NEEDED KILLING — chlorine in the gene pool. This can be a noun — an act — or the verb predicate of a declarative sentence.
Thought you weren’t going to be defining these.
A, think of this as a commentary, not a definition. 2, it’s my rule; I can break it.
The former can be illustrated by this sentence: resistance to Eco-fascists attacking innocent property owners importuned by agents of the state in the course of a politically-motivated witch hunt might predictable result in a NEEDED KILLING.
The latter shows in this assertion: This fellow NEEDED KILLING, Judge. Which ought to be an affirmative defense to a charge of homicide.
Funny how that sort…
What to do, when a ship carrying a hundred passengers suddenly capsizes and there is only one lifeboat? When the lifeboat is full, those who hate life will try to load it with more people and sink the lot. Those who love and respect life will take the ship’s axe and sever the extra hands that cling to the sides.
… always seem to expect that they will most assuredly be in the lifeboat, and not in the water, clinging for dear life to the gunwales.
True. My reaction to those assertions is, “Fine. You first.”
I mean, it’s only fair. Plus, they should be willing to demonstrate the courage of their convictions.
Unless they’re just rent-seeking, trying to glom onto resources they otherwise couldn’t access, by killing off the competition.
Which gives the lie to the whole “…love and respect life…” wheeze.
Plus the fact that they’re dead wrong on all counts of the claims backing up their assertions. Not only no evidence to support them, there’s quite a bit that contradicts them.
Want to add this point. From Glenn Reynolds…
…such sentiments, if usually a bit less bluntly stated, are driving environmental policy nowadays. It’s Himmler in a green shirt. These are not nice people who want good things for everyone. These are evil people who hanker after mass death.