It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trending now.....Two teenage boys shot dead in California during burglary attempt

page: 10
57
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
If you choose to use a gun to defend your home that's fine. However, you have a responsibility to save the life of whoever you shoot. If you confront them, shoot them. If they don't go down shoot them again and again until they do. The second they're down, call an ambulance and give first aid. If they die due to your inaction you're a murderer and should be charged as such. From the moment you pull the trigger it's your responsibility to see they make it to trial if possible. Protection is fine, killing someone because you want to kill them outside of the justice system is not.


No, it is not my responsibility to play paramedic to an intruder I might shoot in my home. Besides, I am a pretty good shot, and if they break in, and I shoot, legally, the likelihood of them needing medical attention is very slim.




posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: SixX18

pump shotgun is fine.
and jacking a round into the chamber
from the feeding tube is an unmistakable sound
that a sober, level headed, intelligent person
in their right mind will sit up and pay attention to.

and the sound as a deterrent. deterrence refers to
stopping a crime from being acted upon.
since they are already in the house,
what exactly are you deterring them from doing??

let me inform you that even though the jacking of a round
from the feeding tube through the cycling of the pump action
sounds really threatening and definitive,
a home invader at two thirty in the morning is
probably drunk or high,
not level headed,
probably not intelligent,
and probably armed.

that means that as soon as you cycle the action with the pump,
you have told everyone in the room exactly where you are and with what you are armed.


Proceeding on breaking and entering. They can hear it, turn and run, and a single shot even aimed blindly around the corner and down/up can deter them as well. If they won't leave, then bunker down! If they stay they are also idiots or think they can take you on. Around me in the country, I doubt they would stay if they heard my foot steps getting out of bed.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75

..a home invader at two thirty in the morning is probably drunk or high, not level headed, probably not intelligent, and probably armed. that means that as soon as you cycle the action with the pump, you have told everyone in the room exactly where you are and with what you are armed.

Absolutely correct...

Here is someone else who also agrees with that as well...


The bad guy is not as rational as you think he is. Well let me question and challenge you... If you're that smart, you wouldn't be in the guys house in the first place, OK? So anybody whose in your house is notably less rational than you are. Possibly critically less rational, INSANELY less rational.

Most criminals, even ones hopped up on drugs, don't want an encounter. They don't want to face an armed "victim", because its no longer a victim, its an adversary. An armed one. While I agree, keep your HD weapon, one in the pipe... you're dead wrong the effects, of "racking one". Its been proven repeatedly, criminals run at the sound. Self-preservation, is still the strongest instinct.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Aazadan
If you choose to use a gun to defend your home that's fine. However, you have a responsibility to save the life of whoever you shoot. If you confront them, shoot them. If they don't go down shoot them again and again until they do. The second they're down, call an ambulance and give first aid. If they die due to your inaction you're a murderer and should be charged as such. From the moment you pull the trigger it's your responsibility to see they make it to trial if possible. Protection is fine, killing someone because you want to kill them outside of the justice system is not.


No, it is not my responsibility to play paramedic to an intruder I might shoot in my home. Besides, I am a pretty good shot, and if they break in, and I shoot, legally, the likelihood of them needing medical attention is very slim.



Thanks for clearing that up 3 or so posts ago about full metal jackets opposed to other hollow points, etc. I figured someone would say it, or that adrenaline was a factor, as which most victims say adrenaline kept them going till they were on their way home, and realized they were bleeding.

I agree, if you need to defend your home and shoot at someone, why play EMT!?

Brake in, deter them, if that doesn't work, shoot them. Why go up to someone who broke in, that you needed to shoot, and try to save them? If you are against killing an intruder, then be aware you and your loved ones may be killed, or robbed. You break into someones home, property, business, etc, what do you expect? Walk in and out? Stealing is against the law. Go get a job!



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:08 AM
link   
So Full Metal Jackets are illegal for civilian use? If they do less damage why? Or are they not illegal? Maybe it per state?

I agree with this video, maybe the pumping of a shot gun won't deter an intruder. Watch this video in above post! ^^^



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75
there are three places that you can use deadly force even if the person that you use deadly force upon is not using deadly force on you.
1. home. 2. vehicle. 3. any other place that you have a legal right to be.


You may only use deadly force as long as the threat is still present. Once they're down and no longer a threat you're obligated to obtain aid. You can't shoot them 3 times in the chest, see them go down, and then shoot them in the back of the head. You will rightfully be found guilty of murder. If you shoot them and don't obtain aid you'll likely be found guilty of manslaughter, the courts tend to be more lenient here but are still quite clear that you're expected to try and obtain aid. Besides that it's the right thing to do if you believe in having a justice system.


originally posted by: spirited75
why would you even consider giving a criminal CPR in the first place.
they probably have Hep C, AIDS, or some other disease.


Because you are not a judge in a courtroom. You do not have the right to sentence someone to death for a crime. If they die during the self defense phase so be it, as the saying goes sh*t happens. Once they are down however they are not a threat. You have legal responsibilities at this point.


originally posted by: spirited75
the only ammunition legal to use in a war is FMJ.


I liked the description of what the bullet does. Anyways to expand on the point that I quoted the reason for this is that the goal in military combat actually isn't to kill the enemy. It's to neutralize them. FMJ's are designed to wound, this means their comrade has to look after them. By shooting one person you actually take two out of the fight. If you instead used ammunition designed to kill, shooting one only takes one down.

Most militaries in the world recognize this as advantageous in a combat scenario, and as such sign on to an agreement that they will use ammunition that's less lethal.


originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
No, it is not my responsibility to play paramedic to an intruder I might shoot in my home. Besides, I am a pretty good shot, and if they break in, and I shoot, legally, the likelihood of them needing medical attention is very slim.


Once they are down it is your responsibility. Sometimes legal defenses are made by people saying they aren't medical professionals and as such shouldn't need to render aid, but you still need to make sure an ambulance is on the way.

We expect this behavior of cops too, just look at the video of the cops that executed the man on the beach. They let him die before getting close "just incase", and most people considered that an execution. If you're not willing to get aid for a criminal, then why should the cops?
edit on 6-5-2014 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Not from America, but steal my stuff, it's gonna get messy.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: spirited75
there are three places that you can use deadly force even if the person that you use deadly force upon is not using deadly force on you.
1. home. 2. vehicle. 3. any other place that you have a legal right to be.


You may only use deadly force as long as the threat is still present. Once they're down and no longer a threat you're obligated to obtain aid. You can't shoot them 3 times in the chest, see them go down, and then shoot them in the back of the head. You will rightfully be found guilty of murder. If you shoot them and don't obtain aid you'll likely be found guilty of manslaughter, the courts tend to be more lenient here but are still quite clear that you're expected to try and obtain aid. Besides that it's the right thing to do if you believe in having a justice system.


originally posted by: spirited75
why would you even consider giving a criminal CPR in the first place.
they probably have Hep C, AIDS, or some other disease.


Because you are not a judge in a courtroom. You do not have the right to sentence someone to death for a crime. If they die during the self defense phase so be it, as the saying goes sh*t happens. Once they are down however they are not a threat. You have legal responsibilities at this point.


originally posted by: spirited75
the only ammunition legal to use in a war is FMJ.


I liked the description of what the bullet does. Anyways to expand on the point that I quoted the reason for this is that the goal in military combat actually isn't to kill the enemy. It's to neutralize them. FMJ's are designed to wound, this means their comrade has to look after them. By shooting one person you actually take two out of the fight. If you instead used ammunition designed to kill, shooting one only takes one down.

Most militaries in the world recognize this as advantageous in a combat scenario, and as such sign on to an agreement that they will use ammunition that's less lethal.


originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
No, it is not my responsibility to play paramedic to an intruder I might shoot in my home. Besides, I am a pretty good shot, and if they break in, and I shoot, legally, the likelihood of them needing medical attention is very slim.


Once they are down it is your responsibility. Sometimes legal defenses are made by people saying they aren't medical professionals and as such shouldn't need to render aid, but you still need to make sure an ambulance is on the way.

We expect this behavior of cops too, just look at the video of the cops that executed the man on the beach. They let him die before getting close "just incase", and most people considered that an execution. If you're not willing to get aid for a criminal, then why should the cops?


So you are saying it should be one shot done. Heard that. Or neutralize them ten call 911 and say whatever happened. I'd be taking my family the heck outta there while calling for aid.
edit on 5/6/14 by SixX18 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:26 AM
link   
they deserve it.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:34 AM
link   
i have 2 dogs and an 18" lead pipe. plus carbon steel choppers.

no guns here.

we will get up close and personal.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 04:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: SixX18
So you are saying it should be one shot done. Heard that. Or neutralize them ten call 911 and say whatever happened. I'd be taking my family the heck outta there while calling for aid.


Shoot until they're down. Be honest about it too, because the police will check forensics and things like the angle the bullet hit and the blood splatter will be evidence against anything you claim if it's not true.


originally posted by: candlestick
they deserve it.


So what's the list of crimes you believe the death penalty is appropriate for?



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: intrepid
So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.
.


Forfeit your life to steal property? That's a damn weak sense of self worth.



originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: intrepid
So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.
.


Forfeit your life to steal property? That's a damn weak sense of self worth.


Your ignorance kills me. 'Murican stereotype reinforcement at it's finest.

IMO they deserved to be shot for sure, possibly in the knee caps, but not shot to death. They were 14! Do you remember when you were 14 and how naive and fearless you were? Hell when I was going into grade 9 I thought I'd have to push a penny across the hallway with my nose.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Vasa Croe




don't all these stories have those people in them saying "He/she was such a nice kid, they could never do anything like this."


First of all, sorry for the misinterpretation of gender.
Some things on ATS shouldn't be left open to interpretation.
And definitely no. Not all these have people saying such things.
But that's the world media has painted for us. I can assure you that
is an illusion.


I actually hear it in a lot of stories. I also feel I need to ask because I don't recall seeing you post anything about this, but are you a parent?



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw
To be honnest I am a bit shocked to see so many ATS-members ...or people... write that these kids got what they deserved. Maybe it was enough to shoot them in their legs..like an other replier suggested... But to make them kneel and shoot them through the back of the head..if the opportunity was there is a bit heartless and mindless to me.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: 0bservant
IMO they deserved to be shot for sure, possibly in the knee caps, but not shot to death.

And you know that the intruders weren't armed ... how? They were breaking and entering ... and they were stealing. They were'nt exactly boyscouts, ya' know?


They were 14! Do you remember when you were 14 and how naive and fearless you were? Hell when I was going into grade 9 I thought I'd have to push a penny across the hallway with my nose.

Maybe in 1950 it was badass to push a penny across the hallway with your nose.
But in 2014, 14 year old thieves can easily be murderers. As I said -
14 Year Old Boy Murders Parents to Get Out of Chores
14 Year Old Girl Charged with Murder
Grandmother Testifies Against 14 Year Old Murdering Grandchild

I could keep going ... but you get the idea.
A 14 year old criminal breaking into your home could easily be a killer.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Cheshire Conn. 2007 i believe 2 men break into a home to rob it. Disable and tie up the husband. Robbery morphs into rape and then into murder. Cost 2 dead girls 1 dead wife. Don't lose your life by listening to bleeding hearts like Intrepid if someone breaks into your house assume the worst and shoot to kill. Don't shoot to injure. Don't shoot to maim. Your family will get to live out their lives and more defectives will be removed from the gene pool. If you hesitate there is a good chance you and your family will die horribly for doing nothing.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: grandmakdw
To be honnest I am a bit shocked to see so many ATS-members ...or people... write that these kids got what they deserved. Maybe it was enough to shoot them in their legs..like an other replier suggested... But to make them kneel and shoot them through the back of the head..if the opportunity was there is a bit heartless and mindless to me.


Huh? Where did this story say they were made to kneel and were shot through the back of the head?



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: zatara
zatara, what are you talking about with this comment???

But to make them kneel and shoot them through the back of the head..if the opportunity was there is a bit heartless and mindless to me.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: 0bservant

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: intrepid
So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.
.


Forfeit your life to steal property? That's a damn weak sense of self worth.



originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: intrepid
So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.
.


Forfeit your life to steal property? That's a damn weak sense of self worth.


Your ignorance kills me. 'Murican stereotype reinforcement at it's finest.

IMO they deserved to be shot for sure, possibly in the knee caps, but not shot to death. They were 14! Do you remember when you were 14 and how naive and fearless you were? Hell when I was going into grade 9 I thought I'd have to push a penny across the hallway with my nose.


So you would suggest everyone that is victim of a home invasion should have the same mindset of a person well trained and experienced in these situations? Not sure if you understand what happens to the body when adrenalin hits....you don't have the dexterity you normally have. Even trained individuals are trained NOT to shoot for kneecaps because it is a much smaller target than center mass.

If someone is breaking into my house, I am not assessing whether or not they are kids....many kids have killed. I am assessing whether or not I can take a clear shot center mass to stop the intruder. Sorry...I don't have time to worry about the well being of someone I don't know breaking into my house.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 08:20 AM
link   
a reply to: spirited75

You are referring to .223/.556 correct? If so I agree that it is some of the best ammo to use for home defense.

Don't use FMJ for home/personal defense if you can help it.

Check on your state laws about your obligation to provide aid to a threat that you shot. I can tell you this, as a police officer on duty if I shoot someone I will provide aid to them.

If I am off duty, asleep with my family in the house and I have to shoot somebody the only aid I will offer the intruder is calling paramedics and police. My gun will be trained on them until the police arrive.

I highly suggest that you DO NOT attempt to give them CPR. It could be a ruse and when you get near the intruder they may attempt to harm you.

Oh and definitely have your shotgun already chambered. Scaring a person by racking a slide is mostly a myth. While it may scare some, it most certainly won't scare all. It also gives away your location.




top topics



 
57
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join