Upon hearing the discussion, Identity steps forth from the shadows

It seems to me that Rourke asked a valid, unoffensive and fair question. He merely wonders what the idea of blatant disrespect is to the community, what we will now allow people to do before we decide to kill them.

Firstly id like to answer the question myself. I personally consider disrespect to be, as many do: attempting to kill bodyguards, attempting to kill the actual mobster, unwanted pickpocketing, verbal threats or even talking in a manner which has an inkling of disrespect to our superiors.

My question personally, is which of these should we go so far as to kill for? Additionally if somebody is young, foolish and not yet been fully brought forth in this world of ours(-48's), should we not give them a chance, or even just ignore their stupid threats, which they have no power to follow through with? Why risk our own lives to destroy one which means so little?

I am not passing judgment on what Dagenham's father did, and I welcome his son to our shores. I merely am entering in on a discussion, which I feel has been blown out of proportion.

+ID+