View Single Post
Old 09-15-2015, 09:03 PM
Esox Lucius is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Depends on whether he used low-penetration ammo like hollowpoints or not. In any case he fired once and hit his target; no problem.

Are you trying to claim this wasn't a legitimate use of a gun?
I'm claiming that a no-guns rule in an apartment building is a no-brainer. The landlord has to consider the safety of all tenants. It shouldn't need to be pointed out to you that he can't depend on random people to use good sense in handling weapons in their apartments.

Let's see if this was legitimate use of a gun:
--The article doesn't say, but it looks like Harvey Lembo didn't take a course in gun safety, something that's promoted regularly by gun owners as a prerequisite for responsible gun use. Instead of knocking this guy for irresponsibly neglecting to take a course, you're lauding him as a good example. What makes him different?

--With no threat of death or injury to himself, he shot at a moving target in an apartment without considering the danger of accidentally shooting someone next door. Hitting the intruder sounded more like dumb luck than anything. Lembo himself said, "Just barely missed the side of the wall." Explain that as responsible gun use.

--Lembo's frustration is understandable, but there's no mention in the article that he took any measures to prevent break-ins other than getting a gun. What about the maxim that guns should only be used as a last line of defence? That's one of the few statements from gun owners that I wholeheartedly agree with because it acknowledges the serious consequences of using guns. Lembo was oblivious to those consequences.
He didn't show himself to be responsible at all. I can't believe that you, who presumably advocates responsible gun use, are supporting him.