Libyan forces fire on mourners at funeral again (Gov't has guns, mourners, not so much)

[shadowrider]

CAIRO – Libyan forces fired machine-guns at mourners marching in a funeral for anti-government protesters in the eastern city of Benghazi Sunday, a day after commandos and foreign mercenaries loyal to longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi pummeled demonstrators with assault rifles and other heavy weaponry.

A doctor at one city hospital said his morgue had received at least 200 dead from six days of unrest.

The doctor said his hospital, one of two in Libya's second-largest city, is out of supplies and cannot treat more than 70 wounded in similar attacks on mourners Saturday and other clashes.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/02/20/libyans-mass-day-protests-1819334753/

[shadowrider]

1. 200 shot dead and the silence from the usual suspects is deafening

and very telling.

[Cirque du So-What]

4. You've already flagellated this particular deceased equine

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x380817

Just because you post the same-old same-old, the 'usual suspects' are supposed to come a-runnin' because your such a threat to their value system that it demands their immediate attention?

You may see your resurrection of a thread - locked because you cannot help yourself from dropping gratuitous insults as though from a Pez dispenser - as a major victory, but you still haven't explained how the plight of those people would have been helped if some among them had returned fire. I maintain that there would have been many more dead if that had occurred, and that the '2nd amendment remedy' you advocate is counterproductive to the Libyan people - or people living under any authoritarian regime - would be helped in the slightest.

Go ahead. Have at it. We're all ears.

[shadowrider]

5. I never said their "cause" would have been helped had they returned fire

I said they were gunned down with no way to defend themselves. Quit putting words in my mouth.

[Cirque du So-What]

6. Regardless of how this is couched

the end result is that the entire group of funeral-goers would likely get gunned down if even one person in the crowd returned fire. Of what use is 'defending themselves' if it results in everyone ends up dead? Seems to me that the point of 'defense' is an attempt NOT to get injured or killed.

Gawd forbid that I put words in your mouth, so here's an opportunity to explain *exactly* how this scenario would play out if the people in that group had 'defended themselves.'

Go.

[shadowrider]

7. You're asking me to prove a negative since it didn't happen n/t

[Cirque du So-What]

8. I'm not asking you to 'prove' anything

I'm just wondering how this fantasy about those funeral protestors 'defending themselves' would play out if even one of their number had returned fire on Libyan agents of the state.

This has nothing to do with 'proving a negative' and everything to do with critical thinking - an everyday skill that we all practice as we go about our daily business. Don't each of us, every day, make use of information, experience, observation and reasoning to guide our decisions? Well, then, what is the likely outcome of returning fire against a squad (or more) of armed government agents? Here's a clue-by-four upside the head: it sure as fuck wouldn't qualify as 'self-defense'; it'd be a complete massacre - down to the last man, woman & child. Critical thinking. It's good - not bad.

[shadowrider]

9. Critical thinking has NOTHING to do with GUESSING what would have happened

had the mourners returned fire. Critical thinking requires facts, not guesses. I won't guess simply because the incident didn't happen.

It's like anti-gun advocates denying any DGU (Defensive gun use) occurs in incidents where no police report is filed because no crime took place. No police report, no stat. No stat, no proof.

My daughter and son-in-law had weapons in hand (but didn't show, brandish or point) when they were approached in a parking lot after dark in mid-town Atlanta. The guy changed direction when he saw each had their hand behind them and kept walking. I consider that a DGU but no police report was filed since no crime was committed.

[Glassunion]

15. The end result.

"Regardless of how this is couched the end result is that the entire group of funeral-goers would likely get gunned down if even one person in the crowd returned fire."

"Of what use is 'defending themselves' if it results in everyone ends up dead? Seems to me that the point of 'defense' is an attempt NOT to get injured or killed."


Correct me if I am wrong. But by your logic, are you stating that it is better to not defend one's self because the end result would be the same.

I agree with your statement: "that the point of 'defense' is an attempt NOT to get injured or killed." But your preceding statements seem to me to be quite the contrary. That in the face of overwhelming odds one should just lay down and take it and not make the attempt.

If I am wrong about your point of view, I am sorry if I misunderstand.

[jpak]

2. But If only they had Glocks - they would have defeated the Libyan armed forces!!1111

what a stupid post

:rofl:

[RSillsbee]

3. what a stupid post

Very true. Oh, wait I don't think we're talking about the same post

[guitar man]

10. Gnm

So those badass Glocks with "30 round bullet clips" aren't weapons of mass destruction after all :crazy:

[Bold Lib]

11. Stop that. Talking out both sides of one's mouth is much easier when others don't notice.

[jpak]

14. Against Democrats in an Arizona Safeway - they are weapons of mass murder

but against Libyan armor and artillery - not so much

yup

[lawodevolution]

12. BB guns can't defend you from a dictator's military, proof the 2A

Does nothing to protect us from a dictator.

If they had waterguns they would not have been able to defend themselves, so now you can see how futile the second amendment is.

I can't resist using Jpac's logic, sorry

[shadowrider]

13. Forgiven n/t

[jpak]

16. Unarmed protesters have driven Gaddafi from the country!

Huzzah!