Burglar sues homeowner that shot him - Page 3




 
--
Burglar sues homeowner that shot him
 
June 19th, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
Burglar sues homeowner that shot him
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldogg
Now you're getting it Ted. We're just a nation of homicidal maniacs. That's why everyone wants in... and if you're interested I have some beach front property in Arizona for sale.
You might want to consider hanging on to it. If global warming keeps going the way it is you might just get that ocean view.

But Ted isn't completely wrong. (This isn't directly meant at you BD)

1. Some people own guns to hunt or enjoy target shooting.
2. Some are interested by Historical Reference or as a Hobby.
3. Some own them for protection, for their type of work or just at home.

4. But there are some people buy guns simply because they like the sense of power it brings, and nothing more. Little men with Big guns. They think carrying a gun around makes them a 'Tough Guy'. And generally, as Ted states, these types tend to be obsessed and usually unstable.

Contrary to the NRA propaganda, not all gun owners are responsible, even amongst the professionals. Last week, there was a jackass cop who shot herself with her own service pistol whilst sleeping with it under her pillow. A true Homer Simpson moment.

And thats not to mention all the pathetic little losers who pull out guns out as their way of solving all of life's little annoyances.

And its with the last category is where America doesn't make much sense with its gun culture.
June 19th, 2007  
5.56X45mm
 
 
That cop was a frakking moron. And yeah, not all gun owners are responsible. I 100% agree with you there. I've seen some idiots at the local gun ranges. And when they're there. I leave. But also remember that not all car owners are responsible. More people drink and drive. Yet you don't see a national campaign to outlaw cars.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted
I reckon this whole "guns for protection" is a load of bollocks. Most of you here don't even care about defending.... It's all about finally getting to use your gun so you can kill somebody without any major fuss. We call defence the physical act of not getting hurt. There has to be an action made at your person. You just hope somebody wanders into your garden so can shoot him! And any innocent victim is collateral damage, which is acceptable.
Oh Ted..... As a gun owner for half of my life. I've never fired my gun in anger here in the States (Military Service, not included). I've dealt with burlgers, tresspassers, and hurricanes. Same with my friends expect one. He was mugged and used his firearm in self defense (works as a jeweler). He didn't kill said scumbag but he wounded him.

Self Defense is something that we enjoy here in the States. We enjoy knowing that we can defend ourselves in needed. We enjoy knowing that we don't have to run into our closets, and hope and pray that the police show up in time.

Some burglers are cowards... Some aren't. A firearm is nothing but a tool. Man got to the top of the food chain by using tools.
June 19th, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
5.56

That cop was a frakking moron. And yeah, not all gun owners are responsible. I 100% agree with you there. I've seen some idiots at the local gun ranges. And when they're there. I leave. But also remember that not all car owners are responsible. More people drink and drive. Yet you don't see a national campaign to outlaw cars.


First of all a gun is not a tool its a weapon. A tool are used in construction, weapons are for destruction. Lets not equate the two, they are not at all the same, they are polar opposites.

Secondly, Their isn't a national campaign to outlaw guns either. What there is a campaign to control guns. The types+accessories one can buy, who can buy them and how they can be bought. A common misconception is that only conservatives are gun-owners. Thats totally Wrong, their are plenty of liberals too, just visit NY/NJ/PA, New England, the Midwest, etc. Lots of Democrats gun owners.

No, but they *DO* make sure that those that are irresponsible with their cars get their license taken away. In in NYC, then Mayor Guiliani passed a law that allowed the police to seize and auction off your car for a DWI conviction.

What is needed is as MontyB suggested; better governance. That those who are responsible enough to own one can do so with ease, whilst those that aren't are screened out. The problem is that groups such as the NRA and ACLU (for 1st amendment reasons, not 2nd amendment) are dead set against any type of monitoring system or central database.
--
Burglar sues homeowner that shot him
June 19th, 2007  
Del Boy
 
The point is that protecting your home and family can become a dilemma. Guns are banned here but any criminal can get them, cheap. So as not to put your family at risk, you have to ready to defend your home with some sort of weapon, and the consideration of that is especially against the law, if you have to put it into action. Once again, the politicians would have us roll and surrender. Get tied up? Get pushed into a car? No way Jose. It's a case of him or me.


COMMAND THE FUTURE, CONQUER THE PAST.
June 19th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
First of all a gun is not a tool its a weapon. A tool are used in construction, weapons are for destruction. Lets not equate the two, they are not at all the same, they are polar opposites.
Truisms are not necessarily true.

Many tools are used for destruction, (some intentionally others not). Using your analogy, a chainsaw is not a tool but a weapon.

A firearm is most certainly a tool.
June 20th, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Truisms are not necessarily true.

Many tools are used for destruction, (some intentionally others not). Using your analogy, a chainsaw is not a tool but a weapon.

A firearm is most certainly a tool.

Sorry, but no.

I was referring to the destruction of life not of objects.

A firearm is a weapon. Just as a sword or bow are. A weapon's primary function is to take life. A chainsaw function is to cut wood. A chainsaw can be used as a weapon, but that is not its intended function. Weapons sole purpose is killing.
June 20th, 2007  
DefiantCdr
 
 
Quote:
I was referring to the destruction of life not of objects.

A firearm is a weapon. Just as a sword or bow are. A weapon's primary function is to take life. A chainsaw function is to cut wood. A chainsaw can be used as a weapon, but that is not its intended function. Weapons sole purpose is killing.
I have to disagree with you on this point, as every tool has its purpose. A weapon is a tool with the function of killing, but it's still a tool.
June 20th, 2007  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
Sorry, but no.

I was referring to the destruction of life not of objects.

A firearm is a weapon. Just as a sword or bow are. A weapon's primary function is to take life. A chainsaw function is to cut wood. A chainsaw can be used as a weapon, but that is not its intended function. Weapons sole purpose is killing.
None of what you have erroneously stated precludes the fact that a firearm is a tool. For several years I worked as a professional vermin shooter, sure,... I killed things, but my rifle was certainly a tool. A tool is any device designed to give the user an advantage. A firearm certainly does that.

Your last statement is also very shortsighted, many weapons are used for their deterrent value. The knowledge that a security officer is armed will certainly deter a proportion of those who otherwise might commit an offence.
June 20th, 2007  
bulldogg
 
 

Topic: I just love sweeping generalisations


Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
Sorry, but no.

I was referring to the destruction of life not of objects.

A firearm is a weapon. Just as a sword or bow are. A weapon's primary function is to take life. A chainsaw function is to cut wood. A chainsaw can be used as a weapon, but that is not its intended function. Weapons sole purpose is killing.
Explain then the rifles used in the Olympics?

Explain skeet shotguns?

Trap guns?

.22 caliber short rounds?

You are wrong, catagorically speaking. Some weapons are not meant to kill but simply destroy something and many people, like myself, find unparalleled stress relief and enjoyment in shooting things. Nothing else comes close to the feeling of firing a weapon and I don't need to kill anything more animate than a paper target to get it. There are many guns and rifles designed for sport and not for killing... but then that's what most of the gun control crowd just don't get.

As for the effectiveness of the "Make My Day laws" or castle doctrine, consider the following empirical data...

Quote:
The success of the law is shown by many as a clear advocation for self defense as deterrence; the crime rates in Oklahoma for burglary fell from 58,333 in 1987 to 31,661 in 2000.
http://www.oksenate.org/news/Nationa...m20041031.html

Same thing happened in Colorado... which passed the law in 1985.

Luis is this accurate... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
June 20th, 2007  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Yup.....

As a Law Enforcement Officer, I respond to calls where a citizen called us after an incident where a firearm or other weapon was used in a defensive manner. 90% of the time it's a firearm. Every call that I have handled involving a firearm used in a defensive act, the firearm was only displayed. Not fired..... The owner of the firearm pulled it out and the simple sight of it scared off the criminal. In my short 1 year career, I have handled at least fifteen calls like that. Other have been knives of some sort. One was a sword.

Castle Doctrine has helped prevent many serious crimes.

Most crimes where a firearm is used in a defensive manner is not reported for a number of reasons.

1. The Victim was not harmed
2. Nothing was stolen from the victim
3. The Firearm used by the victim was not fired, only displayed

Since three of those things happen in 99% of the defensive use of firearms. The Victims see no need to call the police. Why? Because the victim wasn't robbed, wasn't injured, the firearm was only displayed, and the criminal fled the scene.
 


Similar Topics
U.S. Copters Were Shot Down
Chargers' Foley sues police officer
Iraqis shot 'for wearing shorts'
Sniper shot that took out an insurgent killer from three quarters of a mile
Kamikaze shot dead in London, UK. Third attack.