Is there anything wrong in robbing a bank?
Raja, The Great
The banks are gambling away your money anyway!
Raja, The Great
Patrick Kehoe
> If you don't get caught?
>
> The banks are gambling away your money anyway!
Yes... IT'S BREAKING THE LAW AND IS IMMORAL!
P
Manuel aka Xax
Well, kinf of...
The trouble with robbing a bank (I mean the cash), is that you'll very
likely steal more "poor to middle class" 's money than banksters or
richest's money; hard to look like some modern Robin Hood.
Bernie Madoff way was a much better modern approach.
I can't care about breaking the law, since any bank I can think of has
been proved to have broken laws as well.
That's mainly fighting fire with fire; sounds a bit more useless than
immoral.
Morality is such a vague and over-rated idea.
Most of the time it was mainly what the elite wanted it to be.
At best it is some sort of ideal way of socialy behaving.
Manco
>
> The banks are gambling away your money anyway!
I'd rob the Federal Reserve Bank in Manhattan. Dave would be my get-
away driver.
Raja, The Great
I want to form a team. Who else is game?
Patrick Kehoe
> On 12 mar, 17:35, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 12, 7:12 am, "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > If you don't get caught?
>
> > > The banks are gambling away your money anyway!
>
> > Yes... IT'S BREAKING THE LAW AND IS IMMORAL!
>
> > P
>
> Well, kinf of...
> The trouble with robbing a bank (I mean the cash), is that you'll very
> likely steal more "poor to middle class" 's money than banksters or
> richest's money; hard to look like some modern Robin Hood.
>
> Bernie Madoff way was a much better modern approach.
>
> I can't care about breaking the law, since any bank I can think of has
> been proved to have broken laws as well.
Some one or some group breaks the law therefore it's ok for you do to
so? Hope you don't live by that logic or wish society to do so...
> That's mainly fighting fire with fire; sounds a bit more useless than
> immoral.
>
> Morality is such a vague and over-rated idea.
Morality is not vague or relative or over-rated... it may be abused,
or denied or made trivial but it lives in the conscience of those that
undertand doing harm vs. doing good... allowing for self-interest to
not deny the freedom of self-interests to manifest the common good...
> Most of the time it was mainly what the elite wanted it to be.
> At best it is some sort of ideal way of socialy behaving.
Morality gives value to right action... directed self-interests
complying to a tolerable exchanging of opportunity and necessity.
P
drew
Armed robbery gets you a lot of time so you have to make sure it's
really going to be worth it.
When I was young one of my bosses was giving me a hard time and pretty
much telling me
I was expendable. I told him, "Well, I'll work for money or you can
fire me. If you fire me I'm
gonna steal my money from people who have it....people like you."
That shut the bastard up.
It's easy to get small amounts of money robbing banks but I don't
think it's worth it. One of
my friends got 5 years for armed robbery and he didn't get much of
anything. Hell,
he didn't even use a real gun. This guy was no killer. He was just
broke and
a little bit crazy because his marriage broke down and his wife
wouldn't
let him see his kids. But it doesn't matter, at least in Canada.
They put him away in a high security prison and those places really
suck, especially if you've got
a big mouth like this guy did. He got his jaw broken over an argument
playing ping pong.
So good luck. I'm staying clean. Also most crooks are stupid and
greedy and you
can't trust them. They aren't Robin Hood types. They're just
opportunists and they're
just as likely to rob you as rob the bank.
Unless you can find somebody who just enjoys stealing things. My best
friend growing
up was like that. He just got a thrill from ripping things off.
Cars, guns, sporting goods,
you name it.
only human
Forget the banks. security is too good today. get the money before it
reaches
the bank.
Manco
Problem is money is all electronic these days. Robbing armored cars
filled with cash is a thing of a bygone era. You'd be better off
robbing an Apple store.
only human
I wasn't talking about robbing a armored car. but your right
Superdave
better yet be a banker and be immune from prosecution!
TT
You, sir, are full of shit.
bob
and yet raja calls me a "cunt." can't indians just leave their culture
and mentality at the door when they come in?
bob
bob
wrote:
lame. very lame. if you get "fired" because you obviously aren't
worthy to the company, go steal from the rich - only problem if you're
not smart enough to make money legally, i'm certain you're not smart
enough to make it illegally.
bob
bob
wrote:
>
>Forget the banks. security is too good today. get the money before it
>reaches
>the bank.
exactly - maybe just hit some old lady over the head on the street and
snach her purse and jewelry, and in fact, maybe 10-20 old ladies a
day, would be easy,no? you morons.
bob
Superdave
er... he's not an Indian bob. he's a Paki.
Raja, The Great
Who is talking about armed robbery? When you have technology why use
guns.
drew
Then if you're not into an old-fashioned heist, what do you need
partners in crime for?
bob
yes, i keep forgetting.
but is there a difference?
bob
Raja, The Great
Its not a one man job.
Manuel aka Xax
> On Mar 12, 9:04 am, Manuel aka Xax <xami...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 12 mar, 17:35, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 12, 7:12 am, "Raja, The Great" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > If you don't get caught?
>
> > > > The banks are gambling away your money anyway!
>
> > > Yes... IT'S BREAKING THE LAW AND IS IMMORAL!
>
> > > P
>
> > Well, kinf of...
> > The trouble with robbing a bank (I mean the cash), is that you'll very
> > likely steal more "poor to middle class" 's money than banksters or
> > richest's money; hard to look like some modern Robin Hood.
>
> > Bernie Madoff way was a much better modern approach.
>
> > I can't care about breaking the law, since any bank I can think of has
> > been proved to have broken laws as well.
>
> Some one or some group breaks the law therefore it's ok for you do to
> so? Hope you don't live by that logic or wish society to do so...
understand what "stealing" is about if some doesn't hurt them where it
hurts them: their dollars wallets.
2. Of course I don't live "by that logic".
> > That's mainly fighting fire with fire; sounds a bit more useless than
> > immoral.
>
> > Morality is such a vague and over-rated idea.
>
> Morality is not vague or relative or over-rated... it may be abused,
> or denied or made trivial but it lives in the conscience of those that
> undertand doing harm vs. doing good... allowing for self-interest to
> not deny the freedom of self-interests to manifest the common good...
Good to see you seem to have some nice opinion about morality, yet...
Of course it's as much vague as over-rated.
Even nazis were pretending to have some: either they raped the meaning
of the word or the word is way too related with the people refering to
it.
What I think you call "morality" is much more "common good" or "shared
intelligence".
> > Most of the time it was mainly what the elite wanted it to be.
> > At best it is some sort of ideal way of socialy behaving.
>
> Morality gives value to right action... directed self-interests
> complying to a tolerable exchanging of opportunity and necessity.
I am keener to think that it's the way around: right action are giving
morality a bit more value, based on the point I made earlier: even
nazis were claiming to have some high morality standards, wich cannot
be true (for I agree that if something wants to be called "moral" it
has to do with common good).
> P
PS: thanks for your comment, for my inital post was rather more about
fun than serious. This one, on the other hand, is.