“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#600590 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
Texas Homeowner Uses Deadly Force to Protect Property
"February 18, 2011
A late night burglary proves deadly in Odessa, Texas. At approximately 4:30 AM on February 18, 2011 a homeowner was awakened by barking dogs and when he looked outside he saw 3 individuals attempting to steal copper wiring from his his vehicle.
The homeowner proceeded to yell at the suspects and fired a gun in their direction. The suspects fled the scene. A few moments later the police received a 911 call about a gunshot victim. When the paramedics arrived the gunshot victim had died.
The deceased man has been identified as 53 year-old Rodney Allen Burns of Odessa, Texas. His accomplices Tanya Whitehead and David Whitehead have been charged with felony theft and theft of copper.
The Odessa Police Department is investigating the shooting and at this time no charges have been filed against the homeowner. The self defense laws in the Texas Constitution state "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the others imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means." "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to prevent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.(Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"
http://www.examiner.com/article/texas-homeown...
Sweet.

I gotta move back to Texas.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#600591 Oct 11, 2013
MrC wrote:
<quoted text>
....sorry just judged myself 10 times...doesnt matter what I do, change browsers restart or anything like that, I can vote no more.
You think it's ridiculous that you're loathed on this thread? I have news...LMFAO
I'd probably wager that half of the judge-its came from 'christians' whom you give a very bad name.
You're talking about bandwidth? Oh yes you're "good with computers" but think windows comes with a utility caled "Winregit" and you can get rid of a virus by pruning the registry tree...and your computer is 'laggy'. Cool story bro, tell it again.
You're great you are...an absolute leg-end in your own...LUNCHTIME!
Have you considered that there's a way to do it that you're unaware of?

Just sayin'
MrC

UK

#600592 Oct 11, 2013
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
No. He is not.
He is merely wrong and won't admit it.
A common failing here, eh?
still waiting for my 100 judgeits...show me you can do it and I will happily admit I'm wrong.
awsome dr Shrink

Baltimore, MD

#600593 Oct 11, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
<quoted text>
You dump on monkey cause ya love them. LOL Chasing your own tail again for attention. LOL lil whispers knows of rotten eggs like you and you do not fool no one. Also know you do not know bible or do you read it. I shall defend whom ever I shall so choose and do not need your permission to do so. Watch out holy man your jealousy is showing.
1/you are not female chicken to be seated on those eggs and to know that they are rotten?

2/feel free of worries if I know Bible or not,
you are not teacher nor anybody influencial in my circle-also flush your s.... claims?

3/you can deffend anyone you wish,only shut your face with responds to your own dr Shrink?

4/ I am maybe holy man or holy women_you know s.....?who I am?

but you are holy old cow,midgit with cabbage head, fat old mexican female mexican fat old pork, with foot huge number 18

so?go take nap,wipe your tears of sorrows and pray for health because to pray for brain is long time to late

he heeeeeeeeeeeee

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600594 Oct 11, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>very powerful insights Skombolis. It says more about them that you have such an impact on them.
Interesting.
They can't help themselves

They post to me trying to get my attention

They argue things that deep down they know they are wrong about but their pride won't allow them to admit it

They icon my posts to insane extents

I embarrass them. It hurts their pride. It is easy to see just how much by watching their behavior afterwards. They will invent reasons to post to me and argue up is down and black is white just to have another shot at that elusive "win" their ego demands back to balance the scales. When it only results in another loss they start to go exponentially insane! But in fairness, we are not talking about people that were stable to begin with!
MrC

UK

#600595 Oct 11, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>very powerful insights Skombolis. It says more about them that you have such an impact on them.
Interesting.
keep stroking...he's nearly there LMFAO
awsome dr Shrink

Baltimore, MD

#600596 Oct 11, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go chasing your monkey tail for attention again.
right
you are like monkey and i chase your tail for attention again?

listen old fat mama
it is time by you to post passage,but post all of them,not only those who fit your own agendas

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600597 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
Texas Homeowner Uses Deadly Force to Protect Property
"February 18, 2011
A late night burglary proves deadly in Odessa, Texas. At approximately 4:30 AM on February 18, 2011 a homeowner was awakened by barking dogs and when he looked outside he saw 3 individuals attempting to steal copper wiring from his his vehicle.
The homeowner proceeded to yell at the suspects and fired a gun in their direction. The suspects fled the scene. A few moments later the police received a 911 call about a gunshot victim. When the paramedics arrived the gunshot victim had died.
The deceased man has been identified as 53 year-old Rodney Allen Burns of Odessa, Texas. His accomplices Tanya Whitehead and David Whitehead have been charged with felony theft and theft of copper.
The Odessa Police Department is investigating the shooting and at this time no charges have been filed against the homeowner. The self defense laws in the Texas Constitution state "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the others imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means." "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to prevent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.(Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"
http://www.examiner.com/article/texas-homeown...
It has been said from the very beginning that an ADDITIONAL element of the crime would be needed

It is in your own post

""A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the others imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."

And Texas is the only state where this is even close to open to interpretation due to its vagueness and ridiculous nighttime legislation. The other 49 states all have laws that make it blatantly clear

But you see there must be the first element of an additional aggravated felony AND the person feels he won't be able to recover his property. Technically is still follow the original law

"It is important to remember that deadly force can never be used simply to defend property against someone else’s interference with that property, even if that interference is unlawful and even if there is no other way to prevent that interference. See State v. Metcalfe, 212 N.W. 382 (Iowa 1927). Please note, however, that deadly force may be used where the facts also support another privileged use of force."

http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents...

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#600598 Oct 11, 2013
awsome dr Shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU OLD not inspire women
I said quote:'"IF GOOD ALLOWS"
I am not able to throw you to the heaven and stack 3 of you in the devil dust of planet Mars?
you rather cry like old groudge women not having man past 25 years.
not me,no wonder little midgit ugly fat women is not going to have any man(no more pretty or atractive old babcia)
I am married and am loved by my sweety and bunch of kids day and night,
she wipe my tears(claimed by you that I cry)he heeeeee
strange young women they pee from excitments,when they see me and dream to only touch my beautiful handsome hands
but all men see you,making horrible laugh and run away on the second side of the street-he heeeeeeeeeee
poor mamuschka
only your cyber ugly skeleton old Aids boy friend godless scum ben Adam loves you,
and masturabte to all your posts?he heeeeeeee
Wish in one hand and dump in other see which one gets the fullest.
Reality check dream on. Last post no time to baby sit you today. You have to entertain yourself chasing your monkey tail.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#600599 Oct 11, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, no. My deity is called God.
So you believe only the King James Bible conveys the true name of you deity.

I bet you think Jesus spoke in English as well.

ROFLMAO

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#600600 Oct 11, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Sweet.
I gotta move back to Texas.
Do you have a death wish ?

Break a Texan's windshield after sunset and he can legally kill you.

On second thought, move to Texas. The world may be better off.

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#600601 Oct 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
It has been said from the very beginning that an ADDITIONAL element of the crime would be needed
It is in your own post
""A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the others imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."
And Texas is the only state where this is even close to open to interpretation due to its vagueness and ridiculous nighttime legislation. The other 49 states all have laws that make it blatantly clear
But you see there must be the first element of an additional aggravated felony AND the person feels he won't be able to recover his property. Technically is still follow the original law
"It is important to remember that deadly force can never be used simply to defend property against someone else’s interference with that property, even if that interference is unlawful and even if there is no other way to prevent that interference. See State v. Metcalfe, 212 N.W. 382 (Iowa 1927). Please note, however, that deadly force may be used where the facts also support another privileged use of force."
http://nationalparalegal.edu/public_documents...
AND it is noted that the fact the person is committing a crime makes it REASONABLE to assume that the perpetrator would commit the further crime of inflicting injury or death.

Get a grip, Skom. Read the article. The police and courts didn't even arrest the guy for killing a trespasser.
How much more proof do you need ?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600602 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
So you believe only the King James Bible conveys the true name of you deity.
I bet you think Jesus spoke in English as well.
ROFLMAO
Little known fact

Jesus first used piglatin. But some of the apostles couldn't keep up so he moved to parables:)

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600603 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a death wish ?
Break a Texan's windshield after sunset and he can legally kill you.
On second thought, move to Texas. The world may be better off.
The Texas state motto is "He has a gun!"

You get issues a drop-piece to put by the person you shoot when you get a drivers license or state ID

;)
Chess

Columbus, OH

#600604 Oct 11, 2013
MrC wrote:
<quoted text>
still waiting for my 100 judgeits...show me you can do it and I will happily admit I'm wrong.
I'm not your instructor, goofy.

First it couldn't be done.

Then only six times.

Then 10.

May I recommend Computers for dummies?

Since: May 11

UK

#600605 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
So you believe only the King James Bible conveys the true name of you deity.
I bet you think Jesus spoke in English as well.
ROFLMAO
Hey-Zeus was a blue eyed blonde white guy, I know, I've seen the pictures and the stained glass. He looked like kim kardashian with a beard.

Since: May 11

UK

#600606 Oct 11, 2013
Chess wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not your instructor, goofy.
First it couldn't be done.
Then only six times.
Then 10.
May I recommend Computers for dummies?
May I recommend a simple admission that you cannot sprinkle in excess of 10 judge-its on my head and you wont have to carry on squirming.

It's just that simple!

“I.Spirit.Son.God”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#600607 Oct 11, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
IMO
The fault was not God's or Ians
Ians sincerely tried, but hoping something to be true an believing it is are two very different things
I believe seek and ye shall find is not to convince those with doubts but rather a promise to those who have committed to the belief in God and want to know Him
Credit to Ians for being open-minded. But open-minded is not the same as belief
I don't know why it takes belief before God will reveal Himself but I suppose that is the purpose of faith. And I don't know why some are able to believe and others not. I would understand why one religion and not another or why no organized religion but still a belief in God. But to reject the idea of a higher power all together seems to be more of a result of how someone thinks. There isn't a right or wrong to it , it just is how it is
And not to try to use this as some sort of "see I told you" approach by any means. But instead just want to sincerely suggest you consider his story when we talk about unbelievers and do they deserve eternal damnation. Whether that is what hell is can always be a different subject.
Although to be clear, i find simple unbelief and mockers to be two different things as well
(T) Peace
"it aint necessarily so" is in a tough and very undesirable spot in life right now from a philosophical POV.

The blame has to be God's or him.

God does not deal with any two people alike. There is a reason why that writer seeked after God---and by his writing look like he was sincere. But he did not get an answer from YHWH. He did not get a confirmation from YHWH that he was acknowledged for his faith in Jesus Christ.

That's a problem. Because the bible declares:

John6:
37 All those the Father gives me will come to me,[and whoever comes to me I will never drive away]

Matt:7:7
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Those are promises from Yeshua based on biblical word. Seem to be in his mind--- "it aint necessarily so" thinks he is being driven away.

In the mind of "it aint necessarily so" those verses are not true.

There is no gray area in those verses. They are either true or false. "it aint necessarily so" thinks they are false because of his experience or lack thereof with the Christian God.

He has no choice but to blame God or himself. One of them has to be blamed in his mind.

So when it come to eternal damnation that the ultimate question for "it aint necessarily so". Go live life and conclude Jesus myth because he seek Jesus and no get any confirmation and this eternal hell and Jesus business is a myth.

Or commit the rest of his days seeking a positive confirmation and acknowledgement from YHWH for embracing Yeshua. to me that best choice because of the eternal consequences, but I not him.

It easy for you to say neither of them is to blame. But is "it aint necessarily so" neck and arse on the line when he die and have to give an account to YHWH.

"it aint necessarily so" believing hell Jesus and YHWH is myth---no have any consequence to you.

Try and see the position from the POV of "it aint necessarily so".

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600608 Oct 11, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
AND it is noted that the fact the person is committing a crime makes it REASONABLE to assume that the perpetrator would commit the further crime of inflicting injury or death.
Get a grip, Skom. Read the article. The police and courts didn't even arrest the guy for killing a trespasser.
How much more proof do you need ?
Why is it reasonable to assume a trespasser is going to also engage in an additional crime putting someone in imminent life threatening harm where deadly force would be needed?

A prosecutor has discretion on whether to charge someone. Texas prides itself on its use of force in "self-defense". That doesn't necessarily mean it was legal. Any more than back in the KKK days that prosecutors regularly decided not to charge white men for obvious crimes against blacks

Texas had gone out of its way to try to circumvent the Supreme Court ruling that requires a reasonable belief someone's life is in danger and there is an imminent threat by making the law as vague and conditional on purpose.

No other state has a "nighttime exemption". It's meant to try to give a justification for fear. It's dark therefore the threat is scarier even if the circumstances during the day would never allow it. Texas is Texas. They execute kids and the mentally retarded. They have open carry and stand your ground laws. They seem to prefer a Wild West mentality

Granted the number of shootings don't always have a correlation to open carry but that is just one small part of the overall mentality

49 states make it abundantly clear it is illegal. I will concede Texas had managed to somehow add the necessary element such as rape or assault and also include things like criminal mischief to make it easier to give a prosecution discretion.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#600609 Oct 11, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>"it aint necessarily so" is in a tough and very undesirable spot in life right now from a philosophical POV.
The blame has to be God's or him.
God does not deal with any two people alike. There is a reason why that writer seeked after God---and by his writing look like he was sincere. But he did not get an answer from YHWH. He did not get a confirmation from YHWH that he was acknowledged for his faith in Jesus Christ.
That's a problem. Because the bible declares:
John6:
37 All those the Father gives me will come to me,[and whoever comes to me I will never drive away]
Matt:7:7
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.
Those are promises from Yeshua based on biblical word. Seem to be in his mind--- "it aint necessarily so" thinks he is being driven away.
In the mind of "it aint necessarily so" those verses are not true.
There is no gray area in those verses. They are either true or false. "it aint necessarily so" thinks they are false because of his experience or lack thereof with the Christian God.
He has no choice but to blame God or himself. One of them has to be blamed in his mind.
So when it come to eternal damnation that the ultimate question for "it aint necessarily so". Go live life and conclude Jesus myth because he seek Jesus and no get any confirmation and this eternal hell and Jesus business is a myth.
Or commit the rest of his days seeking a positive confirmation and acknowledgement from YHWH for embracing Yeshua. to me that best choice because of the eternal consequences, but I not him.
It easy for you to say neither of them is to blame. But is "it aint necessarily so" neck and arse on the line when he die and have to give an account to YHWH.
"it aint necessarily so" believing hell Jesus and YHWH is myth---no have any consequence to you.
Try and see the position from the POV of "it aint necessarily so".
I believe God always keeps his promise and when someone truly seeks him out, which IMO requires belief, they will find him.

Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying

Are you saying you believe it's God's fault for not revealing himself. Because it seemed like you were saying Ian's had a reason to blame God. Or are you simply saying that is what he has done?

I don't think God is ever at fault if someone doesn't believe

But at the same time if someone seeks God out but they do so without the necessary faith and don't find him, how do we blame someone because they couldn't make themselves believe?

It does serve a purpose in the overall workings as those who suffered spiritual blindness in Israel served as an example believers were supposed to learn from. But I also believe when it says in Timothy that God wants all men to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved

I do think if Ians truly believed and sought God out that God would answer versus trying to give the faith a chance with the hope that with time would come belief. But I just don't see blame there. I simply see someone who isn't able to believe because to them it is not logical.

Unfortunately it means they can't be saved. And in the end it won't matter if someone was not saved due to unbelief or a life of deliberate sin. But that is why it makes sense to me that death is simply no further reward

(T$ Peace

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 min Pokay 269,171
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 12 min Christian with Jesus 810,808
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 26 min Liam 574,724
Any son's ever see there mom's having sex with ... 44 min Jon 3
If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 46 min Seentheotherside 1,053
What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God) (Oct '06) 53 min superwilly 69,808
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 54 min Liam 39,685
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 12 hr Freebird 176,072
More from around the web