Libertarians be upset! Pizza Hut Delivery Driver fired for defending himself!

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

So you are saying endorphines have nothing to do with pleasure...or that none were likely involved?

Either way: No

What are you arguing?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by hsmith

What are you arguing?

I think he's arguing that the man found a natural pleasure in shooting his robber?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by hsmith

If they don't, they go to jail. I think that is a pretty good impetus on using it only on self defense issues. This silly claim was used when states switched to shall issue - people predicted the streets would be flowing in blood because people would "solve issues with guns instead of words" and golly, once again liberals turned out to be liars. Those with permits commit the least crime.

Why should they be worried? What fear do they have of law abiding people? Criminals don't quite ask if they can come in your house.

How extremely elitist. I guess only the highly educated who are extremely rich that can afford body guards should be afforded personal protection

If going to jail was that great of an impetus, we wouldn't have 1 out of every 100 Americans (a ridiculously high rate) in prison

liberals did not "turn out to be liars" even if they had come to an overwhelming conclusion, and they didn't, being wrong does not make you a liar, if I think the Celtics are going to win this week, and maybe even bet on them because I'm feeling really confident about it, I am not a "liar" if I don't do it...

by your own standards, gun advocates turned out to be liars, they all made arguments to the residents of Florida that if broad carry laws were enacted, their state's crime ranking would drop like a rock because everyone could defend themselves...didn't happen

and people, in general, don't like guns being carried by others, it's a fact "why should I be worried about people bringing guns to my house when I wanted a cheese pizza" is like saying "why wouldn't I like to spend my evenings talking to various telemarketers?"

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by JaJae

I think he's arguing that the man found a natural pleasure in shooting his robber?

So I guess the release of endorphines for 4 seconds means it was the greatest pleasure in his life.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by hsmith

This isn't really a "libertarian" argument. At all. I would like it to be.

In the confines of our government, it becomes "does he have a right to life" and can pizza hut contract that right away. Does Pizza hut have the jurisdiction and RIGHT to remove that right of life and defense from a person? Do they have the right to do so for a mere $7.50 hr?

You can't sign away liability when you enter a theme park because you can't sign away those rights. Why should a corporation (which "some" in this thread will be quick to point out isn't an individual and doesn't have individual rights) have the right to deny you your natural rights?

These are philosophical points, many people believe natural rights don't exist, for example

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by hsmith

If everyone knew when they would get robbed or murdered then there wouldn't be any robberies or murders.

I don't think so

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by hsmith

So I guess the release of endorphines for 4 seconds means it was the greatest pleasure in his life.

Where did get you get 4 seconds from...maybe it was 2 seconds, or 2 hours, or 2 days?

[thewise1]

wtf, how can people seriously argue that he took pleasure in this and it not be considered trolling?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thewise1

wtf, how can people seriously argue that he took pleasure in this and it not be considered trolling?

I don't think it's a stretch at all to say someone who enjoys guns and had a high respect for the rule of law...enjoyed shooting and NOT KILLING a criminal who had previously had a gun to his head and was going to disgrace him by taking his wallet...he turned quite the tables there

To me, it reminds me of someone taking a stupid gamble...hey its their dice they call the rolls, it doesn't mean they are a bad person or even have a bad characteristic, but I question that move that turned in their favor

[northhunter]

Sure sounds like trolling to me. Though I can't understand why a case of someone using a firearm to defend themselves so obviously scares those opposed to individual gun rights. In all honesty they have to realize these incidents happen.

And to me the only stupid gamble would be to let someone else decide if you were to live or die and do nothing to protect yourself.
Arguing that others do this seems plain silly to me but don't let that stop you. Don't expect me to take that stupid gamble with you.

[Donkey®]

"Spiers violated company policy by carrying a gun."

[northhunter]

And obviously by using logic and arming himself he was able to stay alive. I'm thinking being alive is more important than company policy.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by northhunter

And obviously by using logic and arming himself he was able to stay alive. I'm thinking being alive is more important than company policy.

These "NRA stories" followed up by the police shining the record to make sure a scumbag goes away aren't exactly going to the most accurate pieces

However, if he had a holstered gun, and someone had a loaded gun pointed against his head, the most illogical thing in the world is to go "hey im going to start a struggle now!"

A fight for his life? What were they going to ransom him? Or it this some suburban legend that petty criminals like to murder random robbery victims?

[kombayn]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Are you suggesting he enjoyed killing this man? What evidence do you have for this?

He didn't kill him and the man didn't even know the policy.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by kombayn

He didn't kill him and the man didn't even know the policy.

That's right he didn't kill him. But he did know the policy. Check out the video in this link.

Pink slip delivered to 'Pizza Man' | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

[7960]

Originally Posted by hsmith

What are you arguing?

he's saying that endorphins cause pleasure and shooting released endorphines so the shooting caused the guy pleasure.



much like the argument endorphines cause pleasure and being eaten by a grizzly bear releases endorphins so being eaten by a bear must cause the guy pleasure.

[Thorgrim]

I'm checking out the DM register, trying to get a full sense for the story

They even have a video up...so let's get some things straight here:

The suspect pulls a gun on him, and began "threatening his life" and he immediately "freezes up" and gives up "everything" which i assume means...wallet and pizza...allegedly, the suspect put the gun back on his head and told him not to follow him, at this point, the victim claims he "lashed out" and "couldn't take it anymore" so he hit the gun-holding hand down and was struggling with the suspect with it, and then in the struggle the victim freed his other hand and eventually was able to pull out his gun

After being shot, the suspect threw down his own firearm, and then shaking on the ground and bleeding, stupidly said not to get the police/ambulance involved,

Victim says he can't POSSIBLY IMAGINE any other way the could have turned out...radio announcer says if he had done anything different (like not pull his own gun) he'd be dead

Victim says he knew company had a policy on carrying guns while working for the company

The only thing the victim wants is mental counseling, and...get this, he gets severance pay and then on the radio show he says Pizza Hut DID RIGHT

Ok, now that's the VICTIM'S side of the story, and as we know there are always two sides to every story, and I say that particularly because there are several factors that don't add up:

-There is nothing on whether the suspect had a round the chamber or even loaded his gun, the victim originally freezes up, and then freaks out, and concludes despite the fact that two guns were being struggled with, that could have gone off and killed him, the suspect, the suspect's gf, any bystander (so we're talking about possibly 4+ people ended up dead) there was no possible way anything could have gone better...it's impossible that not pulling his gun could have lead to a better resolution

-Radio announcer says if he hadn't pulled his gun, he woud have been dead

-The suspect was such a cold-hearted, experienced killer that
1) He didn't fire and blow out the victim's brains when the struggle first started
2) After he was shot, and possibly dying, he let go of his gun rather than try to shoot the man who just shot him

-Not only did the victim know about the company policy, but he thought PIZZA HUT DID RIGHT BY HIM

-After talking to many officers involed in gun shootings in philadelphia, I have never once came across someone who shot and wounded someone they concluded needed deadly force (why they drew their handguns in the first place)...that afterwards the primary concern in life was getting counseling

On review of his conduct during the interview, I conclude
1) He was so much of a wreck (as an american male or just because of that situation, you decide) I don't think he recieved pleasure from the incident
2) His story doesn't make sense and he is lying about something
3) His story doesn't make sense and he (and the announcer) are stupid
4) The primary reason he "snapped" was because of a history of bad luck and so he did not particularly value his own life at the time

[thewise1]

Originally Posted by 7960

he's saying that endorphins cause pleasure and shooting released endorphines so the shooting caused the guy pleasure.



much like the argument endorphines cause pleasure and being eaten by a grizzly bear releases endorphins so being eaten by a bear must cause the guy pleasure.

It's always been my fantasy....

[Thorgrim]

It's sad that I should have to point out the difference between endorphines released in a reaction to PHYSICAL PAIN and those not

By your logic, for a trained swimmer, swimming releases endorphines, therefor, swimmers must be feeling like they're being mauled by grizzlies