|
On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 14:44 nemo14 wrote:
[quote]
Exactly. What is the homeowner supposed to do, turn the lights on and ask the intruder what his intentions are and whether he has any weapons? When it's two in the morning and a stranger is creeping through your house, it is time to shoot first and ask questions later. No law should restrict a person's right to defend their last place of refuge. What about incapacitating the intruder? Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between? Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance. Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho. Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal.
Uh what kind of hypothetical nonsense is this?
What if a comet hits my house and kills everyone inside? Problem is solved that way too. What if that second burglar is going to shoot or stab REGARDLESS of what I do?
Sorry this argument doesn't really work well at all.
Again it's not even the property. I can replace that. I just stated that it is worth more than the guy breaking into my house...frankly.
Conversely said burglar could completely avoid getting shot by not BREAKING INTO MY HOUSE.
|
|
|
On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 14:44 nemo14 wrote:
[quote]
Exactly. What is the homeowner supposed to do, turn the lights on and ask the intruder what his intentions are and whether he has any weapons? When it's two in the morning and a stranger is creeping through your house, it is time to shoot first and ask questions later. No law should restrict a person's right to defend their last place of refuge. What about incapacitating the intruder? Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between? Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance. Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho. Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal.
That's alot of "what ifs". What if theres only one burglar, and that burglar plans to kill everyone in your home so he does not suffer any retaliation during the burglary.
|
On June 30 2011 17:47 smokeyhoodoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:14 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:57 smokeyhoodoo wrote:On June 30 2011 15:40 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:29 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:10 abominare wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 14:44 nemo14 wrote:On June 30 2011 14:26 MozzarellaL wrote:
[quote]
Tell me what is irrational about assuming an intruder into your home is there to kill or rape you when it's the middle of the night. I'm really interested in knowing your reasoning. I would not confront any intruder with anything less than deadly force. It's either that, or I hide in a closet and call the police. there is no middle ground, because you don't know, in fact, it is impossible to know, without putting yourself in grave danger, what the intruder is carrying or intends to do. Exactly. What is the homeowner supposed to do, turn the lights on and ask the intruder what his intentions are and whether he has any weapons? When it's two in the morning and a stranger is creeping through your house, it is time to shoot first and ask questions later. No law should restrict a person's right to defend their last place of refuge. What about incapacitating the intruder? Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between? Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance. Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho. For some reason your country tag makes me giggle about your response. Seriously though why should the burden fall on the victim to minimize the danger the criminal may be in? Granted crime and violent crime in Germany is most likely less than in the states, but hitting some one with a frying pan that potentially has a gun isn't exactly high on my list, I find that .45 acp injected from my 1911 wisens them up Non sensical. You are afraid to hit burgular with gun, but not afraid to shoot him? If he is in range so are you, or are you willing to risk your life because you belive your a superior gunman compared to him? It's about incapacitating them in the safest way possible. That would be a gun. And yes, I do believe I know my house better than any burglar. What is your solution? Run? That is not an option when you have a family. Actually because i live in a nation where getting a personal gun is so hard I dont have the option to shoot the burglar, but if i did I still belive pretending to be asleep and calling police quietly is the safest option. That's safe, but you'll likely never see your shit again. Do you have insurance for that? I rather hope the police to catch him than try to shoot a man i didnt club, because i assumed he had a gun. Besides, there is a reason why death penalty isnt allowed in most western areas, i find no reason why we should be allowed to kill someone even if they are doing a crime if tje state isnt allowed to, especially if like you said there are safer options. I never said shoot him, I just said if you want to keep your stuff you need to confront the burglar. The police are not going to catch him, its just naive to think they will. If you're a police officer, and someone tells you their home was robbed, whats your next move? You might check for finger prints, which is useless if they wore gloves, and you'll ask them if they had any enemies. That's about it. Maybe ask some pawn shops what they bought recently. There's not much else they can do. Murderers are generally easier to catch because there's a much greater chance for forensic evidence, and there's usually a motive and relationship between the victim and perpetrator. Burglars generally just randomly pick a house that looks like it has some good shit in it. Also, the law doesn't say you can kill someone who is committing a crime, it says you can kill someone to defend yourself. Buddha said you can defend yourself. Can you grasp that? Mother fucking Buddha! Maybe that well put in perspective the level of crazy your spewing.
How do i confront a guy with a guy while being safe? And like i said to other guy defendimg property =/= self defense. Also i ment i would call the policee when they are inside my house, people dont run fast with tvs in theyre bag.
|
On June 30 2011 17:14 partisan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:08 KryptoStorm wrote:
Looks like every american TeamLiquidan owns a gun! Have you ever been to the states? There's a reason why we have the highest murder rate in the world.
Not even close.
|
On June 30 2011 17:48 Bleak wrote:
I think if someone breaks into your home at night and if you have a gun, you should first warn him to leave your house and force him to give your belongings back. If he does not comply, if he attacks you, and if he is unarmed/carries a melee weapon, you may shot him in the leg or so to immobilise him. Then, call the police.
However, if the guy is armed with a firearm, I believe you should shoot him. Doing otherwise would be taking a big risk.
In any case, if you are in panic, can't think straight due to fear/adrenalin, and if you shoot burglar, that is still lawful.
Sad to see the Americans caring more about their plasmas than the life of an individual. I have heard that in some places asking people directions in U.S is dangerous as people think you are a trespasser or sth. Americans only care for money and property.
Don't be a tool, you just expressed the opinion of most Americans.
"In any case, if you are in panic, can't think straight due to fear/adrenalin, and if you shoot burglar, that is still lawful."
Yep, that's what its all about. Benefit of the doubt should go to the homeowner because no one else was in the situation they were in.
Asking directions in the U.S. is fine. Please come here before you spout any more shit about us.
|
On June 30 2011 18:03 poorbeggarman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:
[quote]
What about incapacitating the intruder?
Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between?
Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance.
Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho.
Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal. That's alot of "what ifs". What if theres only one burglar, and that burglar plans to kill everyone in your home so he does not suffer any retaliation during the burglary.
Hey, there are always ifs. I just want to act as safe as possible and i do not find it likely that if someone wants to kill my family they would break into my house, when there are million times better ways.
|
I don't know what kind of gun control laws you have over on that side of the pond, but I think it's perfectly reasonable for it to be legal to shoot someone who breaks into your home (it is in my part of the States). You don't know if they're armed, you don't know how they'll react, and you don't know if they're alone. It's safer for you and for your family to either shout a warning then shoot if they seem hostile and/or make sudden moves or just shoot them, and it is very easy for the burglar to not get shot: they can simply not break in to your house. It should not be the homeowner's responsibility to confirm that the intruder is a threat before taking action, but the intruder's responsibility to demonstrate that they are not; someone who breaks into your house in the middle of the night has most certainly not demonstrated that they are benign.
|
How did this thread end up about America?.. The law is being past in the UK, Hardly anyone in the UK has a gun in there own home, and most burglar will also not have a gun in most cases they will run once they see you or an alarm goes off. This law just means that in the case they do no run you can defend yourself without going to prison. Also is if they intended to kill your possessions when they know you are in the house
|
On June 30 2011 17:58 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:
[quote]
What about incapacitating the intruder?
Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between?
Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance.
Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho.
Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal. Uh what kind of hypothetical nonsense is this? What if a comet hits my house and kills everyone inside? Problem is solved that way too. What if that second burglar is going to shoot or stab REGARDLESS of what I do? Sorry this argument doesn't really work well at all. Again it's not even the property. I can replace that. I just stated that it is worth more than the guy breaking into my house...frankly. Conversely said burglar could completely avoid getting shot by not BREAKING INTO MY HOUSE.
I alredy anwsered the if parts to other guy read that. But i will tell you why your last sentace is stupid. Well its because you could use the same argument in every situation. Example would you be ok of law that allows you to shoot anyone who insaults you bevause they could avoid being shot by not insaulting you.
|
Good for England. Castle law (sort of) is always welcome to my country as well.
|
On June 30 2011 18:07 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:47 smokeyhoodoo wrote:On June 30 2011 17:14 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:57 smokeyhoodoo wrote:On June 30 2011 15:40 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:29 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 15:10 abominare wrote:On June 30 2011 14:55 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 14:44 nemo14 wrote:
[quote]
Exactly. What is the homeowner supposed to do, turn the lights on and ask the intruder what his intentions are and whether he has any weapons? When it's two in the morning and a stranger is creeping through your house, it is time to shoot first and ask questions later. No law should restrict a person's right to defend their last place of refuge. What about incapacitating the intruder? Are the only options for you hide or kill? Is there nothing in between? Just give him a nice little smack with a frying pan or whatever blunt object you have ready and then call the police and the ambulance. Deadly force should always be the last option after every other option fails and someone who considers it his first and only option and a natural right needs some psychological assistance imho. For some reason your country tag makes me giggle about your response. Seriously though why should the burden fall on the victim to minimize the danger the criminal may be in? Granted crime and violent crime in Germany is most likely less than in the states, but hitting some one with a frying pan that potentially has a gun isn't exactly high on my list, I find that .45 acp injected from my 1911 wisens them up Non sensical. You are afraid to hit burgular with gun, but not afraid to shoot him? If he is in range so are you, or are you willing to risk your life because you belive your a superior gunman compared to him? It's about incapacitating them in the safest way possible. That would be a gun. And yes, I do believe I know my house better than any burglar. What is your solution? Run? That is not an option when you have a family. Actually because i live in a nation where getting a personal gun is so hard I dont have the option to shoot the burglar, but if i did I still belive pretending to be asleep and calling police quietly is the safest option. That's safe, but you'll likely never see your shit again. Do you have insurance for that? I rather hope the police to catch him than try to shoot a man i didnt club, because i assumed he had a gun. Besides, there is a reason why death penalty isnt allowed in most western areas, i find no reason why we should be allowed to kill someone even if they are doing a crime if tje state isnt allowed to, especially if like you said there are safer options. I never said shoot him, I just said if you want to keep your stuff you need to confront the burglar. The police are not going to catch him, its just naive to think they will. If you're a police officer, and someone tells you their home was robbed, whats your next move? You might check for finger prints, which is useless if they wore gloves, and you'll ask them if they had any enemies. That's about it. Maybe ask some pawn shops what they bought recently. There's not much else they can do. Murderers are generally easier to catch because there's a much greater chance for forensic evidence, and there's usually a motive and relationship between the victim and perpetrator. Burglars generally just randomly pick a house that looks like it has some good shit in it. Also, the law doesn't say you can kill someone who is committing a crime, it says you can kill someone to defend yourself. Buddha said you can defend yourself. Can you grasp that? Mother fucking Buddha! Maybe that well put in perspective the level of crazy your spewing. How do i confront a guy with a guy while being safe? And like i said to other guy defendimg property =/= self defense. Also i ment i would call the policee when they are inside my house, people dont run fast with tvs in theyre bag.
Do they drive fast with tv's in their car? Anyway, concerning defense of property, you guys can do what you wan't, but in English legal tradition, and by extension American legal tradition, a person has the right to defend both themselves and their property. That's just how we generally see things, because we've historically had to defend our property from those wishing to take it, much more so than other cultures have. Look at our history. There's a reason English, Canadian, American, and Australian people care more about this kind of stuff more than other people. That's not to speak for everyone in those countries, just that the populations in those countries trend more towards such ideas.
|
On June 30 2011 17:52 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:48 Bleak wrote:
I think if someone breaks into your home at night and if you have a gun, you should first warn him to leave your house and force him to give your belongings back. If he does not comply, if he attacks you, and if he is unarmed/carries a melee weapon, you may shot him in the leg or so to immobilise him. Then, call the police.
However, if the guy is armed with a firearm, I believe you should shoot him. Doing otherwise would be taking a big risk.
In any case, if you are in panic, can't think straight due to fear/adrenalin, and if you shoot burglar, that is still lawful.
Sad to see the Americans caring more about their plasmas than the life of an individual. I have heard that in some places asking people directions in U.S is dangerous as people think you are a trespasser or sth. Americans only care for money and property. Never happening. Firing a handgun is difficult enough when you are perfectly calm, aiming for center mass, and have time to put your sights on the target. When your adrenaline is spiking because someone just broke into your house who may or may not be carrying a weapon? Good luck, it's not going to happen. Do not underestimate what stress does to your body. Trained people have a hard enough time aiming at a LARGE target under stress and most people simply aren't trained in stress inoculation. Keep in mind that I completely agree that you should announce yourself and tell the burglar to get the hell out of the house. For me though? He gets one chance. If he doesn't start leaving I am shooting. Reaction gets beating by pro action every single time so if he's hiding some weapon in his waist band then I better act first.
Agreed 100%, it would be unrealistic to think you could target a limb under the effects of stress and adrenaline, especially with low light visibility. It may not even work to immobilize him.
Look at what it took to trained police to stop this guy http://concealedcarryholsters.org/fbi-analysis-on-pa-police-shootout/
Warning: The the pics in the PDF are definitely NSFW
|
On June 30 2011 18:21 zdra wrote:
How did this thread end up about America?.. The law is being past in the UK, Hardly anyone in the UK has a gun in there own home, and most burglar will also not have a gun in most cases they will run once they see you or an alarm goes off. This law just means that in the case they do no run you can defend yourself without going to prison. Also is if they intended to kill your possessions when they know you are in the house
Because the legal system in america is much more interesting topic than a law that allows you to do the stupidest thing ever which is getting in melee range of a burglar.
|
On June 30 2011 18:22 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:58 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:
[quote]
Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal. Uh what kind of hypothetical nonsense is this? What if a comet hits my house and kills everyone inside? Problem is solved that way too. What if that second burglar is going to shoot or stab REGARDLESS of what I do? Sorry this argument doesn't really work well at all. Again it's not even the property. I can replace that. I just stated that it is worth more than the guy breaking into my house...frankly. Conversely said burglar could completely avoid getting shot by not BREAKING INTO MY HOUSE. I alredy anwsered the if parts to other guy read that. But i will tell you why your last sentace is stupid. Well its because you could use the same argument in every situation. Example would you be ok of law that allows you to shoot anyone who insaults you bevause they could avoid being shot by not insaulting you.
No you can't. Want to know why?
By using common sense. That aside there is no law that states I can shoot someone for insulting me so your argument just went out the window on that basis alone.
Really do you actually think what you typed somehow brings about a logical conclusion or even makes sense? Insulting me does not actually threaten my well being. Breaking into my house, especially at night, potentially does. Ergo my reaction to someone breaking into my house is going to be a lot more forceful than someone who insults me... This isn't a slippery slope here guy.
|
people just need to stop being U.H.s
|
On June 30 2011 18:10 smokeyhoodoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:48 Bleak wrote:
I think if someone breaks into your home at night and if you have a gun, you should first warn him to leave your house and force him to give your belongings back. If he does not comply, if he attacks you, and if he is unarmed/carries a melee weapon, you may shot him in the leg or so to immobilise him. Then, call the police.
However, if the guy is armed with a firearm, I believe you should shoot him. Doing otherwise would be taking a big risk.
In any case, if you are in panic, can't think straight due to fear/adrenalin, and if you shoot burglar, that is still lawful.
Sad to see the Americans caring more about their plasmas than the life of an individual. I have heard that in some places asking people directions in U.S is dangerous as people think you are a trespasser or sth. Americans only care for money and property. Don't be a tool, you just expressed the opinion of most Americans. "In any case, if you are in panic, can't think straight due to fear/adrenalin, and if you shoot burglar, that is still lawful." Yep, that's what its all about. Benefit of the doubt should go to the homeowner because no one else was in the situation they were in. Asking directions in the U.S. is fine. Please come here before you spout any more shit about us.
Don't get offended, i am aware there are idiots and geniuses in every society, it's just something I've heard that seemed funny to me. What I am trying to say is that (and I have heard it from Americans who live in Turkey) is that they are much more closed in terms of their personal space. My college teacher has talked about this before but it is really off topic.
So you wake up, realise that there is a burglar at your home, you grab your gun and move as silently as possible,. You find burglar the sitting room, checking the stuff around. He is not aware of you, his back is turned to you, you don't care he is armed or not and shoot the guy in torso with 4 bullets. Poor bastard dies right there.
Do you think this would constitute a proportional and necessary self defence case?
|
On June 30 2011 18:22 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:58 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 17:54 Sea_Food wrote:On June 30 2011 17:37 Jayme wrote:On June 30 2011 15:47 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:41 OsoVega wrote:On June 30 2011 15:32 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:23 Gheed wrote:On June 30 2011 15:20 Morfildur wrote:On June 30 2011 15:12 nemo14 wrote:
[quote]
Have you ever tried to "incapacitate" someone? It is a hell of a lot less reliable than the movies make it look. A gun, however, requires considerably less finesse/luck to remove a threat from the equation. Yes, but that potential thread has a high chance of being dead after that. Well, maybe it's really the country as the poster before you suggests, but i would never, ever use force that has the potential of being deadly. When in doubt, i'd rather die and let the murderer rot in prison later than risk killing someone who never was a threat in the first place. You'd rather die then kill someone that was trying to kill you? That's some pretty hardcore turning of the other cheek. Do you have kids? Family? People who like you? I'm pretty sure they'd value your life more than that of some asshole burglar. If i'd kill someone only to later find out that he never was a threat (i.e. was unarmed), i couldn't live with it anyways and probably end up killing myself because of that. Unless the person is actively shooting at me or trying to stab me (in which case i'd probably already be dead), deadly force is not an option for me, no matter who the other person is. Criminals don't just become criminals because they are born evil, they have a life too. Some of them even have a wife and children. Their life is in no way worth less than mine just because they got on the wrong path somewhere. There are lots of options to scare intruders away or incapacitate them. What if someone was holding a fake gun to your family. Would you feel bad over killing them? That is no different than someone who breaks into your house. They are putting themselves into a threatening position in which they have the potential to kill and it is not up to you to take the risk of assuming that they don't. The typical strawman argument... No, i still wouldn't use deadly force. Anyways, that situation is totally unrelated to this thread as a burglary usually doesn't turn into an hostage situation. If it does, give him what he wants and later call the police and get your stuff back and that guy into prison. If your property is worth more than a human life, your priorities are really messed up.
Yes my property is worth more than the asshole that broke into my house and is jacking my shit. There, I said it. I also completely believe it. That's not the real issue though. The real issue though is that some guy that just committed a felony is inside my house at night uninvited. I have no clue what the guy breaking into my house intends to do and I refuse to risk my family on a maybe. If the guy is in my house at night, and he shouldn't be, I honestly have no qualms with killing him. People who break into houses are not good people. Trust me. As a Police officer I really admire your confidence in the police but the real fact of the matter is that house burglary victims rarely get their stuff back. Most of the time they depend on insurance to take care of it. That aside I am far more worried about my family than my stuff and I will use lethal force to protect them without a second thought. They are too important to risk otherwise. What if you go searching for the burglar your gun up, then the burglar you did not see, or even a secong burglar you did not know were there kills you because they were afraid? Who then is left to defend your family? Just because you felt your property is worth more than life of a criminal. Uh what kind of hypothetical nonsense is this? What if a comet hits my house and kills everyone inside? Problem is solved that way too. What if that second burglar is going to shoot or stab REGARDLESS of what I do? Sorry this argument doesn't really work well at all. Again it's not even the property. I can replace that. I just stated that it is worth more than the guy breaking into my house...frankly. Conversely said burglar could completely avoid getting shot by not BREAKING INTO MY HOUSE. I alredy anwsered the if parts to other guy read that. But i will tell you why your last sentace is stupid. Well its because you could use the same argument in every situation. Example would you be ok of law that allows you to shoot anyone who insaults you bevause they could avoid being shot by not insaulting you.
His last sentence wasn't stupid, your response to it is a fallacy. You are equating breaking into someone's house and posing a potential danger to them and their family with insulting him. You cannot equate things across orders of magnitude.
|
On June 30 2011 18:09 dapanman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2011 17:14 partisan wrote:On June 30 2011 17:08 KryptoStorm wrote:
Looks like every american TeamLiquidan owns a gun! Have you ever been to the states? There's a reason why we have the highest murder rate in the world. Not even close.
Ok, 2nd highest of first world countries 
|
there better be 50 percent rise in stabbed burglars over there you limey pussy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
