Shoot um up

[texaspackerbacker]

Hi God...it's me tyrone.

If it isn't too much trouble..can you have tex trespass on my lawn. I promise to put him down mercifully.

Your humble servant..tyrone.

P.S. Sorry for stealing from the collection plate...i just really needed a rock. I'm sure you understand.

Thank you for making my point, Tyrone. You can sit out on your front porch gunning down trespassers 'til the cows come home, and you won't find me in your sights or any other good normal Americans either.

What you will be doing is ridding the world of a bunch of trash that "needs killin'".

Twoseven, you also seem not to be able to grasp this concept that even though the punk victims in any of these cases and others like them may not have been doing direct harm to the good-hearted souls pulling the triggers, they are the kind of people who in the huge majority of cases, undoubtedly have already and would continue to do harm to true innocents. Putting them down prevents that, and if a tiny fraction happen to not be guilty-as-sin career criminals, well, that's where the term "acceptable losses" comes in.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Dear God,

It's tyrone again. Please allow one of Tex's neighbors to sell their house. Please allow said neighbor to make a nice profit.

Please god, allow tex to welcome me to the neighborhood uninvited.

yours in eternal devotion,
Tyrone

[SkinBasket]

Do you own a gun? Have you ever shot and killed an animal? Would you kill someone if they broke in your home?

No. The wife doesn't want one around the kids.

Yes. I grew up on a farm.

I would try. And I wouldn't ask stupid questions first or shout, "Here I am! Kill me if that's what you're going to do! If not, then I kindly ask that you leave now! Please."

I'm already at enough of a disadvantage not knowing who they are or what they're carrying to worry if I'm going to be clubbing an "unwary intruder" to unconsciousness/death or someone looking to kill my kids and rape my wife after I'm dead because I was more concerned about the criminal's mental state and motivations than the lives of my family.

Maybe you want to pass a law that requires the homeowner to sneak up and hug the intruder before taking any other action? Just in case the intruder is just looking for a little snuggle. Don't want any hug seeking unwary intruders to accidentally be killed after all.

I'm trying to have an honest conversation with you, if you want to act like a fucking prick, go right ahead. Whatever you might do in your own home, great. I thought I said as much in earlier posts, but don't fucking tell me how to act in mine. There isn't a how-to on how to handle this shit, and I am genuinely interested in what people think about it. For every person that is going to blast first and not care who or what they shoot, there are plenty of people that are going to handle it different. The law is fucked these days and defending your home can land your ass in jail if you don't handle it right, that's a fact. I have no intentions of spending any fucking time in jail because I didn't realize what my rights as a gun owner defending my home actually entail. If you want to continue mocking my opinions about this, go right ahead.

I'm not trying to tell you how to act in your home. If you want to declare where you are and what you intend to do, or as the case may be, not do, to someone who's broken into your home, that's your business.

This isn't about "blasting first." What happens first is that some fuck breaks into someone else's home, then someone shoots them. As far as I'm concerned, that's it. That's the end game. After that, all bets are off. I'm sorry I don't believe that once someone breaks into your home, they should be granted some special rights reserved only for home intruders. As far as I'm concerned, it's comparable to telling a woman that once her rapist has penetrated her, she must declare what steps she intends to take to stop said rape and ascertain whether her rapist intends to do her "real" harm before she uses force to stop him.

I guess I don't give a shit if killing or maiming a home intruder lands me in jail because I didn't properly ascertain what weapons the intruder was carrying or what their intentions were. As long as my family is kept as far from harm as possible, that's all that matters.

[Partial]

Do you own a gun? Have you ever shot and killed an animal? Would you kill someone if they broke in your home?

No. The wife doesn't want one around the kids.

Yes. I grew up on a farm.

I would try. And I wouldn't ask stupid questions first or shout, "Here I am! Kill me if that's what you're going to do! If not, then I kindly ask that you leave now! Please."

I'm already at enough of a disadvantage not knowing who they are or what they're carrying to worry if I'm going to be clubbing an "unwary intruder" to unconsciousness/death or someone looking to kill my kids and rape my wife after I'm dead because I was more concerned about the criminal's mental state and motivations than the lives of my family.

Maybe you want to pass a law that requires the homeowner to sneak up and hug the intruder before taking any other action? Just in case the intruder is just looking for a little snuggle. Don't want any hug seeking unwary intruders to accidentally be killed after all.

I'm trying to have an honest conversation with you, if you want to act like a fucking prick, go right ahead. Whatever you might do in your own home, great. I thought I said as much in earlier posts, but don't fucking tell me how to act in mine. There isn't a how-to on how to handle this shit, and I am genuinely interested in what people think about it. For every person that is going to blast first and not care who or what they shoot, there are plenty of people that are going to handle it different. The law is fucked these days and defending your home can land your ass in jail if you don't handle it right, that's a fact. I have no intentions of spending any fucking time in jail because I didn't realize what my rights as a gun owner defending my home actually entail. If you want to continue mocking my opinions about this, go right ahead.

I'm not trying to tell you how to act in your home. If you want to declare where you are and what you intend to do, or as the case may be, not do, to someone who's broken into your home, that's your business.

This isn't about "blasting first." What happens first is that some fuck breaks into someone else's home, then someone shoots them. As far as I'm concerned, that's it. That's the end game. After that, all bets are off. I'm sorry I don't believe that once someone breaks into your home, they should be granted some special rights reserved only for home intruders. As far as I'm concerned, it's comparable to telling a woman that once her rapist has penetrated her, she must declare what steps she intends to take to stop said rape and ascertain whether her rapist intends to do her "real" harm before she uses force to stop him.

I guess I don't give a shit if killing or maiming a home intruder lands me in jail because I didn't properly ascertain what weapons the intruder was carrying or what their intentions were. As long as my family is kept as far from harm as possible, that's all that matters.

echoed for an excellent post

[Harlan Huckleby]

ok, I won't press you to give serious answers in the future.

You're not pressing anyone for serious answers. You're pressing for answers that fit your opinion, either in the affirmative or the negative.

I don't have any idea what this means.

Tex is the only Warrior for Joe Horn who has been willing to talk about when he thinks deadly force is justified. The rest of the Warriors just use sarcasm & mockery, and beat their chests in a display of manhood.

I don't know, because they aren't talkin, but my guess is that most of the Joe Hornies base their opinion on emotion & prejudice. In other words, killing somebody is right when it feels right. And they don't want to leave their comfort zone and think any more about it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm trying to have an honest conversation with you,

Good luck with that!

[Deputy Nutz]

ok, I won't press you to give serious answers in the future.

You're not pressing anyone for serious answers. You're pressing for answers that fit your opinion, either in the affirmative or the negative.

I don't have any idea what this means.

Tex is the only Warrior for Joe Horn who has been willing to talk about when he thinks deadly force is justified. The rest of the Warriors just use sarcasm & mockery, and beat their chests in a display of manhood.

I don't know, because they aren't talkin, but my guess is that most of the Joe Hornies base their opinion on emotion & prejudice. In other words, killing somebody is right when it feels right. And they don't want to leave their comfort zone and think any more about it.

How long have you been waiting to use that?

[Deputy Nutz]

Harlan you want a cut and dry answer about when someone thinks it is ok to use deadly force. I can't answer that with a singular answer.

[Scott Campbell]

I have no intentions of spending any fucking time in jail because I didn't realize what my rights as a gun owner defending my home actually entail.

I have no intentions of spending any fucking time in the morgue because I called my attorney to find out what my rights are instead of blasting some prick that broke into my home.

And I hear where you are coming from, and have no problem with you handling it your way.

[Scott Campbell]

......................

[MadtownPacker]

27 - I dont see how you can argue with SB's post. Isnt the safety of your family worth spending 5-10 years in jail for manslaughter? That if you even get in trouble. Doesnt matter because if you wait to see what the intruder does you have already lost unless you are some fucking six-shooter slinging speedy gunslinger.

Maybe Joe Horn could have let those guys live, maybe not but the bottom line is that they where up to no good. That CANT be denied. Because of that I stand by his decision. I think you need to go read terrible stories about families that fell prey to some lowlifes. This one happenend close by.

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...EWS&theme=METH

"Patrick Joseph Booth, violently high on meth, invaded the home of Darren and Chastity Baker, beat Darren Baker with a baseball bat and trapped the couple in their bathroom for nearly 24 hours. He forcibly injected meth into their 11-year-old son. He looted the Bakers' home and stole their vehicle."

Maybe is someone had disposed of this animal during one of the many crimes he commited before it would have saved a lot of people of lot of pain. What if this was your family? You have to think about it like that IMO. It is you or them. Im picking me every time.

[twoseven]

27 - I dont see how you can argue with SB's post. Isnt the safety of your family worth spending 5-10 years in jail for manslaughter? That if you even get in trouble. Doesnt matter because if you wait to see what the intruder does you have already lost unless you are some fucking six-shooter slinging speedy gunslinger.

Maybe Joe Horn could have let those guys live, maybe not but the bottom line is that they where up to no good. That CANT be denied. Because of that I stand by his decision. I think you need to go read terrible stories about families that fell prey to some lowlifes. This one happenend close by.

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...EWS&theme=METH

"Patrick Joseph Booth, violently high on meth, invaded the home of Darren and Chastity Baker, beat Darren Baker with a baseball bat and trapped the couple in their bathroom for nearly 24 hours. He forcibly injected meth into their 11-year-old son. He looted the Bakers' home and stole their vehicle."

Maybe is someone had disposed of this animal during one of the many crimes he commited before it would have saved a lot of people of lot of pain. What if this was your family? You have to think about it like that IMO. It is you or them. Im picking me every time.

Argue with his posts? All I am doing is giving MY OPINION of what I WOULD DO. To me it seems like he is suggesting I am an idiot for making a distinction between two different situiations. All due respect to both of you, whom I repsect quite a bit, ity seems to me like you and he are looking at this in black and white..inturder enters home, homeowner is at a DISADVANTAGE, no middle ground, no rooom for anything to happen but homeowner kills inturder. That's fine.

I clearly stated if I had the advantage, meaning my gun and the element of surprise, and got the drop of some dumbshit out in my living room I would not shoot them if they were unarmed and once confronted they ran for the door or plain surrendered. If the two of you would do things differently if you had the advantage, that's fine. I think that spending any amount of time in jail for needlessly killing someone who I have dead to rights and subdued that is no longer a threat, considering my wife is unemployed and could do little to raise our two kids if I'm locked up, would be a pretty fucking stupid thing to do.

The examples I keep reading to the contrary are talking about someone who is actually a threat confronting a homeowner at a disadvantage. SB doesn't own a gun. He is clearly at a disadvantage if someone enters his home. Go ahead and defend yourself. I own a gun and know how to use it, and would kill in a heartbeat if I felt I HAD TO. But if I didn't actually have to..hey, good luck telling the cops I was the one that needed defense if I shoot an unaramed perp in the back in the driveway, or there's a dead kid in my living room with no weapon clinging to my Xbox. Think the police aren't going to try and figure out if you actually needed to kill someone in your home? They aren't even allowed to shoot someone unless their lives are actually threatened, usually a perp pointing a gun at them. My brother and quite a few of my friends are cops, I have heard plenty of real stories from them about all kinds of things like this. For every sad story like the one you mentioned there have been others about overzealous homeowners that fucked themselves over because they went too far with their gun in defending themselves when they didn't have to. If it weren't for some of the things that I have learned from them about gun rights, homeowners rights, defending your home, what can happen when homeowners brandish weapons and confront inturders, etc I might have a very different perspective and opinion on all of this. As I said, the law is fucked and gives too many rights to the criminals these days, but I am not going to risk getting shipped because I disagree with them if I don't have to.

We are coming at this from different sides. I agree 100% with you and him about the idea of killing to protect your family from imminenet danger or threat. I have been talking about more than just that. Don't look down on me for looking at all the angles and considering how I personally would handle a situation that was not such a threat, especially when the wrong decision made by me IN THAT SITUATION could ALSO fuck my family over because daddy is now in jail. Harlan started this whole string to try and get a measure of what and how much it would take to feel you needed to kill someone, I gave my answer.

[mraynrand]

Harlan,

It's obvious that the answer to you question is that each of us have different thresholds at which we would try to kill a particular criminal and that threshold represents our estimation of the relative threat to our lives or the lives of our families. We can debate it all we want, as a cold argument, but I suspect all of that changes when it's actually happening. For example, 2-7 argues that he wouldn't kill once a criminal is confronted and subdued - but there are all sorts of things that can happen between the confrontation and the subduing that can cost you or the criminal his life. It isn't simple cut and dry stuff. That's why I related that story about the guy who took 11 bullets and was still firing.

[SkinBasket]

Come on 27, you know I'm not trying to insult you. I talk that way to everyone here. If I find one of your opinions completely at odds with my own, please don't take my sometimes slightly abrasive refutation of said opinion as a personal attack. Like you said, we approach this from two different sides and have probably been discussing two different ideas of what's happening during an intrusion.

I just find it hard to imagine a situation where, even if I had a handgun, that I would be able to fix an advantage on someone who's broken into the house in such a way that I would feel confident enough to declare myself without feeling that they might simply turn and fire. It's most likely going to be dark, I'm going to be waking up from sleep, they're going to hear me coming from the upper level - which means they know where I am, but I don't know where they are, and I'm the one "playing" defense. They cut and run, they lose nothing. I've got everything at stake. There is always going to be an element of the unknown confronting an intruder - usually a lot of unknown. Given all these factors plus the problems fear, confusion, and adrenalin pose, I doubt I would ever be able to assess the situation thoroughly enough to know what the intruder's reaction is going to be when confronted - even if I had a handgun and I'm not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

You're working from a position of if the intruder has surrendered or fled once you've confronted them. Maybe you're comfortable taking that chance of actually initiating the confrontation, but I'm not. That might make me a coward, but like I said before, that doesn't much matter to me given the circumstances and what's at stake. The first confrontation they'll get here is a baton to the skull.

We've discussed the handgun as home defense idea in our house before we had kids. If I had a handgun, the first two rounds would be less lethal rounds. The rest of the clip would be regular ammunition. That's my only concession to a home intruder. No confrontations. No questions. They would get two rubber rounds, then a warning to stay still or die. So i guess I'm not such a cold hearted guy after all.

[Oscar]

This has been an interesting thread to read. I grew up in E.St.Louis a place where breakins were fairly common but rarely happened where we lived. When I was 6 my family had an intruder break in. He made it into the kitchen and was greeted by my dog. The dog (a German Shepard) attacked the intruder nearly killing him. My dad who owned a gun came in called off the dog and held the man(who was armed) until the police came. The dog probably saved our lives.. At the time my brother was 4 and my sister was 6 months old.. I know not everyone can have dogs where they live or just choose not to but I'm glad we did.

[Scott Campbell]

So i guess I'm not such a cold hearted guy after all.

Tell that to the retarded baby kittens stealing beer.

[Zool]

So i guess I'm not such a cold hearted guy after all.

Tell that to the retarded baby kittens stealing beer.

He already shot them. No sense in telling them now.

[Scott Campbell]

This has been an interesting thread to read. I grew up in E.St.Louis a place where breakins were fairly common but rarely happened where we lived. When I was 6 my family had an intruder break in. He made it into the kitchen and was greeted by my dog. The dog (a German Shepard) attacked the intruder nearly killing him. My dad who owned a gun came in called off the dog and held the man(who was armed) until the police came. The dog probably saved our lives.. At the time my brother was 4 and my sister was 6 months old.. I know not everyone can have dogs where they live or just choose not to but I'm glad we did.

Harlan is going to want to prosecute your vigilante dog. He should have called 911 and hid in his dog house.

The jury will need to decide, would he have bitten teens stealing beer?

[Oscar]

This has been an interesting thread to read. I grew up in E.St.Louis a place where breakins were fairly common but rarely happened where we lived. When I was 6 my family had an intruder break in. He made it into the kitchen and was greeted by my dog. The dog (a German Shepard) attacked the intruder nearly killing him. My dad who owned a gun came in called off the dog and held the man(who was armed) until the police came. The dog probably saved our lives.. At the time my brother was 4 and my sister was 6 months old.. I know not everyone can have dogs where they live or just choose not to but I'm glad we did.

Harlan is going to want to prosecute your vigilante dog. He should have called 911 and hid in his dog house.

The jury will need to decide, would he have bitten teens stealing beer?

If they were stealing beer out of the old man's fridge at 2am..Chances are...Yes...

[Deputy Nutz]

In all honestly I think Joe Horn might have overreacted. I wasn't there I don't know all the facts. He did call the cops, but somewhere in there he decided that he had the right to shoot.

I suppose talkng about getting our own homes broken into has made me rethink the situation a bit. If somebody just broke into my house while nobody was home I don't think I have a piece of property in my house that I would kill over. I just don't, now if I had Skin's TV, and three gaming consoles that would be different story, but all that stuff is replacable. I would be pissed, but to kill over? I don't want that kind of shit on my hands. So why would I decide to kill somebody for stealing property from a neighbor? Again I don't know all the facts, these criminals could have been exremely violent, could have hurt or injured the neighbors, I don't know any of this, neither did Joe, he was scared, and angry and believed it best to fire his weapon. Mr. Horn could have justifiably felt that he was a target by these criminals, I don't know how he felt, and neither does Harlan, or Tyrone, or Tex, or Scott, or Skin.

What I can tell you, I am not going to wait and find out the intentions of bad people. If someone is attempting or committing a violent act of aggression, like breaking into your house, robbing you, threatening bodily harm, I am not going to sit back and hope everything is going to work out. So there is your answer Harlan.