Alcoblog Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 It is a bit wooly isn't it, whilst technically correct, the implication of killed instantly is that there was no suffering. If you'd just been shot twice in the head though and not killed, then there was definitely some suffering before the 3rd fatal shot. Precisely my point. You can hardly be killed instantly if you've already been shot twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 It can mean two things though, they weren't killed instantly from the point when violence against them started, but they were killed instantly by the 3rd shot (as opposed to bleeding to death over 3 minutes from the 3rd shot for example). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Precisely my point. You can hardly be killed instantly if you've already been shot twice. Of course you can. Being shot in the head is not always fatal. The first two shots could injure but not kill. The third could cause instant death. It's not an oxymoron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyper Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Oooh... I'm all scared now! Who do I decide is the stupid one! Edit ... you Not edit ... me Mods! ... Get your computer Tippex out please! well, I like Alcoblog and I like Ratter71, but who do I like best? There's only one way to find out ....................... Fight ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 Of course you can. Being shot in the head is not always fatal. The first two shots could injure but not kill. The third could cause instant death. It's not an oxymoron. Yeah but if the perps already had a couple of pops at your grey matter with his trusty Heckler & Koch with the sole intent of your immediate demise, it's certainly not likely the first two were test shots is it!? Therefore, to my way of thinking, death isn't instantaneous! I understand your point though ... just that I'm right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dacrlit Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Humanist Forgiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 well, I like Alcoblog and I like Ratter71, but who do I like best? There's only one way to find out ....................... Fight ! Yeah! ... bagsy I get the first three shots! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratter71 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 well, I like Alcoblog and I like Ratter71, but who do I like best? There's only one way to find out ....................... Fight ! He wins, the mods have swooped in with magic Tippex! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alcoblog Posted March 25, 2011 Author Share Posted March 25, 2011 He wins, the mods have swooped in with magic Tippex! Ha ha! ... you don't muck with me and get away with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Yeah but if the perps already had a couple of pops at your grey matter with his trusty Heckler & Koch with the sole intent of your immediate demise, it's certainly not likely the first two were test shots is it!? Therefore, to my way of thinking, death isn't instantaneous! The quote does not imply that death was instantaneous at the start of the attack. It specifically refers to the third shot as being the one which caused instant death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.