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: 4
57
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha



At what point during a home invasion/ robbery is it okay to defend yourself and your home?

When you or your family is in danger. Many of these kids that have gotten killed lately were unarmed the people that did the shooting could have just as easily held them at gun point until the police arrived there was no need to shoot them. Even in states that recognize Castle doctrine you have to prove that you feared imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to him or herself or another.




posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

break-ins are not usually just about losing objects though, a significant number of break-ins are violent so how would she or anyone know what they might have done if she didn't defend herself? she didn't know who they were or their intentions or whether they were good at heart or not.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

It is sad but true, and that's the main point I was trying to make. I don't think normal everyday people wake up with the intention to kill anyone. But in a situation like this, it's fright or flight and I'd rather take the flight.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: NarcolepticBuddha



At what point during a home invasion/ robbery is it okay to defend yourself and your home?

When you or your family is in danger.


I refer you to this:


originally posted by: Blueracer
Here is another story of a home invasion...with different results. The burglers were not shot. This is what can happen in every single instance of home invasions/burgluries. Nobody should have to go thru what these victims went thru.

murderpedia.org...


No one should be giving burglars the benefit of the doubt. EVER.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: blupblup

I could not be less interested in my property.

The issue is that if I want my family to be safe, I have to act under the assumption that anyone who enters my property illegally is a threat to my family, since they have already exhibited a failure of their moral structure. That in mind, the first action on my part should be to totally neutralise that threat without hesitation.

Also, because you have to assume that persons who are capable of criminal enterprise, have experienced violence before, there is a good chance that a mere flesh wound will not slow them down enough to render them beyond effective lethality. The only way to ensure that, is to make the first assault the last act in that engagement. One swing, one thread cut, one threat neutralised. If you add in the percentage of criminals who are on drugs at the time they commit their crimes, you have yet another reason to act utterly decisively in the first instance, and offer no quarter.

A person on PCP for instance, is next to impossible to deal with, unless your first move is one which kills them. Effective defense in such an instance, means you have to destroy the invader totally, as fast as possible, to acheive the aim of protecting yourself and your family.

Again, this is not about material wealth being protected, but about protecting yourself and your family from an unknown threat. At that point, my level of consideration for an invader should be nil, just as theirs could potentially be, for me and mine. It is far better to ask questions later in that situation.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
I am really just tired of all the bleeding hearts on the other side of the story complaining about how robbers don't deserve death.


Theft = death? Property is worth more than a life? Only in America.

*shakes head*


Don't rob houses if you don't want to die....simple logic and common sense people.....


That's an extremely sad commentary on American society.


If this had turned out to be a story where we're reading of an elderly woman who lived alone, broken into multiple times in the past, and killed by the robbers this time.

I'm sure you'd be saying how sad it is that happened to her. Where was anyone to protect her. How these robbers should be found and made to pay for what they did. There is too much of this happening these days.

Instead we are reading...SHE PROTECTED HERSELF!

Good for her, to have the guts to stand up for herself, and her right to protect herself.

As a single older woman, she gives me hope and strength, that if I were in the same situation....I would have the clarity of mind to make sure I didn't get raped nor killed.

To expect single older women to roll over and play the victim in these kinds of horrible situations, to make sure the robbers with ill intentions in the first place, are not harmed, is both demeaning, and illogical.

One shouldn't be required to be a mind reader of robbers who break into one's home, to decide what kind of force to protect ones self with.

JMOHO...

Des

edit on 5-5-2014 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   
There are a lot of break ins in our neighborhood. A lot. And it's usually older teens/young adults. They break in to rob people to get $$$ to feed their drug addictions. They aren't warm and cuddly. They are violent thieves and many times drug addicts. If you run into one in your home, you don't invite them to partake of tea and cookies ... they'll destroy you because you can identify them. And they are unstable due to drugs. NOT to protect yourself from the burglars would be INSANE.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Even in states that recognize Castle doctrine you have to prove that you feared imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to him or herself or another.


Not all states. My state, Alaska, applies the Castle Doctrine to prevention of burglary and protection of property. It is a very natural law, in-line with the nature of humanity... "If you invade my personal space, which I am legally occupying, and I instinctively chew your face off, no penalty can be applied to me because I was acting to defend my rights of person and property."



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Theft equals death?
Maybe. I work damn hard for what little I have.
Why should I just give it up?

If that's ok, then why can't I have some of the stuff that's sitting around buck house?

If you don't want to get killed, don't try doing stuff to people who might have the ability to kill you. Simple.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
What should we do? Whip up a batch of Tollhouse cookies and a pitcher of iced tea while they help themselves to our property?


So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.


People have a right to defend themselves. Did the woman put 6 rounds in their head or something? Maybe I missed that part..


One or 6 doesn't matter. Dead is dead. They aren't defending themselves. They are defending PROPERTY.


Property has sentimental value. Sometimes (and usually it is) the smaller items, like a necklace, wedding or engagement ring that was given before the husband went away to war. Those things and memories are irreplaceable.

Just the shock of seeing that there home has been burgled (and the sense of a home being a sanctuary that has been violated) is enough to give them a heart attack. If that keeps happening repeatedly, then people are going to get upset and angry.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
What should we do? Whip up a batch of Tollhouse cookies and a pitcher of iced tea while they help themselves to our property?


So take a life to preserve property? That's a damn skewed sense of values.


People have a right to defend themselves. Did the woman put 6 rounds in their head or something? Maybe I missed that part..


One or 6 doesn't matter. Dead is dead. They aren't defending themselves. They are defending PROPERTY.


Property has sentimental value. Sometimes (and usually it is) the smaller items, like a necklace, wedding or engagement ring that was given before the husband went away to war. Those things and memories are irreplaceable.

Just the shock of seeing that there home has been burgled (and the sense of a home being a sanctuary that has been violated) is enough to give them a heart attack. If that keeps happening repeatedly, then people are going to get upset and angry.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: blupblup
Really? Someone who steals your TV or wants your car deserves death, by your hand?


It's an issue of respect and honor vs entitlement, though. People work their ass off to provide for their own and then, to have someone feel entitled enough to break into their home and steal stuff... It is not just a matter of losing material possessions, either. Break ins cost the victims peace of mind, their safe-zone has been violated and that's something a lot of people won't quickly get over.

It's a funny damn world.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: blupblup

You do not shoot to maim becausing maiming does not always equal incapacitation. If a person who wishes to do you harm is not incapacitated they can still pull a trigger. That means they can still be a threat.

That is why police officers don't shoot people in the knees or arms. It is very possible to fight through a gun shot if it is not in a vital area.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Also shooting a small target such as a knee or arm during a stressful situation is extremely difficult. Tunnel vision occurs and fine motor skills go out the window.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass




I'm tired of guns being the (false) answer to everything. The US is a case study for irreversible cultural decay and many of the world's citizens realize that. Cavalier attitudes toward human life is the common thread.

Burglars don't deserve death. Burglars risk injury or death because their right to safety is subordinated to safety of the legal resident of the dwelling. They are two very different things morally and legally.



Said the robber who fell through a sky light and broke his leg and sued the home owners. REALLY!!! I will agree that guns aren't the answer. They never are, but your knee jerk response of delusional thinking, is taken as just that, delusional.

Just to re-examine:



Burglars risk injury or death because their right to safety is subordinated to safety of the legal resident of the dwelling.


WTF~!!! YOUR DAMN RIGHT! LEGAL IS THE KEY WORD! What the hell!? REALLY? I mean come on.... You.... Nooo.... OK!? REALLY??? WTF Mate, WTF!



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Good. And good riddance.

I don't care if they were teens. That's old enough to begin a life of crime.

Ask me? Kill em all. Bit extreme? Maybe. I think it fits an extreme case of societal decay.

What do you think they would have done since she was home alone? Left politely?

Thank God for American guns. This is why we aren't giving them up world....ever.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

It seems that those who advocate not shooting, or shooting to maim, have not been in a life or death situation where they are confronted with an unwelcome intruder, have not handled firearms, or are not former military. Fine motor skills go out the window in a fight or flight situation. I can attest to this, given combat experience in multiple parts of the world.

Anyone who is confronted with an intruder MUST deduce that the intruders are there to cause physical harm or worse. The only response to this would be to attempt and stop the intruders with whatever means they have. A shotgun is preferable, but sidearms are a good second option. Maiming is putting oneself at the mercy of the "legal" community and risking losing everything.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzCory

You are exactly right. They got what they were asking for, not deserved. None of us is any better than anyone else.

Well stated.



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Second!



posted on May, 5 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Don't Mess with Texas is apropos to this situation




top topics



 
57
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join