billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on May 2, 2014 19:42:16 GMT -5
Using your comparison this means if I don't bait the criminals I can shoot them ? Does this apply to all convicted criminals and crime in progress ? There are additional conditions beyond baiting that must be satisfied for you to legally shoot a bear. There are specific conditions under which you can shoot someone legally.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 2, 2014 20:00:58 GMT -5
On the other hand, don't bait people into your home to execute them for misdemeanors!Breaking into a home and stealing items is not a misdemeanor, but a felony. And walking into an open garage and getting shot is neither.
What really gets me with some people is that they go right past self-defense and think it is OK to just shoot someone over property.
This guy was not in danger- he was perfectly able to stay in his house and call police. He chose to go out of a safe place with a shotgun and ended up killing an unarmed teenager (sounds familiar).
If they kick in the door and you shoot them dead- fine with me. If you go out the door armed and gun them down- you get to go to jail- at least in a civilized society.
Too bad GA declined to prosecute that asshole that shot the old man with dementia wandering around his yard- guess it makes sense though- GA is the new home to NRA crazy bullshit- guns in bars, churches, government buildings, pretty much anywhere their paranoid citizenry feel a need to have one. Might as well merge that state with TX and FL and let the nuts have at it.
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 2, 2014 22:20:30 GMT -5
This guy was not in danger- he was perfectly able to stay in his house and call police. He chose to go out of a safe place with a shotgun and ended up killing an unarmed teenager (sounds familiar).
I was wondering when you'd get back to that.....
Too bad GA declined to prosecute that asshole that shot the old man with dementia wandering around his yard- guess it makes sense though- GA is the new home to NRA crazy bullshit- guns in bars, churches, government buildings, pretty much anywhere their paranoid citizenry feel a need to have one. Might as well merge that state with TX and FL and let the nuts have at it.
Right....who needs any of that when we have people like you looking out for us and telling us what's best for us...and making up half the shit they say as they go....Fact: in Ga, there will only be guns in bars and churches if bar owners and pastors want them to be there. Don't like it? Don't live in Ga. Say hi to Bloomberg for me when you see him at the next meeting...
|
|
Spellbound454
Senior Member
"In the end, we remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends"
Joined: Sept 9, 2011 17:28:42 GMT -5
Posts: 3,988
|
Post by Spellbound454 on May 3, 2014 4:02:10 GMT -5
Its ironic that these two have called the police several times in the wake of the fury this death has caused.
Pity they didn't think of that before.
They'll be needing more than a shot gun to protect themselves and their property.
What the hell did they think they were doing. This is a dead young man with a grieving family and friends.... and a community which is outraged.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 3, 2014 8:32:05 GMT -5
Its ironic that these two have called the police several times in the wake of the fury this death has caused. Pity they didn't think of that before. They'll be needing more than a shot gun to protect themselves and their property. What the hell did they think they were doing. This is a dead young man with a grieving family and friends.... and a community which is outraged. There are police records of reported repeated break ins, so you are incorrect.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 8:36:00 GMT -5
Thing is, there was no break-in here. Everything was wide open.
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on May 3, 2014 9:12:52 GMT -5
my cousin lives i missoula, so far they've had an avalanche and now this.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 7:44:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2014 9:18:14 GMT -5
No. It's still things. It can be replaced. Life cannot. When you're dead, you're dead. To me, that is the point. No, not all 'things' can be replaced. I have a lot of heirlooms that I received after my grandmother's death. They were not expensive, but they were a piece of her that I got to keep after her death. When I was robbed, my jewelry box was emptied (into my pillowcases), and that mostly costume jewelry, along with her wedding band went too. My class ring was stolen. The pendant my parents gave me for my 21st birthday was stolen. These were all things I treasured, that were irreplaceable. That hurt, because I know that they picked through it and tossed it away. Even with our alarm system in place, I am so afraid of someone one breaking in and taking the few pieces of jewelry that means the most to me. So, I always wear it.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 9:22:18 GMT -5
No, not all 'things' can be replaced. I have a lot of heirlooms that I received after my grandmother's death. They were not expensive, but they were a piece of her that I got to keep after her death. When I was robbed, my jewelry box was emptied (into my pillowcases), and that mostly costume jewelry, along with her wedding band went too. My class ring was stolen. The pendant my parents gave me for my 21st birthday was stolen. These were all things I treasured, that were irreplaceable. That hurt, because I know that they picked through it and tossed it away. Even with our alarm system in place, I am so afraid of someone one breaking in and taking the few pieces of jewelry that means the most to me. So, I always wear it. I'm the same, lonewolf. The pieces that mean the most to me are on me, with the exception of my diamond earrings. They're in my safe deposit box.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on May 3, 2014 9:43:50 GMT -5
Musical interlude
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 3, 2014 9:53:29 GMT -5
Thing is, there was no break-in here. Everything was wide open. No, there wasn't a break-in, but there was a crime. And it looks like repeated ones at that. Are you disputing that mm? Did these people deserve to be shot? No. Would we be having this conversation if they hadn't decided to rob a house? No. So lets stop defending the criminal activities of criminals when the response is extreme. Lets address the response on it's own merits or lack thereof. In addition, lets stop judging a population based on the actions of a very few. Unlike EVT, who believes that the U.S. population south of the Mason-Dixon line are barefoot, unwashed hillbillies that are too stupid to think for themselves and use reasonably good judgment, most people do not follow his line of thought. The fact remains that states with less stringent gun laws experience less crime. Criminals will always have guns. The rest of us have the right to not be made "victims in waiting" by our government systems. There will always be extreme situations where humans are involved. We'll deal with them, but not by punishing the entire population. If ultra liberal people like EVT don't feel that they can responsibly handle the responsibility of handling a gun both in public and in private, then they should do us all a favor and turn their weapons in to the local police authorities asap. The sooner criminals stop committing crimes, the better off we will all be. Don't hold your breath.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on May 3, 2014 10:03:01 GMT -5
... So lets stop defending the criminal activities of criminals when the response is extreme. Correcting factual errors is not "defending the criminal".
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 10:03:34 GMT -5
Thing is, there was no break-in here. Everything was wide open. No, there wasn't a break-in, but there was a crime. And it looks like repeated ones at that. Are you disputing that mm? Did these people deserve to be shot? No. Would we be having this conversation if they hadn't decided to rob a house? No. So lets stop defending the criminal activities of criminals when the response is extreme. Lets address the response on it's own merits or lack thereof. In addition, lets stop judging a population based on the actions of a very few. Unlike EVT, who believes that the U.S. population south of the Mason-Dixon line are barefoot, unwashed hillbillies that are too stupid to think for themselves and use reasonably good judgment, most people do not follow his line of thought. The fact remains that states with less stringent gun laws experience less crime. Criminals will always have guns. The rest of us have the right to not be made "victims in waiting" by our government systems. There will always be extreme situations where humans are involved. We'll deal with them, but not by punishing the entire population. If ultra liberal people like EVT don't feel that they can responsibly handle the responsibility of handling a gun both in public and in private, then they should do us all a favor and turn their weapons in to the local police authorities asap. The sooner criminals stop committing crimes, the better off we will all be. Don't hold your breath. No, I don't dispute there had been crimes. However, when this young man was shot he was shot IN the garage. He hadn't stolen anything. Was he going to? Probably. Is stealing wrong? Absolutely. Should people be executed for it? Not in my opinion. I own a gun and have said I'll shoot anyone who enters my home uninvited with intent to harm me, or my mother. I will not shoot someone to save my "stuff". I most certainly will not set up a trap to lure someone into a position from which I can shoot them because they MIGHT steal my "stuff". YMMV
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,514
|
Post by Tennesseer on May 3, 2014 10:05:33 GMT -5
Thing is, there was no break-in here. Everything was wide open. No, there wasn't a break-in, but there was a crime. And it looks like repeated ones at that. Are you disputing that mm? Did these people deserve to be shot? No. Would we be having this conversation if they hadn't decided to rob a house? No. So lets stop defending the criminal activities of criminals when the response is extreme. Lets address the response on it's own merits or lack thereof. In addition, lets stop judging a population based on the actions of a very few. Unlike EVT, who believes that the U.S. population south of the Mason-Dixon line are barefoot, unwashed hillbillies that are too stupid to think for themselves and use reasonably good judgment, most people do not follow his line of thought. The fact remains that states with less stringent gun laws experience less crime. Criminals will always have guns. The rest of us have the right to not be made "victims in waiting" by our government systems. There will always be extreme situations where humans are involved. We'll deal with them, but not by punishing the entire population. If ultra liberal people like EVT don't feel that they can responsibly handle the responsibility of handling a gun both in public and in private, then they should do us all a favor and turn their weapons in to the local police authorities asap. The sooner criminals stop committing crimes, the better off we will all be. Don't hold your breath. Hence the homicide charge.
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 3, 2014 10:23:00 GMT -5
Yes there was a killing that should not have happened, BUT WHF WAS HE DOING IN SOMEONE ELSES HOME!! Oh, that's right, it was only the guys' garage....Happens all the time, people always just walk into peoples' private residences, garages, etc.....doesn't mean they were going to do anything wrong...shit, it should be perfectly legal to have strangers just mosey up your driveway, walk into your garage and poke around, even come into the house as long as the didn't actually get a chance to take something.
I own a gun and have said I'll shoot anyone who enters my home uninvited with intent to harm me, or my mother. I will not shoot someone to save my "stuff".
And let us all know, in this day and age when these piece of shit criminals are killing people for $5 and raping kids, how you can know without a doubt that the person who has the balls to come into your home is not going to harm you before, during, or after they take your "stuff". You won't shoot anyone period. And there is nothing wrong with that, but you have the mindset of a victim with all due respect. It's easy to say all kinds of shit of a board, but I assure you it's much tougher in the heat of the moment when you have seconds to decide what to do. I agree about the trap, but apparently this guy was robbed before (I thought I read twice) and recently. Very possibly by the same guy he shot. Extreme, yes, but had the crime not been committed that kid would be alive. There are no "rights" here, only wrongs.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 3, 2014 10:23:48 GMT -5
I live south of the Mason-Dixon thanks- never thought of people in that way. If I was ultra liberal I would probably want to ban guns- instead I am calling out the irresponsible use of them. If you want to call that defending criminals then have at it.
BTW there is zero evidence that gun laws have any real effect on crime in this country- either gun control or increased carry laws- but I am sure you can find a study on either side of the debate.
I can handle my weapons just fine- only been shooting since I was 10. I'll keep them thanks.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 10:28:44 GMT -5
Yes there was a killing that should not have happened, BUT WHF WAS HE DOING IN SOMEONE ELSES HOME!! Oh, that's right, it was only the guys' garage....Happens all the time, people always just walk into peoples' private residences, garages, etc.....doesn't mean they were going to do anything wrong...shit, it should be perfectly legal to have strangers just mosey up your driveway, walk into your garage and poke around, even come into the house as long as the didn't actually get a chance to take something. I own a gun and have said I'll shoot anyone who enters my home uninvited with intent to harm me, or my mother. I will not shoot someone to save my "stuff". And let us all know, in this day and age when these piece of shit criminals are killing people for $5 and raping kids, how you can know without a doubt that the person who has the balls to come into your home is not going to harm you before, during, or after they take your "stuff". You won't shoot anyone period. And there is nothing wrong with that, but you have the mindset of a victim with all due respect. It's easy to say all kinds of shit of a board, but I assure you it's much tougher in the heat of the moment when you have seconds to decide what to do. I agree about the trap, but apparently this guy was robbed before (I thought I read twice) and recently. Very possibly by the same guy he shot. Extreme, yes, but had the crime not been committed that kid would be alive. There are no "rights" here, only wrongs. The "trap" is the point of the thread, frankq. That's what's being discussed. The way this was done, there was no danger to the inhabitants and they knew it. That's the point, as I see it, and that's what's being discussed. As to whether I could shoot someone who broke into my house while mother and I are here ... yep, I could. Without a waver. I'd then call the police. I would never lie in wait for someone to break into my house while I wasn't in it so I could shoot them. That's what happened here. Don't make assumptions about what others can, or cannot, will, or will not do, frankq. You don't have that knowledge.
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 3, 2014 10:31:07 GMT -5
I live south of the Mason-Dixon thanks- never thought of people in that way. If I was ultra liberal I would probably want to ban guns- instead I am calling out the irresponsible use of them. If you want to call that defending criminals then have at it.
BTW there is zero evidence that gun laws have any real effect on crime in this country- either gun control or increased carry laws- but I am sure you can find a study on either side of the debate.
I can handle my weapons just fine- only been shooting since I was 10. I'll keep them thanks. There is a ton of evidence published by the Justice Dept and the FBI over several decades. You choose to ignore it.
I live south of the Mason-Dixon thanks- never thought of people in that way.
Really? You should go back and re-read your posts on numerous threads. Your distain for Americans along the Southern coast of this country is blatantly evident.
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 3, 2014 10:37:44 GMT -5
Don't make assumptions about what others can, or cannot, will, or will not do, frankq. You don't have that knowledge.
You don't have the knowledge either and that's my point. You don't know what a criminal will do in the course of committing a crime. To be predisposed to a particular course of action is any event is a tactical mistake. I have my opinions and assumptions just like anyone else and I base them on what people say and how accurate I feel their statements are. I haven't defended the actions of this homeowner, but like I said before, the victim, who was a criminal, could have avoided this. To say that he "actually hadn't stolen anything yet" is ridiculous.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 10:43:24 GMT -5
Don't make assumptions about what others can, or cannot, will, or will not do, frankq. You don't have that knowledge.You don't have the knowledge either and that's my point. You don't know what a criminal will do in the course of committing a crime. To be predisposed to a particular course of action is any event is a tactical mistake. I have my opinions and assumptions just like anyone else and I base them on what people say and how accurate I feel their statements are. I haven't defended the actions of this homeowner, but like I said before, the victim, who was a criminal, could have avoided this. To say that he "actually hadn't stolen anything yet" is ridiculous. I do know what a criminal can't do if he isn't in my house, frankq. If he's in my garage, I'm not going to kill him. If he breaches the entry into my house, I am MOST DEFINITELY going to shoot to kill him. If he takes the tool box out of my garage, without breaching the entry to my house, I'm going to call the police. Theft without breaking and entering is not a capital crime and doesn't warrant the death penalty. As I said, YMMV. In THIS PARTICULAR CASE, the fact the young man hadn't yet stolen anything is very pertinent. He hadn't broken into anything. A trap had been laid for him and he fell for the trap. The intent of the trap-layers was to kill him. That, in my estimation, is dead wrong.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 3, 2014 10:44:44 GMT -5
And all of those nice statistics over several decades draw zero conclusion as to what effect gun laws have on crime rates- there are a handful of claims on either side, none of which have proved anything close to causation.
Crime rates have been dropping period- in fact a solid argument was made that abortion laws have been more relevant.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 3, 2014 12:09:35 GMT -5
I live south of the Mason-Dixon thanks- never thought of people in that way. If I was ultra liberal I would probably want to ban guns- instead I am calling out the irresponsible use of them. If you want to call that defending criminals then have at it.
BTW there is zero evidence that gun laws have any real effect on crime in this country- either gun control or increased carry laws- but I am sure you can find a study on either side of the debate.
I can handle my weapons just fine- only been shooting since I was 10. I'll keep them thanks. There is a ton of evidence published by the Justice Dept and the FBI over several decades. You choose to ignore it. .
here is an appraisal of concealed carry laws: www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/do-concealed-weapon-laws-result-in-less-crime/2012/12/16/e80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.htmlsafest assessment: falling crime rates are related to something other than concealed carry laws. what are you suggesting they are related to?
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 3, 2014 12:17:55 GMT -5
No, there wasn't a break-in, but there was a crime. And it looks like repeated ones at that. Are you disputing that mm? Did these people deserve to be shot? No. Would we be having this conversation if they hadn't decided to rob a house? No. So lets stop defending the criminal activities of criminals when the response is extreme. Lets address the response on it's own merits or lack thereof. In addition, lets stop judging a population based on the actions of a very few. Unlike EVT, who believes that the U.S. population south of the Mason-Dixon line are barefoot, unwashed hillbillies that are too stupid to think for themselves and use reasonably good judgment, most people do not follow his line of thought. The fact remains that states with less stringent gun laws experience less crime. Criminals will always have guns. The rest of us have the right to not be made "victims in waiting" by our government systems. There will always be extreme situations where humans are involved. We'll deal with them, but not by punishing the entire population. If ultra liberal people like EVT don't feel that they can responsibly handle the responsibility of handling a gun both in public and in private, then they should do us all a favor and turn their weapons in to the local police authorities asap. The sooner criminals stop committing crimes, the better off we will all be. Don't hold your breath. No, I don't dispute there had been crimes. However, when this young man was shot he was shot IN the garage. He hadn't stolen anything. Was he going to? Probably. Is stealing wrong? Absolutely. Should people be executed for it? Not in my opinion. I own a gun and have said I'll shoot anyone who enters my home uninvited with intent to harm me, or my mother. I will not shoot someone to save my "stuff". I most certainly will not set up a trap to lure someone into a position from which I can shoot them because they MIGHT steal my "stuff". YMMV How do you know that there is no intent to harm you? Are you willing to wait and find out? Let's say you are holed up with your mom in your bedroom while they ransack your house. They take your TV, computer and silver and your jewelry box is in your bedroom. Do you really think that if they come looking for more goodies and stumble into you, that they won't harm you?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 12:44:40 GMT -5
No, I don't dispute there had been crimes. However, when this young man was shot he was shot IN the garage. He hadn't stolen anything. Was he going to? Probably. Is stealing wrong? Absolutely. Should people be executed for it? Not in my opinion. I own a gun and have said I'll shoot anyone who enters my home uninvited with intent to harm me, or my mother. I will not shoot someone to save my "stuff". I most certainly will not set up a trap to lure someone into a position from which I can shoot them because they MIGHT steal my "stuff". YMMV How do you know that there is no intent to harm you? Are you willing to wait and find out? Let's say you are holed up with your mom in your bedroom while they ransack your house. They take your TV, computer and silver and your jewelry box is in your bedroom. Do you really think that if they come looking for more goodies and stumble into you, that they won't harm you? What have I said, more than once, Mich? If you actually breach the entry into my home, I'll kill you without a second thought. I'll shoot, and I'll shoot to kill. I will not shoot someone in my garage who has not breached the entry to my home. Is that clear enough? Did you even read the post you quoted?
|
|
frankq
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2013 18:48:45 GMT -5
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by frankq on May 3, 2014 12:55:19 GMT -5
Update: Lott notes that, by his assessment, a majority of the research in referred academic publications supports his point of view. In a 2012 article for the Maryland Law Review, Lott listed 18 studies that found such laws reduced violent crime, ten that said it has no discernable effect and one that found it increased violent crime.
Still, it is worth noting that one committee member, the late James Q. Wilson, dissented from this chapter, noting that his reading of the data showed that the laws did result in a decline in the murder rate. (He also observed that the laws did not appear to cause an increase in the crime rate, as opponents had warned.) From the same study you cite. Seems they are saying something other than what you want them to say. I guess people with a particular agenda will read different things into the data. Again, I just say to look at the cities with the most stringent gun laws for the simple answer. I think I'll stick with the experts at the FBI and DOJ thanks..I'm not going to get into a discussion that we've had on countless occasions in the past and cite the same stuff again and again. People have their own ideologies. I'm not going to change your mind regardless of the overwhelming data contrary to your opinion. America has lost it's sense of culture and respect for life over the last few decades. Part of that is due to the mixing of so many people from other cultures in too little time and out stupid attitude that we must accept everybody else the way they are but nobody has to make an effort to become more American when they come here....legally or not. Part is due to the lack of desire by parents to put foot to ass when necessary when it comes to their kids. Part is due to some people who just don't give a shit about anything in life... It was never this way when I was a kid. There were rules, even for criminals when the committed crimes. No more.....
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on May 3, 2014 13:28:41 GMT -5
How do you know that there is no intent to harm you? Are you willing to wait and find out? Let's say you are holed up with your mom in your bedroom while they ransack your house. They take your TV, computer and silver and your jewelry box is in your bedroom. Do you really think that if they come looking for more goodies and stumble into you, that they won't harm you? What have I said, more than once, Mich? If you actually breach the entry into my home, I'll kill you without a second thought. I'll shoot, and I'll shoot to kill. I will not shoot someone in my garage who has not breached the entry to my home. Is that clear enough? Did you even read the post you quoted? But it is just stuff. What makes your garage less of your home than your living room? In fact, what we have in our garage is probably more hockable. Hell, we probably have $10k in bikes alone. Not only that, once you are in our garage, it is an easy jump into the house.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 3, 2014 14:01:48 GMT -5
It's not about whether my garage is "less of my home"! It's about whether I'm in danger when someone is in my garage and I KNOW they're there. Try to gain entry into the house, where mother and I are, and I'll blow you away. I don't give a flip if some damned fool wanders off with something "hockable" from my garage. That's not my major concern. My major concern is the safety of my mother and myself. That, I will ensure, just as I've insured my belongings.
If your garage isn't any better protected than to allow an "easy jump into the house", you have some work to do. To get into MY house from the garage, you're going to have to break open the door. It's not a weak door and it has a double lock, one being a dead bolt. Frankly, Mich, the $10k worth of bikes just doesn't move me enough to blow somebody away to save it. I'm smart enough to have insurance on such things. Human life is more valuable to me than $10k worth of bikes. If I think for a moment you could be a threat to my life, or my mother's life, I'll kill you. I won't kill you over $10k worth of bikes. I'll call the police.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 3, 2014 16:11:39 GMT -5
What have I said, more than once, Mich? If you actually breach the entry into my home, I'll kill you without a second thought. I'll shoot, and I'll shoot to kill. I will not shoot someone in my garage who has not breached the entry to my home. Is that clear enough? Did you even read the post you quoted? But it is just stuff. What makes your garage less of your home than your living room? In fact, what we have in our garage is probably more hockable. Hell, we probably have $10k in bikes alone. Not only that, once you are in our garage, it is an easy jump into the house.
So what about my shed in the back yard which has some expensive things in it? I see someone going in it do I get to grab my shotgun and go blast them on sight?
I think if the homeowner wants to grab their gun and go after a burglar outside the residence- then we hold them to a higher standard similar to police- as in you are no longer presumed in fear for your life so shooting an unarmed person will require some actual evidence that they were attempting to harm you. I think that is reasonable.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 3, 2014 18:58:01 GMT -5
From the same study you cite. Seems they are saying something other than what you want them to say. no. i am citing the article. now it could be that the author has a horse in the race, but i don't.I guess people with a particular agenda will read different things into the data. yeah, i can see you have no agenda at all. no bias in your posts at all. yep.Again, I just say to look at the cities with the most stringent gun laws for the simple answer. i looked at the states with concealed carry -vs- those without it. here is what the author said:
Gohmert’s statement was declarative and sweeping: “The facts are every time guns have been allowed, concealed-carry has been allowed, the crime rate has gone down.”
The actual evidence is much murkier — and in dispute. Certainly, it appears such laws have not increased the crime rate, as opponents had feared, but it is equally a stretch to say such laws are a slam-dunk reason for why crimes have decreased. Even those sympathetic to Lott’s research suggest that any decline in the crime rate from right-to-carry laws is more sporadic — as opposed to Gohmert’s claim that crime rate always goes down.
Moreover, even if one could prove a definitive link, other factors certainly play a role in reducing crime and should be acknowledged. (Update: We wavered between Two and Three Pinocchios, but the Washington Examiner argues our final ruling is “unfair” given the murkiness of the evidence: “The research is good, but it doesn’t jibe with the conclusion.”)
I think I'll stick with the experts at the FBI and DOJ thanks.. i think i will stick with what i read, which basically says that it is inconclusive.I'm not going to get into a discussion that we've had on countless occasions in the past and cite the same stuff again and again. fair enough. but i am here to be convinced one way or the other. present your proof. i'll entertain it. People have their own ideologies. I'm not going to change your mind regardless of the overwhelming data contrary to your opinion. America has lost it's sense of culture and respect for life over the last few decades. Part of that is due to the mixing of so many people from other cultures in too little time and out stupid attitude that we must accept everybody else the way they are but nobody has to make an effort to become more American when they come here....legally or not. Part is due to the lack of desire by parents to put foot to ass when necessary when it comes to their kids. Part is due to some people who just don't give a shit about anything in life... It was never this way when I was a kid. There were rules, even for criminals when the committed crimes. No more..... anecdotal. not interested in your personal story. thanks tho.i am not dogmatic. i am swayed by what i read. sway me.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 3, 2014 21:07:08 GMT -5
He was bringing up Lott- a very biased individual and his study has been shot down numerous times.
My point was neither gun control laws or expanded gun rights have made much of a difference- and not enough for causation at all.
I think there is going to be a certain level of crime regardless of laws- whether you arm every citizen and let them carry everywhere, whether you have the death penalty or not, whether you have strict gun control laws or not.
That's pretty much it- crime has been dropping for decades- and continues to drop- and the NRA and gun ownership has jack to do with it- in fact gun ownership was going DOWN during this time.
Of course if we wanted to discuss real gun control we would look at the crime rates outside of the US where they have severely restricted gun ownership- and of course we know what happened in those countries- something the NRA likes to sweep under the rug. It is no secret gun crime is so high in the USA- by their own logic these other countries should be overflowing with crime. Yet- not so.
It fits our MO- we like being a third world country. Just a matter of time before US citizens are sneaking into Mexico or Canada.
|
|