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.

 

Horrible home invasion video from Millburn NJ

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bluesma

Originally posted by sine.nomine

Originally posted by Bluesma
...The woman could not stand and walk, and she is going to be able to go get a gun, and shoot it accurately???

...or else is the suggestion that one should always have a gun in hand. t all times?



Seconds really make a difference in situations like this, and a 2-second scramble to a hidden gun in a wall compartment could most definitely change the outcome. Especially when those weapons are strategically placed where attackers are bottlenecked through a single target area. I realize different situations call for different measures, but certainly having those options couldn't hurt your chances, am I wrong?

What was your solution again?


Oh, I have not a "solution". I think life has dangers as part of it, and there is no sure way to avoid dangers from happening. I have guns, we have done what we think is possible within limits of safety, to make them available.
But by no means do I consider that absolute security and that anyone who is attacked, killed, or robbed could have avoided that by having a firearm.

Being asked, I would say, she didn't have much of a chance to get a firearm in time, make sure the security was off, and fire it accurately. It would have to be not loaded, as there are children in the house, so that would have to be done too. That a child was present in the room, it would be best if she fired before having been hit and stunned, so that there is less chance of her killing the child by mistake. In this case, she had some injuries, and the child is fine. In an alternate scenario, the kid could be dead as well.

But they lost some "stuff"- which is not a big deal to me. But to others, a childs well being might be on equal footing in value, I don't know.

I would suggest she should have had a lifetime of learning self defense- martial arts, perhaps boxing. This sort of training inscribes automatic reflexes in the body that can emerge in such moments even when taken by surprise, and become valuable.


So martial arts is your answer? Did you see the size difference in this altercation? I never said gun ownership is an end-all safe out, but even an unloaded gun waved in the face of an attacker is 9 times out of 10 sufficient in ending with the attacker on the run.

Lets keep in mind here what we are both saying. What are you really arguing against here? What did I reference that has you attacking my opinion? I just don't see how having defensive measures could hurt your chances, that's all..

ETA: RE: child safety, there are so many avenues to take to skirt the issue I hardly feel the need to address it. My gf just said, "just be smarter than the 3-year-old." :p
edit on 26-6-2013 by sine.nomine because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-6-2013 by sine.nomine because: typos typos typos... damn my trigger finger o.O




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

I responded to it because you implied he was 13, trying to "insult" him in some way.

Cause one insult with another is classy...


Being 13 is a very real possibility on a message board. It is worth keeping in mind that sometimes there are younger people, and comments which seem rude and inappropriate from an adult could simply be the clumsiness of youth, and expected. I was acknowledging possible alternatives to simply "an adult lacking in class".
Yes, I think it is classy to acknowledge ones possible ignorance of all potential elements.






My response was to show you that there are teens that know how to use firearms, in precarious situations.


Okay. I agree.



Its also common for folks to ask "who is it" before opening the door. I didn't see that happen in this video.


Ok. I don't do that. I have never seen anyone do that except in movies. But perhaps in some areas of heavy crime, it is common.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by sine.nomine

So martial arts is your answer? Did you see the size difference in this altercation?


For one, I have found that things like martial arts can allow one to go around a size and weight difference.
Even in Rugby, we were surprised to find our 100 pound daughter developed the ability to hold back a 180 pound man from advancing- it is all in how you use your body.

Secondly, the guy did not seem like he was really willing to put much energy into this robbery. Only the minimum necessary to get some money or valuables. It is possible that if she had been difficult enough to subdue, he may have simply decided it wasn't worth the effort.

But I will repeat that I do not think that is a "solution"- life sometimes brings dangers and that is the way it is.
I just scanned my mind for what I think might have been a potential aid (because you asked).






Lets keep in mind here what we are both saying. What are you really arguing against here? What did I reference that has you attacking my opinion?


Uh... I didn't feel I was "attacking" your opinion. You posted to me, an argument in favor of the hypothesis that a gun would have been effective in this situation. I gave a counter argument to why it might not have been.
This is called discussion. People offer different positions and their reasonings.






I just don't see how having defensive measures could hurt your chances, that's all..


Me too. I just posited that personally, I think some physical defense training might have been more effective in this particular case. From what I understand, you are saying you feel firearms might have been more effective. Right? So we disagree on that point. That happens. *shrug*


edit on 26-6-2013 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Also, just to add, when there is a knock on our door and we aren't expecting company, we grab a weapon first. It may sound harsh, but we don't take chances anymore.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
Tie him down to my mortuary table.

And let me put him out of our misery.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


My apologies for calling your response an "attack" but I find it difficult to fully grasp undertones through text, so yeah, agree to disagree I guess. I just know through experience that having such options is more often than not beneficial, especially when you know what you're doing in such a situation



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by StrangeTimez

Originally posted by SeenAlot
Doubting Thomas here:

1st- this looks more like a boyfriend beating than a home invasion, she's quiet and that's just a big red flag for me.
2nd-why'd Hubby have the camera up in the first place?
3rd-why didn't Mr. HomeInvasion take the camera? If its a nanny cam, please see above two statements


Are you mental?? Who cares if it was a boyfriend or home invasion?


Her husband



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:31 AM
link   
it would have been a horror story if this happen in my home,I and my 4 children all have machetes and can use them expertly.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Originally posted by SeenAlot
That doesn't negate the boyfriend theory.

Just first impressions.


When I saw this on the news that's exactly what I said outloud "they don't know who this is? It's obviously her boyfriend."

Why have a nanny cam for a nanny when the woman is at home during the day? And you don't just leave a nanny cam running 24/7 for no reason, you only have it on when the nanny is around. Hence it's a nanny cam.

She probably got beat, her husband came home and she said she didn't know who it was even though she in all probability does.

'Nanny cam' is one common name for them, but they were originally audio only and were used by parents to monitor their baby while they were sleeping in another room. The mother could do laundry or dishes while the baby was sleeping upstairs and would instantly know if the baby was crying.
The next advance was to give them video capability. They were still used for the original intention, but naturally people decided to use them as spy cameras, often to look at the actions of their in home child care givers. They even make them to look like teddy bears so that they are not recognized as a camera.

They showed the camera on the news video and it wasn't disguised, so I doubt that the husband was spying on his wife.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Originally posted by StrangeTimez

Originally posted by SeenAlot
Doubting Thomas here:

1st- this looks more like a boyfriend beating than a home invasion, she's quiet and that's just a big red flag for me.
2nd-why'd Hubby have the camera up in the first place?
3rd-why didn't Mr. HomeInvasion take the camera? If its a nanny cam, please see above two statements


Are you mental?? Who cares if it was a boyfriend or home invasion?


Her husband


Lol He would be interested in her boyfriend huh. Changes nothing as far as the attacker goes though.
edit on 26-6-2013 by StrangeTimez because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:16 AM
link   
Some of you have been watching too many movies. If it was her "boyfriend", why would there be a manhunt? She knows who the hell he is, and if she was pissed she could easily reveal his identity. Secondly, if she is trying to cover for her "affair" why didn't she erase the tape, or why did she bother calling the police?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Posted earlier here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

**Thread closed**



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join