Terrorist getting owned
- Thread starter DeLamar.J
- Start date
Cudos to Spanish Police. If that happened here, there'd be an outcry about the morons 'rights'.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
I don't agree.
I don't think bank robbers are terrorists.
I don't think police officers should be executioners. Was there no other, less violent way to capture the perpetrator? It seems the Spanish police have become Judge Dredd.
Mike
I don't think bank robbers are terrorists.
I don't think police officers should be executioners. Was there no other, less violent way to capture the perpetrator? It seems the Spanish police have become Judge Dredd.
Mike
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
With the advent of new computer techs. It would be possible to rig a kill switch to the motor that could be used remotely to disable the bike. Then when in a safe area if a grenade is used then only he would blow himself up. I do not think even SWAT would have used this tactic on the video but then again this is a Different country and law enforcement unit.
Sincerely,
Mark E. Weiser
Sincerely,
Mark E. Weiser
Fightfan00
Orange Belt
Diffrent countries have diffrent ways of tolerating things.I guess the spanish took care of it their way
I agree, there are other ways. Unfortunately, sometimes a message has to be sent, and the Spanish police sent one. My guess is that the hope is that the terrorists will see that video and go somewhere else rather than Spain.
Bammx2
2nd Black Belt
hooraa!Kaith Rustaz said:
Flatlander
Grandmaster
Bearing in mind the recent pre-election attack in Spain, I would say that whatever needs to be done to apprehend these villains should be done.
:mp5:
:mp5:
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
The problem with so called Terrorist is that he or she is willing to give his or her life to the cause. So the best way is to catch them alive if possible and have them watch I LOVE LUCY reruns and Leave it to Beaver or Ozzie and Harriet, Marcus Welby MD, Bradey Bunch, the list goes on and on.
PsychOps at work.
PsychOps at work.
Okay, assign me as the devil's advocate now.
Are we equating all crime as terrorism? This is a bank robbery. This thief didn't seem to be willing to sacrifice his life for a point of view - he wanted his life...and money and drugs.
Now, I don't really think what the Spanish police did here to stop him and arrest him was unjustified or even beyond what we would do here. And I like Mike Weiser's suggestion of the kill switch on the engine (remote controlled, of course). What REALLY BOTHERS ME is the equation of lesser crimes with terrorism.
So let's define terrorism. Webster's New Standard Dictionary for Home, School and office, pub. 1969 defines it as "mass-organized ruthlessness." Webster's New World Dictionary, pub. 1966 defines it as "the use of terror and violence to intimidate, subjugate, etc., especially as a political policy."
So, is bank robbery with the use of hostages considered terrorism in your minds, everyone? Although it is very heinous and despicable, I just can't quite equate it with terrorism. I still think it is a lesser crime that terrorism.
Yes, the captor instilled terror in his victims upon taking them hostage, however his agenda was purely selfish and non-political, was it not? Is there a part of the picture I'm not seeing?
Respectfully
Are we equating all crime as terrorism? This is a bank robbery. This thief didn't seem to be willing to sacrifice his life for a point of view - he wanted his life...and money and drugs.
Now, I don't really think what the Spanish police did here to stop him and arrest him was unjustified or even beyond what we would do here. And I like Mike Weiser's suggestion of the kill switch on the engine (remote controlled, of course). What REALLY BOTHERS ME is the equation of lesser crimes with terrorism.
So let's define terrorism. Webster's New Standard Dictionary for Home, School and office, pub. 1969 defines it as "mass-organized ruthlessness." Webster's New World Dictionary, pub. 1966 defines it as "the use of terror and violence to intimidate, subjugate, etc., especially as a political policy."
So, is bank robbery with the use of hostages considered terrorism in your minds, everyone? Although it is very heinous and despicable, I just can't quite equate it with terrorism. I still think it is a lesser crime that terrorism.
Yes, the captor instilled terror in his victims upon taking them hostage, however his agenda was purely selfish and non-political, was it not? Is there a part of the picture I'm not seeing?
Respectfully
OP
DeLamar.J
3rd Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #11
I feel that if someone goes as far as taking a hostages and robbing banks, they should be shot on the spot unless they surrender, he got lucky IMO. If it were up to me I would give him one chance to surrender and if he did not, he dies. I think a person should always be givin a chance to give up, but after they try to take it a step further we should have zero tolerance policy. Alot of people dont agree with this point of view, but if you give someone who is robbing banks, taking hostages, carrying grenades or even bluffing something like that the chance to give up, and they dont, how is killing them unjustified?
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Yeah ... I agree ... all those civil liberties are for the birds anyhow. Why should anyone expect; to be treated as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, expect a trial by jury of his peers, the right to speak in his own defense.DeLamar.J said:
Nahh .... Screw America and its 225 years of liberty .... We don't need rights ...we need security.
Thanks for contributing. Mike
Flatlander
Grandmaster
I didn't realize the guy on the motorcycle was a bank robber. I was under the impression that was a terrorist.
No, I think a terrorist is someone who does nasty things to incite fear, or to attack a society. Theivery doesn't equate.
However, he flew pretty good. Unfortunately for him, the landing wasn't particularly graceful.
No, I think a terrorist is someone who does nasty things to incite fear, or to attack a society. Theivery doesn't equate.
However, he flew pretty good. Unfortunately for him, the landing wasn't particularly graceful.
I watched the clip again and it doesn't specifically state he is a bank robber - I assumed that, I guess, because he held hostages in a bank, but he demanded money and drugs and a getaway vehicle - he did not serve a political or religious agenda.
Not a suicide bomber, just a junkie. However, the reporter insinuates a link to terrorism. See, I think of 9/11, the Oklahoma city bombing, and the prior WTC bombing as terrorist acts for obvious reasons, I think. Violence, destruction and loss of life to serve the purpose of asserting a political and sometimes religious point of view. This guy just wanted to get high.
Not a suicide bomber, just a junkie. However, the reporter insinuates a link to terrorism. See, I think of 9/11, the Oklahoma city bombing, and the prior WTC bombing as terrorist acts for obvious reasons, I think. Violence, destruction and loss of life to serve the purpose of asserting a political and sometimes religious point of view. This guy just wanted to get high.
Okay - so if we begin to apply the word terrorism and/or what some of us believe to be an appropriate response to terrorism to what you are describing, then all the abusive spouses and abusive parents, sexual predators, certain politicians, oh the list goes on...should all just be killed. If abuse and rape aren't hostage situations, what is?DeLamar.J said:
Okay, let's line them all up and ship them off to Guantanamo, then just nuke the place. How about drug dealers and pimps too? They hold people hostage and kill them with their drugs, violence and power-over - let's shoot all of them also. Might as well off the hookers because they hold a man hostage for more money. Then there's the police - they hold people hostage in exchange for evidence, confession, statements, etcetera. Let's throw in the U.S. Military because they hold our young people hostage, inflicting terror on new recruits during Basic to incite the rage response so they may willing go forward and risk life and limb, cover up, show faith to an entity that exists purely for use by the whims of people like Dubya? Or large corporations who ship off their hard labor to third-world countries to make your $100 dollar Nike shoes, handcrafted by children under the age of 10 who get paid cents per week and can't leave the work camp. If that's not a hostage situation, what is?
Or our energy industry who shut people's power off because they rigged supply and demand to make more money and incite terror in the market and consumers?
Come to think of it, let's just bomb everyone. If all the horrible things we are all doing doesn't justify death, what does?
OP
DeLamar.J
3rd Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #16
Civil liberties! How is robbing a bank a civil liberty? If someone is going to go as far as doing something that extreme they should be wiped off the face of the earth. I bet you wouldnt be crying civil liberty if your mother was one of the hostages in that building. And what is there to prove, its right there on tape? There is a time to prove your case, but when your doing things like holding hostages, what needs to be proven?michaeledward said:
M
Mark Weiser
Guest
Okay Gentlemen:
I am not a MODERATOR but I think the personal barbs should cease before they close the thread.
Thanks,
Mark E. Weiser
I am not a MODERATOR but I think the personal barbs should cease before they close the thread.
Thanks,
Mark E. Weiser
OP
DeLamar.J
3rd Black Belt
- Thread Starter
- #18
You are getting me all wrong. I dont belive in negotiating with criminals doing things like hostage taking, bank robbing ECT. If it is known without a doubt who is doing this they should be givin one chance to stop there actions and surrender, if they dont, well.shesulsa said:
Your would-be response to a situation like that sounds extreme to me.
