Snoopy

Oh, you are right.  By that point you should already be twice as big, makes sense now

On a less random Side Note

Upon reading the answers here it looks like my sentence with "taking" was poorly edited, as it should read something akin to **gaining for what it was intended to convey.  

Keith, I think that what you are referring to as "traditional" is still in need of an appropriate reference in the context from which the ethics are being handed from.

If its a goomba, just take some shrooms and jump on it

Yeah, this mugger really needs to find a new line of work apparently.

As a general rule, material possessions are less important than people, and I am not necessarily equipped to handle a hot headed individual with a mental disorder off the cuff so initially its sensible to prioritize the actual people I assume under my care (the perp is currently uncooperative, acting ably in their self interest, and strains my capacity) rather than their material possessions and allow the perp to continue their course of de-escalation which seems to be the best option available for taking control and ensuring safety among other priorities, and try to maintain situational awareness.  In this case, the old lady does not appear to badly hurt, but that is not yet confirmed, and she would know what she needs, or at least her immediate concerns, better than I do at this point. 

It is unwise to expect fairness from a mob. 

How do you check that your SSD (Solid State Drive) or HDD (Hard Disk Drive) is in good repair?  Can hard drives be rebuilt with fresh parts, or carefully removing the original hard disc and placing into a new carriage with fresh bearings, disc readers, electronics etc...? In their respective designs, what design and manufacturing elements help to ensure that data is not corrupted over the lifetime of the storage medium, and that the storage device has a predictable service life over the long term?  

This thread is for the significance of the term, what it applies to, history, where it came from, its use in philosophy etc...

*Ethics

If your goal is simply not to speak hypocritically, just be honest that you don't observe the truth, believe in it or what have you, and don't speak in terms of morality, because nothing is right or wrong.  For example, one can appeal to empathetic reason under moral relativism.

Honestly, your words seem more like you are just lost, humbled, and kind than someone who doesn't believe in truth, and that's perfectly normal.  I don't believe we are talking about moral relativism if you are just acknowledging your limitations.

Briefly if you would like, could you please list what constitutes "legitimate use" of firearms?

Are you saying that mass shootings are more common than acts against individuals within the United States of America?  

Would you please define what you consider to be a mass shooting?

Is there something special about 98 days passing?

Other than Email, nah. I don't think its made life any easier.  

You are welcome.  Its just some reliable information pertaining to a question you asked at some point, and seems to be relevant to the thread in general.

That's just absurd, don't you think?

A position is contingent upon relativity.

Allah is Arabic, not necessarily Islamic.  

Our existence on earth is in a fallen state.  We are born into sin, but people are basically good and can choose a righteous path.  Though off topic, could you start a thread on weapons of mass destruction?  I wonder how other people think about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, how they reconcile their existence, and how people such as yourself reason an approach to the issue.

 I would suspect that the idea that food, shelter, healthcare, water, and other essentials could not be afforded within a given jurisdiction is most likely predicated to a topic of entrusting vast degrees of resources into the hands of a few, or situations where 40% or more of the population is living off seized expenditure on "welfare", without respect to relevant productivity.

Universal Healthcare is simply not the same as mandatory health insurance coverage though naturally one might imagine that universal insurance of some sort is practically necessary to unpredictable elements.  The United States has universal healthcare, meaning that every citizen has some basic access to healthcare services.  Healthcare is not universally "affordable" in the United States from an individual standpoint.  What is happening in a general sense is that people are skipping important services because they haven't met deductible and going into enormous amounts of debt until they die or their credit is run out. This is being afforded, as someone is always picking up the tab, and we are paying through the nose for it at this time as a nation.  Some say we are also subsidizing countries where government officials are authorizing restrictions on the healthcare industry as a means of cutting costs on mismanaged liabilities.  I think the best a government can be expected to do is to subsidize critical supply side elements (to ensure the ready supply of doctors, facilities and quality labor) in a manner which is conducive to a market with an acceptable amount of risk with preference to relatively smaller start ups, particularly specialists, that can compete more conventionally as opposed to say, pooling assets taking what they can get and coming up with asinine administrative formulas/policies for survival. This is something that needs to be approached with vision over a length of time.  Perhaps some places to start a conversation up are ways to simplify how healthcare businesses negotiate with insurance, increasing/easing numerous insurance pools across low population and low income areas, ways to make services relatively consistent and predictable, and critically analyzing copious amounts of risks being accounted for from irregular payments and costs, including how complications are dealt with, legal costs, emergencies, certification/schooling etc...  There is also the aspect of "raising the bar" so to speak, meaning that we need not only to think about the quantity of people serviced, but thinking societally about raising our standard of services commonly available.  Currently we are dealing with the consequences of "Obamacare" which is well known to have been flawed and pushed through expediently with political reasoning, but beyond that I'm not sure how much depth the average American would have on the subject.