[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]


File: 1671841680813.jpg (23.86 KB, 300x450, 2:3, jersey-shore-no-grenades-a….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Let's try this again without attempting to be respectful to the state.

Debate question: it should be illegal to deploy grenades (or similar explosives) against people or in occupied spaces, and this law should apply to everyone in America.

I suppose I need to exempt those using grenades against a foreign enemy, not because I think that's OK, but because that's another topic.


Kind of reminds of a question on whether it should be legal to boobytrap your property and what it applies on collateral.

If I throw a grenade in my backyard and the shrapnel kills / injures my neighbour, am I to be held responsible for that?


>If I throw a grenade in my backyard and the shrapnel kills / injures my neighbour, am I to be held responsible for that?


>attempting to be respectful to the state.
I believe this post is covered under the free speech amendment and is legal, even though it proposed a disagreement with current law.  Advise if otherwise.


>debate question
While walking to work, I can already feel a confusion.  The debate question is not also: all deployment of grenades not directed at a person or in an occupied space should be legal (eg. denotation of a grenade in a closet adjacent a bedroom where a child is sleeping), or the converse of the converse: all use of explosives should be illegal (fireworks, mining, building demolition).  The debate is only the specified case.


Should follow the same rules as any other weapon.
If you frag innocent people, expect at least manslaughter charges.


Is he trespassing and has been told not to, or was the blast going into his yard?


Thank you for entering this contentious debate.  I think that is mostly agreement with the question.  Does "frag" include injury or attempted murder?  I don't feel like digging too much into "innocent," and am content to take it to mean not an imminent threat.


Sure. Again, same as any other weapon.


Not to labor the point, but here's something that might change your mind: some grenades are non-lethal.  They can still almost kill people, but probably won't cause death.  One kind is a stun grenade.


There's a lot of things that are nonlethal.
Nonetheless, they follow the same rules.
I don't see why that ought change.


Excellent.  I think our opinions are similar.  Now I guess we wait for representatives of the conventional opinion.


I think what I really want to argue is that police should not have special privilege to cause harm at their prerogative, in ways that would put someone in prison for a long time if the roles of police officer and non-police officer were reversed.  For hypothetical example it being legal (or not a crime, not punishable -- something like that) for police to denote a stun grenade in a residence that causes serious harm to an infant, or to beat an old man and cause a concussion and loss of hearing in one ear.  I feel that the standards should be symmetric, I guess.

[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]