Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
That's completly wrong, and that fundanemntal philosophical difference between you and I is where our argument lies. I'm responsible for my life and my life alone. I'm responsible for the safety of others, but never with their lives. In order to take someone else's life, you take responsibility for their life and that's wrong. It's like the worst and most fundanemtnal kind of theft. They are responsible for their lives.
|
The part that I bolded is completely and totally wrong. If I'm put in to a position where I have to take someones life before they can take mine, THEY take responsibility for their life, not me. THEY made a choice to assault or kill me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ch'i
I'm curious, (other than hunting) have you ever been involved in a situation wherein the only answer was the use of an automatic rifle?
|
USMC, 1984-1990. Yes, I've been in a situation where the only answer was an automatic rifle. I hope it never happens to me again, but if it does, I'd certainly like to have it as an option instead of having some elected representative make it illegal because my possession of an automatic weapon somehow affects interstate commerce.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ch'i
Why do you assume that violence must be used to keep the gift your God gave you? Does it not sound like somewhat of a contradiction to you that violence must be used at any cost to preserve peace?
|
I never said that violence must be used at ANY cost. I said that violence MUST be a viable option if you're left with no other choice to avoid death or serious bodily injury.