|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2018 2:26:47 GMT
It wasn't a bogus warrant. It was a legal warrant issued by a judge and Howard Stark did in fact commit the crimes listed in the arrest warrant. This discussion just reminded me of when Thomas Wayne thought his fists were faster than a bullet. Is he supposed to be Trump level dumb-but-everyone-ignores-it-rich-guy or did he want to get his family killed? The robber wasn't wearing a mask so the Waynes would be able to identify himself so it's most likely that the robber would kill them to prevent them from identifying him. So Thomas Wayne could either just stand there and let the robber shoot and kill them or eh could try to disarm the robber. He tried to disarm the robber but the robber was able to shoot them first.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2018 2:31:51 GMT
You don’t know what empire-building involves, do you? I know it doesn't involve executing everyone who opposes you. Yes, it does. The executions took place offscreen, just like Peter being bitten by a radioactive spider took place offscreen and was never shown in SMH. But it was referred to, just like the executions were referred to. Ragnarok said that Odin was a ruthless and brutal conqueror. What do you think happens when a Conqueror ties to conquer other people? Do you think everyone is just going to say "Welcome, Your Majesty, we'll be glad to serve as your slaves and obey your every command"? No, the people who are being conqueror will resist and rebel. And in order to quash the resistance/rebellion, the Conqueror executes anyone who opposes him. That's what Odin did. Odin appointed Hela as the Executioner and Hela under orders from Odin would execute anyone who opposed Odin's tyranny.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Jul 31, 2018 2:34:51 GMT
Yes, they do. That's what the Executioner does. Execute anyone whom the King orders them to. Anne Boleyn was executed. What was her crime? The charges against her were infidelity and incest, but the consensus among almost all historians is that she never committed infidelity or incest and those were just trumped-up charges to execute her because she refused to give Henry VIII the divorce that he wanted. So Henry VIII ordered his Executioner to execute Anne Boleyn for opposing him. That's the same with Odin. He appointed Hela the Executioner so he could order her to execute anyone who opposed him. Once again, I completely crushed your argument. Executioners execute criminals. Unless those Executioners are serving a ruthless and brutal Conqueror like Odin was. Ragnarok said that Odin was a ruthless and brutal conqueror. What do you think happens when a Conqueror ties to conquer other people? Do you think everyone is just going to say "Welcome, Your Majesty, we'll be glad to serve as your slaves and obey your every command"? No, the people who are being conquered will resist and rebel. And in order to quash the resistance/rebellion, the Conqueror executes anyone who opposes him. That's what Odin did. Odin appointed Hela as the Executioner and Hela under orders from Odin would execute anyone who opposed Odin's tyranny.
|
|
|
Post by merh on Jul 31, 2018 8:07:46 GMT
Executioners execute criminals. Unless those Executioners are serving a ruthless and brutal Conqueror like Odin was. Ragnarok said that Odin was a ruthless and brutal conqueror. What do you think happens when a Conqueror ties to conquer other people? Do you think everyone is just going to say "Welcome, Your Majesty, we'll be glad to serve as your slaves and obey your every command"? No, the people who are being conqueror will resist and rebel. And in order to quash the resistance/rebellion, the Conqueror executes anyone who opposes him. That's what Odin did. Odin appointed Hela as the Executioner and Hela under orders from Odin would execute anyone who opposed Odin's tyranny. So why didn't Odin execute Laufey? Why did he rescue Loki? Doesn't sound like a tyrant, dude.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jul 31, 2018 9:48:44 GMT
I know it doesn't involve executing everyone who opposes you. Yes, it does. The executions took place offscreen, just like Peter being bitten by a radioactive spider took place offscreen and was never shown in SMH. But it was referred to, just like the executions were referred to. Ragnarok said that Odin was a ruthless and brutal conqueror. What do you think happens when a Conqueror ties to conquer other people? Do you think everyone is just going to say "Welcome, Your Majesty, we'll be glad to serve as your slaves and obey your every command"? No, the people who are being conqueror will resist and rebel. And in order to quash the resistance/rebellion, the Conqueror executes anyone who opposes him. That's what Odin did. Odin appointed Hela as the Executioner and Hela under orders from Odin would execute anyone who opposed Odin's tyranny. No you don't. If you did you wouldn't have enough manpower to govern everything you conquered. You don't know much about this thing do you? There are multiple ways to stamp out opposition, some a lot more beneficial than execution. Besides, if Odin really did execute everyone who opposed him, why was Laufey still alive as was the rest of his frost giants? Why was Hela not killed? Why was Loki not executed? This proof alone completely crushes your argument.
|
|
|
Post by RedDeadFallout on Jul 31, 2018 12:42:02 GMT
This discussion just reminded me of when Thomas Wayne thought his fists were faster than a bullet. Is he supposed to be Trump level dumb-but-everyone-ignores-it-rich-guy or did he want to get his family killed? The robber wasn't wearing a mask so the Waynes would be able to identify himself so it's most likely that the robber would kill them to prevent them from identifying him. So Thomas Wayne could either just stand there and let the robber shoot and kill them or eh could try to disarm the robber. He tried to disarm the robber but the robber was able to shoot them first. He would have no chance of disarming a madman aiming the gun at him, he was incredibly stupid and just ensured he and his wife would get killed.
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Jul 31, 2018 14:29:35 GMT
Executioners execute criminals. Unless those Executioners are serving a ruthless and brutal Conqueror like Odin was. Ragnarok said that Odin was a ruthless and brutal conqueror. What do you think happens when a Conqueror ties to conquer other people? Do you think everyone is just going to say "Welcome, Your Majesty, we'll be glad to serve as your slaves and obey your every command"? No, the people who are being conqueror will resist and rebel. And in order to quash the resistance/rebellion, the Conqueror executes anyone who opposes him. That's what Odin did. Odin appointed Hela as the Executioner and Hela under orders from Odin would execute anyone who opposed Odin's tyranny. Did you just fail 3rd and 4th-grade grammar class?
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 1, 2018 4:31:00 GMT
The robber wasn't wearing a mask so the Waynes would be able to identify himself so it's most likely that the robber would kill them to prevent them from identifying him. So Thomas Wayne could either just stand there and let the robber shoot and kill them or eh could try to disarm the robber. He tried to disarm the robber but the robber was able to shoot them first. He would have no chance of disarming a madman aiming the gun at him So he should just stand there and let the gunman shoot him and his family? No, if he was going to be shot and killed, better to at least attempt to fight back and disarm the gunman. It seems every few months there's a story about a mass shooting, a shooting at a school or a business or a concert or some other public place. Some businesses have "Active Shooter" training to train their employees on what to do when there's an active shooter in the building. The 3 main principals are Run. Hide. Fight. Run if you can. If you can't run and get out of the building, then Hide. If you can't hide and barricade yourself in a safe place, then Fight. Grab anything you can use as a weapon and be as aggressive as you can in fighting off the active shooter. Nowhere in the training does it say to "Stand still and let the shooter shoot you". Run. Hide. Fight. It might not work 100% of the time, but it gives you a better chance than just standing still and letting the shooter shoot you.
|
|
|
Post by RedDeadFallout on Aug 1, 2018 6:19:48 GMT
He would have no chance of disarming a madman aiming the gun at him So he should just stand there and let the gunman shoot him and his family? No, if he was going to be shot and killed, better to at least attempt to fight back and disarm the gunman. It seems every few months there's a story about a mass shooting, a shooting at a school or a business or a concert or some other public place. Some businesses have "Active Shooter" training to train their employees on what to do when there's an active shooter in the building. The 3 main principals are Run. Hide. Fight. Run if you can. If you can't run and get out of the building, then Hide. If you can't hide and barricade yourself in a safe place, then Fight. Grab anything you can use as a weapon and be as aggressive as you can in fighting off the active shooter. Nowhere in the training does it say to "Stand still and let the shooter shoot you". Run. Hide. Fight. It might not work 100% of the time, but it gives you a better chance than just standing still and letting the shooter shoot you. You really like making up nonsense don't you. Please do some research for this "if someone points a gun at you immediately try and punch them!" method. Being aggressive is a last resort, does he try anything else first? His family have no chance against a bullet, neither does he, the only thing he did was force the guy to fire the gun.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 1, 2018 6:35:31 GMT
So he should just stand there and let the gunman shoot him and his family? No, if he was going to be shot and killed, better to at least attempt to fight back and disarm the gunman. It seems every few months there's a story about a mass shooting, a shooting at a school or a business or a concert or some other public place. Some businesses have "Active Shooter" training to train their employees on what to do when there's an active shooter in the building. The 3 main principals are Run. Hide. Fight. Run if you can. If you can't run and get out of the building, then Hide. If you can't hide and barricade yourself in a safe place, then Fight. Grab anything you can use as a weapon and be as aggressive as you can in fighting off the active shooter. Nowhere in the training does it say to "Stand still and let the shooter shoot you". Run. Hide. Fight. It might not work 100% of the time, but it gives you a better chance than just standing still and letting the shooter shoot you. You really like making up nonsense don't you. Please do some research for this "if someone points a gun at you immediately try and punch them!" method. Being aggressive is a last resort, does he try anything else first? His family have no chance against a bullet, neither does he, the only thing he did was force the guy to fire the gun. If he's not wearing a mask, then your only resort is to try to disarm him. Because if he's not wearing a mask, that means he doesn't care that you can see his face because he's not going to give you a chance to identify him. So you can either stand there like an idiot and let him shoot you without a fight or you can try to disarm him.
|
|
|
Post by RedDeadFallout on Aug 1, 2018 10:21:22 GMT
You really like making up nonsense don't you. Please do some research for this "if someone points a gun at you immediately try and punch them!" method. Being aggressive is a last resort, does he try anything else first? His family have no chance against a bullet, neither does he, the only thing he did was force the guy to fire the gun. If he's not wearing a mask, then your only resort is to try to disarm him. Because if he's not wearing a mask, that means he doesn't care that you can see his face because he's not going to give you a chance to identify him. So you can either stand there like an idiot and let him shoot you without a fight or you can try to disarm him. Considering he was dumb enough to try and punch a person with a gun he definitely wasn't thinking through his options in case he could pick them out of a line up.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 1, 2018 17:45:15 GMT
You really like making up nonsense don't you. Please do some research for this "if someone points a gun at you immediately try and punch them!" method. Being aggressive is a last resort, does he try anything else first? His family have no chance against a bullet, neither does he, the only thing he did was force the guy to fire the gun. If he's not wearing a mask, then your only resort is to try to disarm him. Because if he's not wearing a mask, that means he doesn't care that you can see his face because he's not going to give you a chance to identify him. So you can either stand there like an idiot and let him shoot you without a fight or you can try to disarm him. I honestly don't know the numbers of this, but in real life, how many armed robbers wear a mask let alone muggers? Are you saying that every mugger/robber wears masks and the ones who don't kill their victims? I've been mugged twice both didn't have masks. That's just 2 cases, though, you seem to know more on this subject. What are the mugger to mask ratio in real life?
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 1, 2018 18:33:56 GMT
If he's not wearing a mask, then your only resort is to try to disarm him. Because if he's not wearing a mask, that means he doesn't care that you can see his face because he's not going to give you a chance to identify him. So you can either stand there like an idiot and let him shoot you without a fight or you can try to disarm him. Considering he was dumb enough to try and punch a person with a gun he definitely wasn't thinking through his options in case he could pick them out of a line up. He had only 2 options: 1. Just stand there like an idiot and let the robber shoot him and his family. 2. Try to disarm the robber. He chose option #2. It didn't work, but it was still a better option than option #1.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 1, 2018 18:41:19 GMT
If he's not wearing a mask, then your only resort is to try to disarm him. Because if he's not wearing a mask, that means he doesn't care that you can see his face because he's not going to give you a chance to identify him. So you can either stand there like an idiot and let him shoot you without a fight or you can try to disarm him. how many armed robbers wear a mask let alone muggers? Are you saying that every mugger/robber wears masks and the ones who don't kill their victims? I've been mugged twice both didn't have masks. That's just 2 cases As with all criminal cases, there are exceptions. For example, almost every FBI profiler will agree that most serial killers are males. Does that mean there can't ever be a female serial killer? No, but there can be female serial killers, but those cases are rarer. In your case, the mugger wasn't wearing a mask and didn't kill you, that's a rare case. Thomas Wayne was going by the statistics and making the best decision he could based on the statistics.
|
|
|
Post by Vassaggo on Aug 1, 2018 19:11:22 GMT
how many armed robbers wear a mask let alone muggers? Are you saying that every mugger/robber wears masks and the ones who don't kill their victims? I've been mugged twice both didn't have masks. That's just 2 cases As with all criminal cases, there are exceptions. For example, almost every FBI profiler will agree that most serial killers are males. Does that mean there can't ever be a female serial killer? No, but there can be female serial killers, but those cases are rarer. In your case, the mugger wasn't wearing a mask and didn't kill you, that's a rare case. Thomas Wayne was going by the statistics and making the best decision he could based on the statistics. As you state it was a rare case and you say that Thomas Wayne was going off of the statistics that attacking a non masked attacker was the right decision you can share your sources/statistics. I am very interested in this as I'd like to know how rare my cases were. How many muggings occur in the US? How many muggings occur with and without masks? How many muggings without a mask results in a murder attempt? How many muggings without a mask results in a murder? How many muggings without a mask with the victim complying result in a murder attempt? How many muggings without a mask with the victim not complying result in a murder attempt? How many muggings without a mask with the victim complying result in a murder? How many muggings without a mask with the victim not complying result in a murder? I've tried to find this on my own and can't. So if you could tell me the info and where you found it I would appreciate it.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Aug 1, 2018 19:34:08 GMT
how many armed robbers wear a mask let alone muggers? Are you saying that every mugger/robber wears masks and the ones who don't kill their victims? I've been mugged twice both didn't have masks. That's just 2 cases As with all criminal cases, there are exceptions. For example, almost every FBI profiler will agree that most serial killers are males. Does that mean there can't ever be a female serial killer? No, but there can be female serial killers, but those cases are rarer. In your case, the mugger wasn't wearing a mask and didn't kill you, that's a rare case. Thomas Wayne was going by the statistics and making the best decision he could based on the statistics. I think you're thinking of kidnappings in regards to hiding their faces, which is a different scenario than a mugging, in a mugging it's over in a few seconds to minutes tops, victims actively try not to look at their attackers for fear of setting them off, if the mugger has a weapon that usually gets the victims attention also more so than the attackers face, plus you add into all this the slew of emotional and chemical reactions the body goes through in intense moments such as these and people don't tend to recall things properly.
Kidnappings is different because the length of time spent with a kidnapper allows the victim to actually learn their faces which is why if a kidnapper doesn't hide his face it's a ominous sign of their intentions especially if they seem in control.
Also in BVS Thomas doesn't seem to try and do anything but confront the mugger, atleast in other versions his actions that trigger the shooting is him trying to protect Martha from the muggers advances, in this he doesn't even protect them in a protective manner but in a "i'll fucking handle this" aggressive manner, he doesn't even seem to reach for the gun looks morel like he tries to go for a punch of something.
In other versions Thomas gives them their money, his watch and shit tells them to take it and just leave them be, we don't get that in BVS from what I recall, maybe this is a issue with JDM's performance maybe he didn't want to act meek or something but the result is it looks like Thomas openly provoking the guy aiming a gun at him.
|
|
|
Post by RedDeadFallout on Aug 1, 2018 21:32:44 GMT
Considering he was dumb enough to try and punch a person with a gun he definitely wasn't thinking through his options in case he could pick them out of a line up. He had only 2 options: 1. Just stand there like an idiot and let the robber shoot him and his family. 2. Try to disarm the robber. He chose option #2. It didn't work, but it was still a better option than option #1. He didn't try to disarm him he tried to punch a gun, only a self important fool would think that's a good idea. And since when does getting shot make you an idiot?
|
|
|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Aug 2, 2018 1:17:20 GMT
how many armed robbers wear a mask let alone muggers? Are you saying that every mugger/robber wears masks and the ones who don't kill their victims? I've been mugged twice both didn't have masks. That's just 2 cases As with all criminal cases, there are exceptions. For example, almost every FBI profiler will agree that most serial killers are males. Does that mean there can't ever be a female serial killer? No, but there can be female serial killers, but those cases are rarer. In your case, the mugger wasn't wearing a mask and didn't kill you, that's a rare case. Thomas Wayne was going by the statistics and making the best decision he could based on the statistics. Then why didn't he kill Bruce??
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 2, 2018 4:15:04 GMT
He had only 2 options: 1. Just stand there like an idiot and let the robber shoot him and his family. 2. Try to disarm the robber. He chose option #2. It didn't work, but it was still a better option than option #1. since when does getting shot make you an idiot? Jus standing there and letting a robber shoot you is idiotic.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Aug 2, 2018 4:17:04 GMT
As with all criminal cases, there are exceptions. For example, almost every FBI profiler will agree that most serial killers are males. Does that mean there can't ever be a female serial killer? No, but there can be female serial killers, but those cases are rarer. In your case, the mugger wasn't wearing a mask and didn't kill you, that's a rare case. Thomas Wayne was going by the statistics and making the best decision he could based on the statistics. Then why didn't he kill Bruce?? Because, like in the comics, unbeknownst to Thomas Wayne, the robber's intent wasn't really to rob them but to kill Thomas Wayne to keep him from testifying against a mob boss. The gunman was told to make it look like a robbery and not kill Bruce so that Bruce could tell the cops it was a robbery gone bad.
|
|