If those are your thoughts, then I'd like to inform you that "not killing" doesn't mean the same as "no actions". We're all well aware that it's impossible to talk a dangerous slaver into a prison cell. Knocking out, locking up, and rehabilitation should be the key words here.
(( Alexander! )) wow okay no need to be a fuckin maggot about this you dont know what kind of connections people got for all you know like i could be making drugs with that effect man
Without strong leadership and a strict code of conduct, this is nothing more then an angry mob choosing victims at on a whim and claiming moral high ground, at the cost of political consequences which serve to cause more damage to the lives and livelihood of others, and as an impediment to the sovereign territories in existence who seek to police these issues in accordance to their own law. It is far better to leave law enforcement to the entities that be, within their territory.
Lots of coulds and what ifs, I wonder how many of you have been in a combat situation, or even an aggressive engagement where your life is threatened. It's all well and good to take those who can be rehabilitated alive, but when your enemy is willing to literally rip your throat out while your paralysis poison takes affect...you're not going to question if shooting them is worse than taking them alive.
(( Alexander! )) you truly are the biggest maggot for treating this with yer serious talk im gonna go ahead and say that i've been in more combat situations than needed but thats just how the dice rolled you just gotta be able to read people and then take out the base and once you do that the structure falls, y'know it's simple shit man
I know it's all-speech-zero-actions right now, but that will change very soon. It may be the "hard" way. But I believe it is the right one.
For your information, I have been attacked multiple times, and I'm currently in a job that requires me to get close to dangerous individuals. I have been able to take down the majority of these criminals. And just in case you haven't read my last post well enough (which has to be the case, unless your intelligence is too low to understand a simple post), I will remind you that you should use the right tool and the right amount of it.
That would imply you work in a prison setting, yes? Hardly a combat situation. Dangerous, yes, but in no way equal footing. Also with immediate access to an arsenal of non-lethal tools. Speaking for marines, in most operations we can only bring so much equipment. If we carried absolutely every tool required for absolutely every job, we'd be incapable of moving. It's impractical in any other setting.
First of all, I'm not working in a prison setting. I've told you all you need to know about my job. And that "impractical" part just reminded me of how ancient the technology you marines use is. Seriously, what were you going to do with those tools; carry them on your back?
"Ancient"? We were the first ones to reach space, and are second only to a society that dedicates themselves to scientific research and advancement. ((source=lore))
I find it absolutely hilarious that Colonel Deschemblaine is willing to protest with vigor a pro-peace organization. I respect you, but please, find a better way to spend your time than arguing about whether lethal or non-lethal is more acceptable. They've yet to get in your way, and hell, it's even just a concept at the moment. - Corvus
Both are acceptable, but they have different applications. For example, I wouldn't use a lethal tool on a single unarmed criminal. But against a group of heavily armed, trained and experienced combatants? Non-lethals just won't cut it. I would hate to see another group fall prey to the more heavy handed organizations of the galaxy, especially one that promotes peace. But as they say, peace doesn't come to you. You have to meet peace halfway. If my posts can cause some sort of review of practice, it may save lives.
As somebody who lost a friend due to the whole slavery thing, I'm all for this. Sending you a message now. -Shellton
I'm not taking an opinion here, but I'm just saying that perhaps less argument and more friendly dialogue would help affirm the points of both sides. Although, if I were to take a side, I would say that a law against killing might decrease the effectiveness of The Fog Fall. Like, you sometimes need that option, when things get shitty. Take Draco Wintersun, for example. He tried to test a pathogen on live subjects. Is this the type of person we want roaming about? Probably not. Thankfully, he's dead. There are still criminals out there, though, sadly.
I've found in my experiences, civil and "nice" words are often overtaken by the overbearing. It is unfortunate, but I have at least not resorted to insulting anyone. Safety and peace are my goals, we all just have different methods and opinions of such.
As an aside: It is highly improbable that humans were the first species to develop means for extraplanetary travel. History simply does not have the evidence for that. Not yet, anyway. I mean no offense, of course - the ingenuity of humans is certainly impressive - but it is a bit presumptuous to assume that they were the very first without any proof. They are not ancient by any means, but there are also others that are further along. Standard human technology seems to be somewhere in the middle, comparatively. To get on topic! I applaud this group in question for attempting a more civilised approach to things. However, I would advise you to both be cautious, and to be professional. Forget the latter, and (as High Legislatore Hollow stated) you will be likely to turn into naught but a mob. Forget the former, and you will be likely to die. Please be cautious with your efforts to solve problems through non-violence. While I firmly believe in not resorting to killing as the solution to every remotely-threatening problem, violence is sometimes unavoidable, and you must take care not to lose your own lives to protect that of your murderer. I certainly approve, and bless your efforts. But please be careful. - Chronicle
'Tis no trouble. I would offer to try and aid your organisation in planning and action, but, unfortunately, I already have quite too many responsibilities to attend to as it is. Your people have my support in their preliminary plans and ideals, however. Perhaps we may even work together at some point. We shall see. - Chronicle
