"What? you mean bullets pass through walls? Never occurred to me."

[cluebyfour]

Total dipshit tries to take out street light, kills two people instead.

I don't know; maybe my fellow anarchists will disagree with me.  But if you're in the city and are not either A) at a shooting range or B) defending yourself against an aggressor, you don't fire your fucking gun.  Period.

This idiot needs to go away for a long, long time.

Comments

[flainn]

It's easier and less risky to disable an annoying street light with a screwdriver and a pair of dykes anyway. Less conspicuous, too.

...not that I would know anything about that.

[cluebyfour]

Troublemaker!

[flainn]

Not anymore.

[deadpansev]

I look at shooting guns in the same way I would a drunk driver. In both cases you are endangering others. If nobody gets hurt, it should not be a crime. However, you are taking a serious risk when engaging in these activities because I think as soon as you hurt someone while engaged in an activity known to be dangerous to other people besides yourself you open yourself up to some seriously harsh punishment. Obviously he crossed the line and hurt someone while doing something reckless and stupid, and I agree he should have the book thrown at him.

[cluebyfour]

Yeah, I get the no harm-no foul concept, but even in Ancapistan, any community worth living in would frown on discharging firearms without good reason. Not to mention that a street light would not be a legal target under any circumstance (unless you own it!).

[deadpansev]

I am sure you are right. Since I believe in a voluntary government and not really NO government, probably recreational shooting in non-approved areas would be a no-no in most neighborhood associations. One concept I have struggled with as an anarchist is what to do about attempted crime, on one hand if no damage was done was a crime really committed, on the other hand I would not want someone to be continually trying to kill me or something like that. I really haven't heard much about this idea from other an-caps.

[cluebyfour]

Any form of aggression against your life or property could be classified as a crime. I think this includes attempted murder, or murder for hire. (I do believe in some amount of causality--people do respond to incentives after all, and I see little difference between paying a hitman to do a job and pulling the trigger yourself.)

[tcpip]

But guns don't kill people... wait a minute!

[ilcylic]

Guns don't kill people. Guns are inanimate objects. Even if a gun is used to cause a death, there was still a person responsible.

[tcpip]

Technology amplifies moral decisions. Thus regulative legislation is appropriate.

[cluebyfour]

Nonsense. Moral decisions are the responsibility of moral actors, period. It doesn't matter if one is carrying a slingshot or a suitcase nuke; it is aggression which must be addressed, not technology.

[ilcylic]

He violated Rule #4. Other people paid the price. Now he should pay his.