| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/19/2012 12:24:19 PM · #726 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 12:35:22 PM · #727 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
If my son is busting into people's houses and takes a round between the eyes, I can't say I'd be happy, but I'd damned sure understand. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 12:39:43 PM · #728 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
If my son is busting into people's houses and takes a round between the eyes, I can't say I'd be happy, but I'd damned sure understand. |
Sure thing.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2012 12:57:17 PM · #729 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
If my son is busting into people's houses and takes a round between the eyes, I can't say I'd be happy, but I'd damned sure understand. |
Sure thing. |
So, you're telling me that your son could be in the middle of raping or killing someone, or doing violent home invasions, and you'd still think he was an angel who didn't have any hand in his own undoing?
You've got to be kidding me jager, I know you're all about the head-butt, and I'm sure it's done a number on the contents of your head, but even if someone is related to you it doesn't make them somehow above reproach.
Message edited by author 2012-08-19 12:57:35. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 01:23:21 PM · #730 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
If my son is busting into people's houses and takes a round between the eyes, I can't say I'd be happy, but I'd damned sure understand. |
Sure thing. |
So, you're telling me that your son could be in the middle of raping or killing someone, or doing violent home invasions, and you'd still think he was an angel who didn't have any hand in his own undoing?
You've got to be kidding me jager, I know you're all about the head-butt, and I'm sure it's done a number on the contents of your head, but even if someone is related to you it doesn't make them somehow above reproach. |
Now now, no need to be nasty, stay civil and watch that gun doesn't go off.
What I was saying is, wouldn't it be better that he be takin care of and not shot in the head, like mike was suggesting. You simply answered that you would understand if your son was shot while busting into someones home, would you not prefere that he be treated and prevented from doing more harm, or would you still prefere him dead ? it's an honest question.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2012 01:32:35 PM · #731 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
If my son is busting into people's houses and takes a round between the eyes, I can't say I'd be happy, but I'd damned sure understand. |
Sure thing. |
So, you're telling me that your son could be in the middle of raping or killing someone, or doing violent home invasions, and you'd still think he was an angel who didn't have any hand in his own undoing?
You've got to be kidding me jager, I know you're all about the head-butt, and I'm sure it's done a number on the contents of your head, but even if someone is related to you it doesn't make them somehow above reproach. |
Now now, no need to be nasty, stay civil and watch that gun doesn't go off.
What I was saying is, wouldn't it be better that he be takin care of and not shot in the head, like mike was suggesting. You simply answered that you would understand if your son was shot while busting into someones home, would you not prefere that he be treated and prevented from doing more harm, or would you still prefere him dead ? it's an honest question. |
No nastiness intended, all in good humor my friend. :)
I'm not sure I understand your proposal.. Of course if I do a proper job as a parent it's much less likely that he'll be engaged in those types of activities, and of course I would prefer that something else would happen, but my preferences as the parent of the child, don't really matter too much when someone else's safety or life is being actively threatened. That's a selfish preference, and it's natural and normal, but I didn't say that I'd prefer someone put some lead between his ears, what I said was that I would understand and accept the fact that actions beget consequences..
How do you propose that "he be takin care of" How exactly do you "treat" someone when they're busy breaking into your house, armed? I don't know that hot lead injections aren't the only treatment available in that sort of situation. Of course, I really do want to hear what you had in mind when making the above comment.
I have a rather strong distaste for those who can never rationally examine the actions of their own family - it's a disease that leads to the delinquency of the children IMO. You see it on the news all the time, someone gets killed and their mom is on TV trying to explain how "He was a sweet boy, never hurt anyone, never would, not my baby - went to church every sunday and worked with the kids" you know exactly what I'm talking about... Meanwhile the picture of the kid screams "thug" and he was charged with 40 felonies. yeah. Sweethearts, innocent... right.
Message edited by author 2012-08-19 13:34:09. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 02:44:33 PM · #732 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I have over the years handled a great variety of guns and know how to use them and truth be told, in most confrontational situations, I much favoured my chances when NOT armed. Silly you say,go back and read some of the comments made by  Flash a few pages back and you may understand why.
My two cents.
Ray |
I'm hoping you are referencing my post on the escalation levels of force and the use of awareness, confidence, hand to hand skills (PPCT), and non-lethal options like OC spray and a Kubotan. If you were referencing something/(s) I posted on lethal force, please clarify so I may review. One distinct escalation level that you in uniform had that is typically absent from most civilian encounters is you had the advantage of "presence" - specifically Uniformed Presence. The very nature of your uniform carried an explicit "authority" with known arrest powers (plus communication access via radio to backup). Not exactly the same as a civilian with a cell phone.
That said, the civilian generally has a responsibility to evade/escape if possible whilst the officer has a general responsibility to engage or at least contain until help arrives. Regardless, your point that irresponsible people exist who handle firearms irresponsibly - is true. Unfortunately, irresponsible actions are too common in too many venues that have nothing to do with firearms, as well. Part of the challenge is the balance between allowing access to those who are responsible and denying acces to those who are not. Laws merely state the desired outcome. Enforcement is key for adherance.
There are many laws on the books now designed and intended to reach this balance. As we have seen in some rather high profile examples revealed in Fast and Furious, that decision to not enfore the law can have dire and deadly consequences.
Back to handling firearms, 1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded. 2. NEVER point the muzzle at anything/one - unless a very narrow and specific set of circumstances are present. 3. Know that you are responsible for each and every round that leaves that gun while it is in your possession (and you may be responsible for rounds while it is not in your possession if negligence can be proven). In my years shooting PPC (Police Pistol Combat) I did not see horse play with firearms. In my training classes I did not see it either - as it was cause for immediate dismissal (without refund). However, I have witnessed at public firing ranges decorum that caused me to question an individuals common sense, but fortunately that has been the exception and rare.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2012 02:58:45 PM · #733 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
... I'm your poster boy of everything you write that you want gunowners to be - and I'm the one who scares you. |
What "scares" me is the faith you have that everyone who acquires firearms will voluntarily believe and behave as you do.
There's something like 300 million guns un the US. There are about 4 million NRA members ... even if they each own ten guns that leaves about 260 million guns in the hands of those who do not necessarily subscribe to your philosophy. |
I think your concern/point is valid. The counterpoint however is that of the 300 million guns presently in the US - one could expect that there are potentially 300 million homicides or other illegal uses of these firearms at any given time. Excluding gang on gang related uses and suicides, the risk to society as a whole is pretty small. Again, the thousands and thousands of licensed concealed carriers in 38 states indicate that a pretty healthy portion of the gun owning population does know what I know and think responsibly. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 03:49:51 PM · #734 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Excluding gang on gang related uses and suicides, the risk to society as a whole is pretty small. |
On what basis do you "exclude" suicide (and "accidental" death) -- the leading causes of firearms fatalities -- from the "risk to society"? It seems that this public-health risk is exactly the point of greater/more effective restrictions and more limited availablity than under the current situation. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 04:18:00 PM · #735 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Flash:
Excluding gang on gang related uses and suicides, the risk to society as a whole is pretty small. |
On what basis do you "exclude" suicide (and "accidental" death) -- the leading causes of firearms fatalities -- from the "risk to society"? It seems that this public-health risk is exactly the point of greater/more effective restrictions and more limited availablity than under the current situation. |
Sigh. Again, there are better ways. FFS, why does our culture think guns are the best tool for everything. |
|
|
|
08/19/2012 04:50:01 PM · #736 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I have over the years handled a great variety of guns and know how to use them and truth be told, in most confrontational situations, I much favoured my chances when NOT armed. Silly you say,go back and read some of the comments made by Flash a few pages back and you may understand why.
My two cents.
Ray |
I'm hoping you are referencing my post on the escalation levels of force and the use of awareness, confidence, hand to hand skills (PPCT), and non-lethal options like OC spray and a Kubotan. |
My apologies for not specifying what it was that I was alluding to. I was making specific reference to your post or 08/16/2012 10:24:50 AM · #648.
Considering your experience in this matter, I would hazard a guess that you might agree that on occasion, ownership of a firearm can lead to a false sense of security.
There exists a monumental amount of difference between shooting at an image on a piece of paper and being faced with someone who can shoot back.
Ray
|
|
|
|
08/19/2012 09:53:47 PM · #737 |
Originally posted by jagar:
Originally posted by mike_311:
unfortunately she miss his head, now the tax paying public needs to fund his medical bills and incarceration. |
What's your soultion Mike, round up all the dangerous individuals and send them off to a firing squad ? if your son turned out to be a danger to the general public, would you want him shot or taken care of, we all have a mother and a father and it's not only delinquents that have delinquent offspring. |
it was a cynical jab, obviously killing someone is a last resort and to answer your question, if my son turn out to be a danger to general public, no i would not WANT him to be killed, but i sure as heck am not going to blame a mother of two young children who shot and killed him if he was posing a serious threat to them, i'd mourn my son but he then brought it on himself.
given the choice im not going to kill someone, im going to put and end to the threat to my safety given the opportunity, but i guarantee im not going to mourn the loss of their life.
i cant believe we are having a debate whether guns are safe. its not the guns that are the problem, its the animals that feel the need to threaten the rest of society so that society wants to use guns protect itself. think about that for a second. they feel they need to use GUNS. lets stop treating these animals as if they are people. im a compassionate person, but i'm also a realist.
and about the firing squad, I'm all for it. capital punishment is used far too infrequently and its far to humane in its current incarnation. if a person wont think twice about ending your or my life, why do we afford the same?
|
|
|
|
08/19/2012 10:55:52 PM · #738 |
Ive got something for an intruder...Its called a triple tap...1. stomach- 2.chest- 3. head
I completely respect her shooting him...she was protecting her family
edited to add (I just read later posts)
If I had a fam member that broke into a house or was in the process of raping someone....and they got shot and killed. I would not like the fact that he was killed, but He had it coming to him for doing that type of activity. I would not hold anything against a fam that shot an intruder
Message edited by author 2012-08-19 23:02:24.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2012 05:26:56 AM · #739 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Ive got something for an intruder...Its called a triple tap...1. stomach- 2.chest- 3. head |
I am really intrigued if shooting someone 3 times would not be considered "excessive" and lead to legal troubles. Surely any person shot in the stomach would be incapacitated and future shots could be viewed as an intent to kill.
Anyone have a view on this?
Ray |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 05:32:34 AM · #740 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
If I had a fam member that broke into a house...and they got shot and killed...he had it coming to him for doing that type of activity. |
This is hard for me to accept. My first reaction is "You can't be serious!" Death is a reasonable response to breaking and entering? (I'm aware "rape" was on your list too, but those are different categories of actions, surely?) |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 07:23:59 AM · #741 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
If I had a fam member that broke into a house...and they got shot and killed...he had it coming to him for doing that type of activity. |
This is hard for me to accept. My first reaction is "You can't be serious!" Death is a reasonable response to breaking and entering? (I'm aware "rape" was on your list too, but those are different categories of actions, surely?) |
yes.
think about it, you are mother of two young kids and someone broke into your house inst listening to your demand to leave after warning them and they approach you.
i fully support your decision to pull the trigger to protect yourself and also fire repeatedly until the threat is over.
you didn't go out of your way seeking to end someones life, they came into your home and threatened you, it was their decision was to put themselves into a situation where they got themselves killed.
I dont understand the sympathy for the assailant, do you sympathize when someone drives drunk and kills them self? tragic yes, but it was their own fault.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2012 08:04:05 AM · #742 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
I have over the years handled a great variety of guns and know how to use them and truth be told, in most confrontational situations, I much favoured my chances when NOT armed. Silly you say,go back and read some of the comments made by Flash a few pages back and you may understand why.
My two cents.
Ray |
I'm hoping you are referencing my post on the escalation levels of force and the use of awareness, confidence, hand to hand skills (PPCT), and non-lethal options like OC spray and a Kubotan. |
My apologies for not specifying what it was that I was alluding to. I was making specific reference to your post or 08/16/2012 10:24:50 AM · #648.
Considering your experience in this matter, I would hazard a guess that you might agree that on occasion, ownership of a firearm can lead to a false sense of security.
There exists a monumental amount of difference between shooting at an image on a piece of paper and being faced with someone who can shoot back.
Ray |
I do agree that owning a firearm can in some circumstances lead to a false sense of security. I also believe that some people think they drive better than they do and some dog owners think their dogs don't mess on other people's yards. But your point is valid.
I believe that when one decidees to incorporate any defensive option (lethal or non-lethal) into their personal preparation planning, that prudent persons will avail themselves of proper training with those options and understand the strengths and weaknesses of those choices - to include the liabilities. Not all do - but certainly more should. The NRA certainly encourages it and has many programs available to help teach responsible ownership - including knowing the limits of your firearm and its correct application. |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 08:19:18 AM · #743 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Ive got something for an intruder...Its called a triple tap...1. stomach- 2.chest- 3. head |
I am really intrigued if shooting someone 3 times would not be considered "excessive" and lead to legal troubles. Surely any person shot in the stomach would be incapacitated and future shots could be viewed as an intent to kill.
Anyone have a view on this?
Ray |
This is different than the training I have had as a civilian. Due to the increased heart rate under assault induced stress, fine motor skills are lost as adrenlin dumps into your system preparing for fight or flight. That leaves only gross motor skills operational which equates to large muscle groups. Therefore, very specific platforms like Ayoob's Isosoles position which incorporates the bodies natural reaction of a slight bend in the knees with arms straight out, is a preferred stance to learn and practice with, Likewise, center mass is the preferred target area as it allows for the most lattitude in shot placement while maintaining an effective incapacitation potential. I have no way of knowing what an individuals personal training level is and some very highly trained persons are specifically trained to maintain fine motor skills under high stress scenarios (think FBI Hostage Rescue, Air Marshalls, Navy Seals, Delta, SWAT, etc.). I certainly do not possess that level of training and thus my target would be center mass. The number of rounds required would be dependent on many factors including caliber, hopped up state of the assailant (drugs), and the effectiveness of each round. It could be 1 or 2 or 3 or 6 or even a reload. The objective is to stop the assault and one needs to continue the defensive action until the threat is stopped. |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 08:40:50 AM · #744 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
If I had a fam member that broke into a house...and they got shot and killed...he had it coming to him for doing that type of activity. |
This is hard for me to accept. My first reaction is "You can't be serious!" Death is a reasonable response to breaking and entering? (I'm aware "rape" was on your list too, but those are different categories of actions, surely?) |
Bear - the threshold for the lawful use of deadly force is "imminent threat of death or grave (crippling) bodily injury". I am not aware of any other defnined use (for civilians) - if there is one. Law enforcement has an option of "pre-emptive" deadly force but is is very narrow and essentially applies to hostage situations.
The scenario with the burgler is very complicated - meaning there are many potential elements that could have a role in determining what force is lawful and justified.
eta: certainly repeated warnings to the intruder that the homeowner was armed and for the intruder to leave would go a long way with the prosecutor (or jury) that the homeowner was justified in this instant case of the mother defending her two children. Ecah case is different. Some states do not have a "castle doctrine" law and homeowners are required to flee even their residence. Many states do have castle doctrine law, and that essentially states that a homewoner is not required to flee their residence and can defend their sanctuary with force. However the definition still applies of "imminent threat of death or grave bodily injury" meaning you can't shoot a burglar in the back as they are leaving.
Message edited by author 2012-08-20 12:46:50. |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 05:03:41 PM · #745 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Ive got something for an intruder...Its called a triple tap...1. stomach- 2.chest- 3. head |
You really shouldn't post that sort of thing on the net. If the worst happened and you actually were put in a situation that you had to triple tap someone, your defense against excessive force and volitional murder would be how quick it all happened and that you just reacted. If the investigator saw that you planned to do such an act and posted it on the net, it would shift their perception of your actions from a reasonable defensive over reaction, to a planned homicide. Once you neutralize a threat further action against another person is going to get you treated like a criminal. |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 07:25:20 PM · #746 |
I'm pleased to report I had no need to resort to deadly force of any kind this past weekend. I participated in a sponsored bike (bicycle) ride with at least a thousand others. Figure that the bikes averaged about $1500 each, with many much higher than that, and you have a parking lot or park just ripe for serious thievery. Bicycle theft is VERY popular in these here parts. I am pretty sure no riders were carrying concealed weapons (really hard to hide in spandex) but there is the chance a volunteer at a rest stop may have been armed. It seems as though no one had to resort to shooting anyone. And in fact, I think the day went by without a single theft! I know, I know, really hard to believe! But it did. Whew!!
Talked to my brother - he and a friend went to a gun show in Orange County, and were told they had to have their beer in plastic cups, not cans, because by the gods, cans were dangerous. At a gun show.
One can only chuckle at the absurdity of it all. :-) |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 07:37:47 PM · #747 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
I'm pleased to report I had no need to resort to deadly force of any kind this past weekend. I participated in a sponsored bike (bicycle) ride with at least a thousand others. Figure that the bikes averaged about $1500 each, with many much higher than that, and you have a parking lot or park just ripe for serious thievery. Bicycle theft is VERY popular in these here parts. I am pretty sure no riders were carrying concealed weapons (really hard to hide in spandex) but there is the chance a volunteer at a rest stop may have been armed. It seems as though no one had to resort to shooting anyone. And in fact, I think the day went by without a single theft! I know, I know, really hard to believe! But it did. Whew!!
Talked to my brother - he and a friend went to a gun show in Orange County, and were told they had to have their beer in plastic cups, not cans, because by the gods, cans were dangerous. At a gun show.
One can only chuckle at the absurdity of it all. :-) |
:) I see what you're doing there. ;)
I wonder if you realize that sheer numbers are as good or better than any gun? |
|
|
|
08/20/2012 08:00:17 PM · #748 |
my wife participated in the broad street run in Philly with 10,000 other folks starting in and running through some rough neighborhoods. she didn't need a gun either, no one did, excpet maybe the massive police presence.
i wouldn't run that same course, by myself, with a gun. |
|
|
|
08/21/2012 12:03:23 AM · #749 |
Originally posted by Cory:
I wonder if you realize that sheer numbers are as good or better than any gun? |
A good point with respect to theft. Sadly, it doesn't work with nuts with guns, such as those at Fort Hood, Aurora, Virginia Tech... no safety in numbers there - more of an incentive, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
08/21/2012 12:16:02 AM · #750 |
Proper use of a weapon in public
Even better
Message edited by author 2012-08-21 00:21:10. |
|
