DescentBB

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:vision, If you were a woman and a man broke into your house with God knows what intent, I'm sure you'd rethink that opinion. If I were a man however, I'd be more likely to tackle and beat the crap out of the guy instead of killing him, then let the law deal with him properly afterwards. If that intruder breaks in and is armed, the situation changes drastically. Shoot first and ask questions later.

oh this old chestnut again.

Most people who break into your home just want your TV.

callmeslick wrote:the Castle Doctrine is an excuse to shoot Black People, at least in practice. The arguments for adoption of same are based on the same paranoia around breakins, when it has been long proven that virtually ALL break-ins are with the intent to steal small portable objects of value. In other words, the Castle Doctrine is used to apply a death sentence to petty theft.

Ferno wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:vision, If you were a woman and a man broke into your house with God knows what intent, I'm sure you'd rethink that opinion. If I were a man however, I'd be more likely to tackle and beat the crap out of the guy instead of killing him, then let the law deal with him properly afterwards. If that intruder breaks in and is armed, the situation changes drastically. Shoot first and ask questions later.

oh this old chestnut again.

Most people who break into your home just want your TV.

callmeslick wrote:so, breaking and entering should be a capital offense with no trial, Thorne? Sorry, I'll pass.

callmeslick wrote:so, breaking and entering should be a capital offense with no trial, Thorne? Sorry, I'll pass.

callmeslick wrote:

oh, and from the post above, it would seem that you don't grasp the meaning of the word 'most'. Just because some rare outlier makes the news(precisely because the event WAS a rare outlier) doesn't mean that MOST break-ins aren't about quickly grabbing portable valuables. I'd suspect those make up OVER 99% of all break-ins, which translates into 'most'.

A household member was present in roughly 1 million burglar-
ies and became victims of violent crimes in 266,560 burglaries.

tunnelcat wrote:Really? Sometimes people go bonkers, then break into your home, stab you to death just for being in the way, and then take your car. One of the victims in the home this guy broke into was an 80 year old lady who was no threat at all and she died for just being in this guy's way.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dining-o ... d=39034337

callmeslick wrote:So, I read your link, in its entirety, and when you take all break-ins, attempted and completed, of all types, the incidence of assault, which in most cases is 'Simple Assault', which can be as little as verbal threat or pushing, is around 3.2%, not 1% as I suggested. From there, you extrapolate into fantasy boogie-man scenarios. Want my full advice? ★■◆● the weapon and get a dog. That simple.

woodchip wrote:Want my advice slick

Top Gun wrote:All things being equal, I'd much rather defend my property with the business end of a Louisville Slugger. Far less potential for inadvertent murder or self-harm.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:A good beating, or a bullet, followed by jail time would do more good than all of the romantic and "compassionate" words you could get out...

Sergeant Thorne wrote:It's very important to understand that some actions are deserving of death...

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Myself, I pretty much draw the line for compassion at attempting to harm another person.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Christian morality is not a free pass for evil men to do whatever they want, or a reversal of Old Testament judgements. Jesus Christ set an example when he died for us (to save us from Buddhism, among other things, BTW)...

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Someone who threatens another person's life, unprovoked, hasn't just made a bad decision, they have gone so far down the wrong road that they are in danger of being deserving of DEATH themselves.

It's very important to understand that some actions are deserving of death...

Ferno wrote:No. You didn't. Did you?

This isn't a case of someone 'going bonkers'. No, this is a guy with a serious mental health issue, who had an episode when he was involved in a collision. Not to mention, he's only a part of a group of 23 people in the entire united states with a serious problem. So your chances of meeting someone like that are infinitesimally small.

You're letting a perceived threat get the better of you. And what you've said does not negate my point.

Spidey wrote:…I will shoot to kill.

Spidey wrote:nobody here has stated that they are just going to shoot first and ask questions second. (look at the stats woody posted…most intruders leave the premises alive and well.)

I will not allow myself to be willfully be assaulted or murdered by anyone who breaks into my domicile, mentally ill or not.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Good job, detective Ferno... there's no conflict there.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Her statement does not preclude a verbal warning or ultimatum, Ferno.

Ferno wrote:so you're upset that mentally ill people don't get the treatment they deserve, but don't really care that you may have to shoot a mentally ill person.

I don't think you have the right to get pissed off at law enforcement if they shoot a mentally ill person with that contradictory stance.


the problem I see here is there's this assumption being demonstrated that anyone who breaks into your home is hell bent on the sole purpose of ending your life. And using a freak incident as justification just makes me shake my head.

Real life is NOT a hollywood action flick. You're not going to be dealing with Raoul, Burnham and Junior.

Hell, look at it this way TC. If you did shoot someone dead in your home and it turned out they were coerced into doing it, under the influence, or in some way not in control of their own actions, would you be happy with killing someone's son or daughter? How would you explain it to their bereaved mother that you just took away their family member?

tunnelcat wrote:
If someone broke into my house while I was at home, the first thing I'd do is arm myself if I had the forewarning or the opportunity. If the intruder refused to leave, I would attempt to hold him or her at gunpoint for the police. If that person charged at me or my family, I would shoot them without hesitation, period, because I value my own life at that moment, not theirs.

If they ran out, I'd let them go, then call the police with a description. Now, if I was alone in the house, I'd be far more likely to shoot first out of fear, especially at night. That's not something I can think rationally about, or control, at the spur of the moment, no matter the intentions or mental state of the intruder.

Maybe that's why you live in Canada. You can trust far more people and be far more confident with their intentions than we can down here in the Wild West of Anarchy. The U.S. has turned into a dog eat dog world and it sucks. Now, you either have to defend yourself, or end up robbed blind and/or dead, because there are a lot of bad people with bad intentions or those who are just plain desperate and the police and our social support services are underfunded, understaffed and overworked.

tunnelcat wrote:The U.S. has turned into a dog eat dog world and it sucks. Now, you either have to defend yourself, or end up robbed blind and/or dead, because there are a lot of bad people with bad intentions or those who are just plain desperate and the police and our social support services are underfunded, understaffed and overworked.

tunnelcat wrote:If someone broke into my house while I was at home, the first thing I'd do is arm myself if I had the forewarning or the opportunity. If the intruder refused to leave, I would attempt to hold him or her at gunpoint for the police. If that person charged at me or my family, I would shoot them without hesitation, period, because I value my own life at that moment, not theirs.

callmeslick wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:The U.S. has turned into a dog eat dog world and it sucks. Now, you either have to defend yourself, or end up robbed blind and/or dead, because there are a lot of bad people with bad intentions or those who are just plain desperate and the police and our social support services are underfunded, understaffed and overworked.

where the feck do YOU live? I can say, pretty confidently, that while less than perfect, there is NO scenario ANYWHERE in the US remotely close to what you state. You have just falling for the fear mongering of the past 30 years and developed some sort of twisted hysteria, TC. Yes, there are 'bad people', but a lot? Hell no, most people are completely harmless. The VAST majority, in fact. Yes there are always desperate individuals, and while social services have been stretched by decades of 'government bad' bullcrap, police budgets aren't really hurting, overall. I repeat, where do YOU live? Can you give examples of these waves of bad people overrunning your area as you paint it to be?

tunnelcat wrote: I'm sorry slick and ferno. I've been kind of depressed lately. It just seems that this country is rotting from within and our current politics is a symptom of that. Maybe it's just my perceptions and the changing times, maybe not. Things always change I guess, and each generation tends to hate it. But I see so much violence on the TV news. I see far too many homeless people wandering around, even kids, suffering and sometimes getting into trouble, even in my own little town, people that used to have jobs and homes. I see too much hard drug-caused bad behaviors, theft and violence. I see too many people who don't think the rules apply to them, so they go ahead and drink and drive or even text and drive and still kill and hurt people. I see a nation that still can't get over it's racist past, even though it thinks it's gotten past it. I see a healthcare system that's crumbling with no solution at hand for the vast majority of the people. I see mentally ill people walking the streets left out like so much garbage. I see students who can't afford a higher education, who end up in debt with no jobs and living with their parents. I see a Congress that won't do it's job for the people, only for the special interests and lobbyists when it suits them. I see a shrinking middle class and the good jobs that used to support it disappear into a global economy, jobs which are not coming back. I see a giant military industrial complex that wants to profit off of more and more wars and no one seems to realize it. I see a crazy, rich, egotistical bully about to get voted into the office of the president who may give them the war prize theyso desire. Kind of sucks, doesn't it?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:
I don't want to derail, but *derails it anyways*