(05-27-2018, 10:21 AM)Byron LeftTown Wrote:

(05-27-2018, 09:50 AM)mikesez Wrote: When Byronlefttown and others said I was fearful and inadequate as a protector, and called me a "beta" that was also name-calling, but wasn't ad hominem. If they had said explicitly, "You're a softie, and that's why you're wrong" that would be ad hominem.  I didn't say that copycat was wrong.

I did no such thing.  You are the one who advanced the idea that your family was robbed and murdered, then suggested the government's role is to investigate and punish the miscreants.  Where does your responsibility come into play?  Dialing the phone to report the crime?  Your family is still dead, and your focus is on asking somebody else to avenge you.  Zero effort was spent on preventing the tragedy in the first place.

Right I introduced a hypothetical scenario where someone's family was robbed and murdered. I did not mention if this family had done anything to prevent that outcome. The scenario focused on what to do next. You are jumping and and assuming that nothing was done to prevent the outcome. You are adding to the scenario things that I did not say. So let's be more explicit and say that the family had taken many precautions to prevent the tragedy. They had guns and other weapons in the house. They kept their doors locked and they kept their exterior well-lit and they had some sort of alarm system. None-the-less the bad guys broke their windows while they were sleeping. 
So do we need some sort of government to figure out who did it and punish them or is it just up to the surviving relatives of these victims to find the perpetrators on their own and exact revenge without having to prove to any third party that they were the guilty ones?

---