Family, Friends Of Dead Home Invaders Say “They Didn’t Deserve To Get Killed.”

a reply to: revmoofoo

Serious question for the Yanks. Why is it that every problem seems to be solvable with a gun in the US? When I lived among you for 6 months around 2002, I met some truly crazy people who, of course, had the right to own a gun (and for the record, I mostly met responsible gun owners) and for a few of them there was nothing a gun couldn't do. And I just don't understand that kind of attitude.

I'm most definitely a Yank, but I can't help you with this one. 'cause I don't understand it myself. Sorry.

Guns are tools. Nothing more, nothing less.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Rodinus

Oh, I forgot you are in charge.

Any other edicts I need to be aware of?


I am not going to dance around certain subjects. I will be blunt and unapologetic on my approach.

Only the Mods are in charge here.

I will not respond to the rest of your immature comment, The Op deserves better respect.

Rodinus

a reply to: NavyDoc

That's exactly what the responsible gun owners would have said, but the crazy ones weren't like that. I served my country, so I'm used to being around firearms (and thoroughly enjoyed using your excellent gun ranges), however the less responsible gun owners really did frighten me a wee bit.

Thanks for your response.

Rev

originally posted by: DeepImpactX


At least they're alive so no one has to hear their families cry about how the death was unwarranted.

So, when you kill them with your baseball, as I stated, then what??? It is okay since it was with anything else but a firearm?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX
You break into my house and I suffer those consequences and I suffer them while I'm alive. Get caught and you will suffer the consequences but you will suffer them while still alive. The punishment fit the crime.

No, that punishment does not fit your crime. If someone breaks into your house, you would in turn, by your standards, get to enact something onto their house. Not hit them in the head with your ninja bat.

originally posted by: DeepImpactX
Guns are necessary when all else fails.

Umm, okay then.

originally posted by: DeepImpactX
It's obvious that you were never trained to fully incapacitate a person without doing lasting harm that could legally be construed as a crime.

And how exactly did you Nancy Drew this up?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX

In other words, you were never in the military.

Arrrre you sure about that?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX
I 'haven't had to do that in many, many years and I don't plan on doing it again. But I know how if I have to. In other words, I would take care of business old-school when it's determined the person in my house doesn't have a gun. That's what men do.

Oh, so you were high speed military special ops. That is super duper for you.

And what are the rest of us lowly peons supposed to do? Seeing as that we don't have that special training?

originally posted by: Rodinus

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Rodinus

Oh, I forgot you are in charge.

Any other edicts I need to be aware of?


I am not going to dance around certain subjects. I will be blunt and unapologetic on my approach.

Only the Mods are in charge here.

I will not respond to the rest of your immature comment, The Op deserves better respect.

Rodinus

So, .....ah nevermind.


Not really worth it.


Okay sure sure.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Very true Doc . . .

It is simply from a point of ignorance when people, especially those that get their view of America from the media (abroad), speak about "gun culture" in America.

Throw anyone of these anti-gun or "america is gun crazy" talking holes into a week long course at Gunsite, or some other training facility, and they'd be surprised at the level of "non-crazy" about how to present/discharge a firearm.

a reply to: abdctd

Yea, because as soon as I hear a noise in my house at night I "go full auto" and "spray and pray".

Liberals are so much fun sometimes

originally posted by: Mianeye

But if you could prevent people from breaking in to your home in the first place, the daughters wouldn't get raped and very young people who havn't learned to play by the rules wouldn't get killed, there is the issue or actually the issue is the broken society but thats a completly different topic.

It's really getting borring to disscus with deaf people, every one have a good one...i'm out

See it's the stupid homeowners fault for not barricading themselves up better. Silly me, here I thought it was the robbers breaking in.

I think it's time to punish people for even having homes.... I mean who do they think they are?

originally posted by: DeepImpactX

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: DeepImpactX

So, you hit them in the head with the baseball bat, and they end up a vegetable at the local hospital. Great job I guess.


Or, your "blunt force trauma" causes their brain to swell, and they die from internal bleeding.

At least you didn't use an evil gun.

At least they're alive so no one has to hear their families cry about how the death was unwarranted.

You break into my house and I suffer those consequences and I suffer them while I'm alive. Get caught and you will suffer the consequences but you will suffer them while still alive. The punishment fit the crime.

Guns are necessary when all else fails.

It's obvious that you were never trained to fully incapacitate a person without doing lasting harm that could legally be construed as a crime. In other words, you were never in the military. I 'haven't had to do that in many, many years and I don't plan on doing it again. But I know how if I have to. In other words, I would take care of business old-school when it's determined the person in my house doesn't have a gun. That's what men do.

I disagree. In the military we were trained to removed the threat as efficiently as possible within the ROE.

As for the "men" comment. A true man defends his family first and foremost regardless what would be the macho thing to do.

If you "took care of it old school," you have a higher likelihood of being jailed for assault and assault with attempt to kill (remember--use of a bat is also considered "deadly force" legally) than if you simply shot once. Giving an intruder a non-lethal thrashing after he surrenders is actually more illegal than shooting someone before he surrenders.

As for "old school" are you talking about how intruders were shot 100 years ago or killed with an axe or sword 300 years ago, or what? Posturing about macho fisticuffs is really a modern invention. Throughout history criminals and intruders and threats were dealt with as efficiently and deadly as possible.

A law abiding citizen should not be subject to more risk than necessary to stop the threat even if adolescence think it manly to engage an intruder in Bruce Lee fisticuffs. First of all, in my experience, those who most brag about how manly they are, tend to be the least experience and skilled in hand to hand battle. My JSOC friends (and I would think you would agree that special forces types know a thing or two about fighting) will tell me that anyone who thinks they can go into a knife or fistfight assume they will come out uninjured is an idiot--you have to expect to be cut and accept that before you even get into it. They'd rather just shoot and go back to their family unscathed.

a reply to: mclarenmp4

It's an awful thing mate. The fact that children are being given a vote, while we Jocks who have moved away do not only proves that the SNP know that the only way they can win is by brainwashing the young. Very sad IMHO.

Back on topic:

Shame we don't have guns to shoot the SNP with really...

Rev

A question to all US firearm owners.

When you purchase or before you purchase your first firearm, is it obligatory to follow a course on gun safety and general safety conditions?

If so, during these courses, are firearm owners trained as to which points of the body a gun should be aimed at in case of agression in order to incapacitate an eventual aggressor?

Over here in France you have to take an exam in order to gain a lifetime hunting license, part of this exam is taken up in gun safety, once the exam passed you have the right to own a shotgun and also high powered hunting rifle (as many as you wish).

For other firearms it is compulsory to be a member of a shooting sports club and to pass a safety exam before gun ownership (also no criminal record is allowed for all applicants).


Kindest respects

Rodinus

a reply to: seagull

I concur. But you (as in people in general) don't walk around carrying your tool box with you everywhere, do you?

Rev

So the homeowner shot the intruders...


but why didn't he drink their blood? Was he not that thirsty? Had he already drank his fill of blood earlier that day? I suppose that's pretty likely; as we all know there are 23.17 shootings per sq mile per hour in America.

GOD BLESS AMERICA LAND OF THE AWESOME.





Seriously though, why do the mods not camp these threads and take care of the countless amounts bigotry that immediately rear their head because some poor soul decided he should defend himself and his family against criminals?

originally posted by: revmoofoo
a reply to: seagull

I concur. But you (as in people in general) don't walk around carrying your tool box with you everywhere, do you?

Rev

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: revmoofoo

Vice Grips are a tool that can do anything brother and I mean ANYTHING

However, if I was to defend my home with a pair of Vice Grips I have very little doubt that I would be unable to defend that action in a court of law. Especially in the American judicial system.

I think a big part of the problem is modernization and technology. By that I mean we as Americans go to the end result rather than the "steps" it takes to get there. Most Americans say "I'd shoot anyone that broke into my house", skipping the "steps" of saying a warning, shouting a warning, and shooting a warning. We assume people understand that those steps lead up to deadly force, not that all Americans are John Wayne/Bruce Lee/Chuck Norris just waiting for someone to break into their house so we can test fire our new toys. If that makes any sense.

originally posted by: Rodinus
......

If so, during these courses, are firearm owners trained as to which points of the body a gun should be aimed at in case of agression in order to incapacitate an eventual aggressor?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Not a gun owner, but a gun rights supporter. If I am ever in a situation to use a gun, I will NOT be aiming to incapacitate...... I will be shooting to kill.

I suppose criminals in your land go through the same training..... learning how to responsibly incapacitate their victims? Must be a pretty perfect world over there.

originally posted by: Rodinus
A question to all US firearm owners.

When you purchase or before you purchase your first firearm, is it obligatory to follow a course on gun safety and general safety conditions?

If so, during these courses, are firearm owners trained as to which points of the body a gun should be aimed at in case of agression in order to incapacitate an eventual aggressor?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Some states that is yes, others no. However, a federal criminal background check is law in all states.

As far as where to aim... Center mass always (that is how all gun owners are trained, professionally). Just like you don't "kinda punch" someone, you don't kind of shoot someone.

Only in the movies do people aim for the knee (of a moving target) and hit it. 20% is the hit rate in a real gunfight, when adrenaline kicks in.

originally posted by: revmoofoo
a reply to: NavyDoc

That's exactly what the responsible gun owners would have said, but the crazy ones weren't like that. I served my country, so I'm used to being around firearms (and thoroughly enjoyed using your excellent gun ranges), however the less responsible gun owners really did frighten me a wee bit.

Thanks for your response.

Rev

Were you Black Watch? I liked hanging out with those blokes back in the day.

a reply to: eNumbra

at the leatherman link. I was wondering if someone would come back with that.

Rev

originally posted by: revmoofoo
a reply to: seagull

I concur. But you (as in people in general) don't walk around carrying your tool box with you everywhere, do you?

Rev

In my pockets right now are such tools as a pocket knife, pen, and flashlight.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: Rodinus
......

If so, during these courses, are firearm owners trained as to which points of the body a gun should be aimed at in case of agression in order to incapacitate an eventual aggressor?

Kindest respects

Rodinus

Not a gun owner, but a gun rights supporter. If I am ever in a situation to use a gun, I will NOT be aiming to incapacitate...... I will be shooting to kill.

I suppose criminals in your land go through the same training..... learning how to responsibly incapacitate their victims? Must be a pretty perfect world over there.

Hey, I was asking a legitimate question there Pavil as I am curious?

I am a gun owner too but would not aim to kill... what is the point of killing the person when you can incapacitate them and then let them live out the jail sentence given and also let them suffer for their wrongdoings for the rest of their life?

Why put yourself down to the level of a criminal?

Kindest respects

Rodinus