Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Appeasement Nation: Should You Resist An Attacker?
The Bulletin ^ | 05/27/2008 | Michael P. Tremoglie

Posted on 05/27/2008 9:04:40 AM PDT by William Tell 2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
To: William Tell 2

“He told me that he routinely advises citizens to acquiesce to the demands of the criminal to lessen the risk of violence and, instead, to make an appeal to the criminal’s humanity.”

Unfortunately, he doesn’t go quite far enough. The right thing to do, of course, is immediately to hand over your wallet and car keys; then get down on your knees; kiss his feet; beg for mercy; and offer him your wife, your house, your first-born child, and half your salary for the rest of your life. How could that fail to appeal to the ‘humanity’ of a criminal?


21 posted on 05/27/2008 9:30:19 AM PDT by Jack Hammer (here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
I believe that decent people have a moral obligation to resist criminals.

The "police officials" these articles usually refer to are usually Chiefs of Police, who are nothing but political lapdogs for urban Mayors. "Academics" can simply go to hell. They're such scum anymore they are not worth considering.

22 posted on 05/27/2008 9:31:36 AM PDT by VR-21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

>For at least a generation now, gun control advocates, many police officials and some academicians have advised citizens to “give the criminal what he wants and you won’t get hurt.” This viewpoint began permeating society as a way of reducing violence during crimes.<

Think about this for a moment. Isn’t this the law that is held by the Courts in England to be the only acceptable behavior?

For that reason alone I will never believe that it is a well reasoned or effective one. I have watched violent crime in England rise to unheard of levels. Knife crimes are at unimaginable levels now that firearms are forbidden across that nation.

Sorry, but I will never support socialism in any manner. That’s is probably why I cannot find the weakness in me to vote for McCain.


23 posted on 05/27/2008 9:38:05 AM PDT by B4Ranch ("Winston Churchill said, "Americans always do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2; Joe Brower
Bang!

A Nation of Cowards

Pacifism: The Ultimate Immorality

Why the Gun is Civilization

24 posted on 05/27/2008 9:38:41 AM PDT by EdReform (The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed *NRA*JPFO*SAF*GOA*SAS*CCRKBA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
give the criminal what he wants and you won't get hurt."

I believe in giving them something to remember me by

Photobucket

25 posted on 05/27/2008 9:41:20 AM PDT by Snurple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2
Good point.....along with that, they can’t be turned loose by liberal judges in the court system.

How unenlightened you are to imply that prisoners can't be reformed.

26 posted on 05/27/2008 9:42:42 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (1984 was supposed to be a warning not an instruction manual!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

I believe in transformation rather than reformation.

Mine will be transformed into compost!


27 posted on 05/27/2008 9:49:51 AM PDT by catman67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
“give the criminal what he wants and you won't get hurt.”

How soon people forget. Sounds like a rework of “Be quiet and sit down. Don't do anything or you will endanger your self and airplane. They have met our demands and we are returning to the airport”

Giving the criminal what he wants worked real well for flights 11,77 and 175./s Even though United 93 perished the Capitol was spared and lives ultimately saved.

28 posted on 05/27/2008 9:50:19 AM PDT by Polynikes (Yo, homie. Is that my briefcase?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikeus_maximus
What if what he wants is no witnesses?

Then you had best shut up and die. It'll save the cops both time and paperwork.

And so you don't stretch the mental capacity of the DA trying to figure out if he should prosecute you for murder or just reckless discharge of a firearm.
29 posted on 05/27/2008 9:52:35 AM PDT by Dr.Zoidberg ("Shut the hell up, New York Times, you sanctimonious whining jerks!" - Craig Ferguson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

It worked.

More criminals survive their crimes than ever before.


30 posted on 05/27/2008 10:11:29 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Malone LaVeigh

The same kind of terrorists who support Obama did this:
http://www.frugalsites.net/911/attack/
Never apologize for them.
Never appease them.
Never forget.


31 posted on 05/27/2008 10:13:36 AM PDT by cyberella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
For at least a generation now, gun control advocates, many police officials and some academicians have advised citizens to "give the criminal what he wants and you won't get hurt."

That tactic worked quite well on 3 of the 4 planes that crashed on 9/11. People were complacent, giving the hijackers a wide berth. The results are history.

32 posted on 05/27/2008 10:16:19 AM PDT by meyer (Still conservative, no longer Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
Has America become a nation of appeasers?

Women, who are enablers. Should women vote?

33 posted on 05/27/2008 10:17:45 AM PDT by bmwcyle (If God wanted us to be Socialist, Karl Marx would have been born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

Quoting:

“Demand silver.

Receive lead.”

Cheapskate! Use silver bullets, like the Lone Ranger....


34 posted on 05/27/2008 10:37:54 AM PDT by MainFrame65 (The US Senate: World's greatest PREVARICATIVE body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2

Bump! ;-)


35 posted on 05/27/2008 10:41:42 AM PDT by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here. ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EdReform

bump for later viewing


36 posted on 05/27/2008 10:49:55 AM PDT by EnigmaticAnomaly (Proud member of the largest 'Hate Group' in the USA...The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
For at least a generation now, gun control advocates, many police officials and some academicians have advised citizens to "give the criminal what he wants and you won't get hurt." This viewpoint began permeating society as a way of reducing violence during crimes.

Just a thought, but isn't a crime already violent as soon as a criminal displays a weapon in a threatening manner? And for those of us with the ability to resist effectively, shouldn't our goal at that point be to reduce the number of violent crimes by permanently solving the problem posed by a criminal who wants things that he is not entitled to have? My philosophy: "give the criminal what he deserves rather than what he wants."

How about a real study? Let's track down all the criminals who have reformed after an appeal to their humanity. My guess is that it's what mathematicians call "the empty set". Let's track down the family members who have lost loved ones to repeat offenders whose victims gave them what they wanted. This is, sadly, a very large set. Let's read the "Armed Citizen" reports from the NRA and ask ourselves how those outcomes compare with the outcomes from rewarding criminals. I'll happily defer to the winning side in that study.

37 posted on 05/27/2008 10:55:35 AM PDT by RogerD (Public School Teacher - but not a wimp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EdReform
"How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself? Because that is his job and we pay him to do it? Because your life is of incalculable value, but his is only worth the $30,000 salary we pay him? If you believe it reprehensible to possess the means and will to use lethal force to repel a criminal assault, how can you call upon another to do so for you?"

Now if only all anti-gun advocates would try to understand this point...

38 posted on 05/27/2008 10:58:42 AM PDT by EnigmaticAnomaly (Proud member of the largest 'Hate Group' in the USA...The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
Those of you with "loved ones" involved in crime...

Keep the sonuvabitch out of my home - because I will kill him/her in an INSTANT.
I don't want to hear you wailing about what a good boy/girl he WAS and how he didn't DESERVE to be killed..

I will KILL anyone in my home uninvited -- because I don't KNOW why they are there.....
I am/was always "fearful for my life", I will assume they are there to kill me or members of my family and THAT will NOT happen..

He will die -- -rest assured, he will die....
So, take appropriate measures to keep your loved one out of my home and away from my loved ones or their possessions....

That small sign near my front door, stating:
"We call 911, only after we use .45cal or 12ga"
is a statement of fact.

39 posted on 05/27/2008 11:23:51 AM PDT by river rat (Semper Fi - You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell 2
The story has an excellent quote from Dr. Gary Kleck:

The most famous study is that by Florida State criminology professor Gary Kleck and Jongyeon Tark. Their landmark study, "Resisting Crime: The Effects of Victim Action on the Outcomes of Crimes," published in the November 2004 academic journal Criminology stated, "Data analyzed for the study were collected during the time period 1992 through 2001 and included five types of crimes: sexual assaults, robberies, assaults, personal contact larcenies and confrontational burglaries. Results of statistical analyses indicated that both forceful and nonforceful types of victim SP [self-protection] reduced the risk of property loss and injury when compared to victim nonresistance. Victim SP tactics involving greater force, such as the use of a gun, had the greatest impact on injury risk reduction."

40 posted on 05/27/2008 11:41:45 AM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson