Gun Control

[Dak]

But legally speaking (or ethically), you shouldn't assume that you can just shoot whomever comes into your house in the middle of the night.

Legally speaking they shouldn't be in my house in the middle of the night.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

The point is that killing someone who enters your house just to take your TV and items of value is very much excessive.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Legally speaking they shouldn't be in my house in the middle of the night.

Irrelevant point. Someone breaking into your house doesn't automatically make it legal for you to kill them.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Irrelevant point. Someone breaking into your house doesn't automatically make it legal for you to kill them.

exactly, aim for the testicles

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

btw we're talking about what is legal i.e. not excessive force i.e. not killing someone who breaks into your house just cuz they're in your house, damn gun hard-on people, just so you don't say anything like "dur but he's brakin in mah haus time to sh00t its da rite th1ng 2 d0"

 

[viewerfromnihil]

but when somebody breaks into your house, not only are they putting your valuables at risk, for all you know, they have a gun themselves and could be putting your family at risk

 

[Einherjar86]

I was going to say what nihil said:

If someone unknown to you is in your house for an unknown purpose, it's perfectly logical to assume that they mean you harm. They know the law, and they know that they're on your property against your will. It's perfectly acceptable (I feel) to shoot on sight, simply because you have no idea what kind of danger you might be in. Basically, the fact is that it's completely irrational to inquire as to why a suspicious person is in your house. Defending yourself immediately is the proper course. Now, maybe some people would be able to simply crack the guy over the head with a baseball bat. But I don't believe in faulting someone for shooting on sight if a stranger is present in your house uninvited.

I know of one case where a man who tried to rape a woman accused her of attempted murder because she shot him. Fortunately she got it appealed.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Defending yourself immediately is the proper course. Now, maybe some people would be able to simply crack the guy over the head with a baseball bat.

some anti-gun people like to pull that argument of whippin out the baseball bat but honestly, what are the chance that you can sneak up on him with out him hearing you... second to none. also, if the guy does have a gun and you're trying to wack him with a baseball bat, well, guess who wins that confrontation?

I know of one case where a man who tried to rape a woman accused her of attempted murder because she shot him. Fortunately she got it appealed.

an american case right? i love america but this whole matter of people trying to sue every chance they get is total bull shit and americans seem to love doing it most

 

[rms]

didnt a thief break into a guy's house and fall or something and break his leg/bone(s) and sue the owner of the house and won the case? gotta love it..

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

good posting dakryn.

If someone breaks into your house you should have every right to dispatch them.

 

[viewerfromnihil]

didnt a thief break into a guy's house and fall or something and break his leg/bone(s) and sue the owner of the house and won the case? gotta love it..

YEAH


god bless americans

 

[rms]

good posting dakryn.

If someone breaks into your house you should have every right to dispatch them.

if you saw a guy stealing your valuables, be it whatever, would you honestly just shoot before any other reaction?

 

[The Ozzman]

didnt a thief break into a guy's house and fall or something and break his leg/bone(s) and sue the owner of the house and won the case? gotta love it..

This is why I hate trial lawyers

 

[viewerfromnihil]

if you saw a guy stealing your valuables, be it whatever, would you honestly just shoot before any other reaction?

i'd fire a warning shot. if they run, i'll chase them for a little bit to scare the shit out of them to prevent them from coming back. if they freeze, i'll tie them up and call the cops. if they come at me, their ass is gonna die

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

if you saw a guy stealing your valuables, be it whatever, would you honestly just shoot before any other reaction?

no. but I should have the right if I wanted to.
Or if he threatens me.

 

[rms]

Don't you find that a little excessive?

 

[Einherjar86]

If there's any risk of potential harm to your person, and you're unable to safely assess the risk (i.e. if you believe your attacker could have a firearm of his own) you should be allowed the right to fire. I don't see why defending yourself should be a crime. It's not a preemptive strike because the stranger has already trespassed upon your property.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

Don't you find that a little excessive?

no.

If I could tell the guy had no chance in harming me then I'd just make him get down and I'd call the cops. Im sure 99% of people would be scared if a gun was pointed at them. Its that 1% of the drugged up loonies that might try something stupid.

Self defense isnt about "guns blazing". Its about using your head, staying cool and staying safe.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

If there's any risk of potential harm to your person, and you're unable to safely assess the risk (i.e. if you believe your attacker could have a firearm of his own) you should be allowed the right to fire. I don't see why defending yourself should be a crime. It's not a preemptive strike because the stranger has already trespassed upon your property.

I'll admit I have a hard time disagreeing with this argument. It seems reasonable for a criminal to expect his life to be in danger if he breaks into someone's home. It would of course be preferable if there were non-lethal means of self-defense which were as 'combat-effective' as guns, but there don't seem to be at present.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I find myself hard pressed to disagree with it also.