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.

 

23 year old kills three teens.

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: LABTECH767


Now imagine if those kid's had gotten the gun before him?.

Not likely, the sound of the sliding door window pane breaking and strangers in the house would just about preclude that. You know what time it is, goto your ready rack.

Just the selection of the arm I would choose and the action taken at that point. Along with the choice of arm, the choice of tactics are just as important.

Imo, if you are in your bedroom you get behind the bed, level the firearm on the bed and wait for them to come to you (ambush) instead of...

seeking them out around corners, room to room in the dark, maybe they are armed (you don't know), and you are disoriented, nervous, can't tell where family is, how many bad guys, etc.

edit on 29-3-2017 by intrptr because: spelling




posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude


I think the outcome is better than a timid voice saying "hey, what are you doing here, please don't cave in my skull with those brass knuckles". -Armchair

I don't know enough either.

But to be blunt, dented skull or three bodies in the morgue... Imo, seems a little excessive?



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I realize many people don't know about security or firearms, those people should'nt be armed with AR 15's, either.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: network dude


I think the outcome is better than a timid voice saying "hey, what are you doing here, please don't cave in my skull with those brass knuckles". -Armchair

I don't know enough either.

But to be blunt, dented skull or three bodies in the morgue... Imo, seems a little excessive?


You realize people have died from a single punch, without the use of a multiplier like brass knuckles.

It's not on the victim to allow injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

That type of after the fact analysis is just pointless, baseless and nothing more than speculative. Wasted thought.
edit on 29-3-2017 by MisterSpock because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-3-2017 by MisterSpock because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock


It's not on the victim to be allow minor injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

He wasn't being attacked. Breaking and entering doesn't warrant summary execution.
Some people watch too much "Walking Dead".



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr


I realize many people don't know about security or firearms, those people should'nt be armed with AR 15's, either.

Most don't realize that an AR-15 is not a special monster rifle that is capable of doing things that other rifles that aren't in the news can?
I am not being sarcastic to you.
An AR-15 is scary looking to those that aren't in the know, but to those that know, usually they get them because of what they look like, they are deadly but they are not any scarier, or shouldn't be than a 30.06 rifle or bullet.
This is the pit bull of rifles, that's all.

So really, anyone that shouldn't be around a rifle shouldn't be armed.


edit on 29-3-2017 by recrisp because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr


I realize many people don't know about security or firearms, those people should'nt be armed with AR 15's, either.

And what problem do you have with an AR-15? Other than someone told you they were scary? I can kill just as well with my little LCP, the AR just looks meaner.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: recrisp

Thats the other goto, if you live in "that kind of neighborhood", maybe a pitbull should be the first line of defense. If the intruders shoot your dog, now you know they are armed, game on.

But imagine the police were called and they entered the house in a sweep and clear, they aren't going to shoot first either.

They will yell, drop yer weapon and come out with your hands up? At least if they do shoot I doubt they will kill all three anyway. Something would clearly be wrong with that.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MisterSpock


It's not on the victim to be allow minor injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

He wasn't being attacked. Breaking and entering doesn't warrant summary execution.
Some people watch too much "Walking Dead".


He hadn't yet been attacked, is another way to look at it. Once again, should he have waited to be stabbed?



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MisterSpock


It's not on the victim to be allow minor injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

He wasn't being attacked. Breaking and entering doesn't warrant summary execution.
Some people watch too much "Walking Dead".

Have you ever been in a situation when bad things were occurring? I ask that because when they do happen you don't have the luxury of time, things are in slow motion AFTER the fact, that is, if you are lucky and live.
Things happen fast, there is no time for thinking out most situations, we have to use our fast judgements and instincts. He may not have been attacked, but it was only second before the 3 dead guys could have done something, then for the innocent one there is no redo. You can't go back and make it happen in the scenario that you should have taken. Crime is a thought process that the criminals think about beforehand, they already have the upper hand on you before they break in. If you give them your ONLY precious few seconds that are in your favor then you have more than likely lost.

If you have never had a gun or a knife directed at you you cannot say what you might do, you can say that you think you know, but you don't know until you are that victim.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Forcing entry into someones home, while carrying life threatening weapons. Is an offensive move, and denotes an offensive or aggressive posture/presence. The logic that a potential victim has to yield and await confirmation of life threatening contact before responding is downright ludicrous.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MisterSpock


It's not on the victim to be allow minor injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

He wasn't being attacked. Breaking and entering doesn't warrant summary execution.
Some people watch too much "Walking Dead".


He hadn't yet been attacked, is another way to look at it. Once again, should he have waited to be stabbed?


I already vetted a good response. You're too lazy to read it further up^^^, thats your problem.

(Portion redacted: responded to wrong post)
edit on 29-3-2017 by intrptr because: ()



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock
Forcing entry into someones home, while carrying life threatening weapons. Is an offensive move, and denotes an offensive or aggressive posture/presence. The logic that a potential victim has to yield and await confirmation of life threatening contact before responding is downright ludicrous.

You don;t know spit about defending ones own home from attackers. My advice to you is to buy a vicious dog and reach for a cell phone instead.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Every time I read about the getaway driver, I keep asking why the hell she would turn herself in..
I'd be gone.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MisterSpock


It's not on the victim to be allow minor injuries to themselves in order to judge the malicious intent of their attacker.

He wasn't being attacked. Breaking and entering doesn't warrant summary execution.
Some people watch too much "Walking Dead".


He hadn't yet been attacked, is another way to look at it. Once again, should he have waited to be stabbed?


I already vetted a good response. You're too lazy to read it further up^^^, thats your problem.

Frankly, comparing firearms (not "guns" as you call them) to "monsters" and "Pitbulls" reflects your ignorance.


Quoted the wrong poster, I'll refrain from making a long winded quip about the laziness of not proofreading.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: MisterSpock
Forcing entry into someones home, while carrying life threatening weapons. Is an offensive move, and denotes an offensive or aggressive posture/presence. The logic that a potential victim has to yield and await confirmation of life threatening contact before responding is downright ludicrous.

You don;t know spit about defending ones own home from attackers. My advice to you is to buy a vicious dog and reach for a cell phone instead.


The Irony of your post is hilarious, are you misquoting the wrong poster again? Or was this actually meant for me.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: recrisp

Thats the other goto, if you live in "that kind of neighborhood", maybe a pitbull should be the first line of defense. If the intruders shoot your dog, now you know they are armed, game on.

But imagine the police were called and they entered the house in a sweep and clear, they aren't going to shoot first either.

They will yell, drop yer weapon and come out with your hands up? At least if they do shoot I doubt they will kill all three anyway. Something would clearly be wrong with that.


I wouldn't use my dog for defense, but I know that most do, plus, I have yappers, not large dogs.

Anyway, that is one way to go about protecting your family and yourself, it's just not one that appeals to me, but I have not been through that scenario before. If someone shot MY dog game on is exactly what it'd be, but that's another thread.

You are 100% correct about the police coming in and doing their' "sweep", they should not kill all three, and not even one if he is complying, which sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.
The thing is, (most) homeowners are not the police, so while that sounds good what you just said, it's not how it usually goes down.
I just wrote about how I was broken into years ago with my wife and I asleep, they lived, but I did have a gun, more than likely won't be doing any more break-ins after their attempt though. I am not one of those killer types that tell everyone that I will blow someone's head off if they come at me, I am trained enough to use a gun properly but I know when to use it and when not to. I have been a victim a LOT of times in my life, I have been in so many situations that I am pretty sure I have PTSD, although I had no idea as to what to call it then. I have actually been at deaths door many times and so far i have not killed anyone for their attempts, which is a good thing.
I know what you mean though, but you can't say what you will do not unless you have been in someone's shoes that has, meaning that guy that killed the 3. You can say what you feel you would/should do, but not what you would do.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: MisterSpock
Forcing entry into someones home, while carrying life threatening weapons. Is an offensive move, and denotes an offensive or aggressive posture/presence. The logic that a potential victim has to yield and await confirmation of life threatening contact before responding is downright ludicrous.

You don;t know spit about defending ones own home from attackers. My advice to you is to buy a vicious dog and reach for a cell phone instead.


The Irony of your post is hilarious, are you misquoting the wrong poster again? Or was this actually meant for me.

The part about waiting to be stabbed stands, thanks for pointing out my mistake, I fixed it. Theres five armchair keyboard warriors pinging me with worst case scenarios about this event, none of which turned out to be true. And I got you mixed yup with someone else.

What a stupid question anyway, should he wait to be stabbed?



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: recrisp


The thing is, (most) homeowners are not the police, so while that sounds good what you just said, it's not how it usually goes down.

Neither should those (imaginary characters) be armed with an AR15. I think I said that already, this is getting redundant.



posted on Mar, 29 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   
"Frankly, comparing firearms (not "guns" as you call them) to "monsters" and "Pitbulls" reflects your ignorance."


Ignorance? Like I said, have you EVER been through anything like that guy went through? That makes all of the difference right there.
Answer me that one question truthfully, if you have, I'll not say another thing to you about that, that means that you just have an opinion, not any past experience.

Not knowing the differences between the rifles that I mentioned is showing your ignorance actually, that is not unless you can tell me why you think otherwise. I don't know a lot about guns but I can prove the differences about the types of rifles. (I would rather not derail this thread for that though)
edit on 29-3-2017 by recrisp because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join