It's People AND Guns that kill people

Great Debates
161

The problem is that the anti-gun types don’t understand that collecting guns is not different than collecting stamps, or baseball cards, or vintage movies, or used ladies underwear…

Uh…

Anyways, to them it’s a weapon. Period. No justification, no excuses, no reasoning will sway them.

I actually had a co-worker, when I told her of a friends Vintake WWI rifle, she said it was dangerous because someone could enter the house, and load the weapon with cartridges they brought with them (he had no ammo himself. for him, it was a wallpiece.) and shoot someone.

162

In the interests of full disclosure, I’m pretty much an “anti-gun type” but I have what is, I hope, a pretty innocent question.

In most of the scenarios described here, the homeowner hears a noise, sneaks up on the intruder and then the scene unfolds.

Why shouldn’t it go like this… Owner hears noise, gets gun, yells really loud, “I’ve called the police. I have a gun and I will use it. I suggest you leave now.” Then stay in the bedroom. If burglar attempts further entry, then shoot.

In other words, why sneak up? Why not be loud and clear?

163

Your scenario is plausible emulsified, and I think that some states laws say you must do something like this prior to using deadly force. However, this guy/kid is in your house uninvited, so why not get the drop on them? YMMV.

164

In the interests of full disclosure, I am not either “pro-gun” nor “anti-gun”.

I have owned and used guns all of my life. But I also have used hammers, saws, purses, refridgerator, and can openers all of my life. I do not consider m yself to be “pro-purse”, “pro-hammer”, nor “pro-refridgerator”. Frankly, I dont understand how anyone can be against guns, hammers, or refridgerators, they are nothing but tools, and inanimate objects.

Anyways, to answer your question, if the situation allows it
(no imminent danger of the situation drastically worsening, and no chance at all for that particular bad guy to come back when I am not as well prepared), then there is nothing wrong with giving out a warning, and letting the bad guy/criminal/intruder decide if he wants to die, or go free to pick on somebody else who is not well armed.

I have done this more than once: point a gun at a criminal and demand that he cease and desist, and let him leave.

I will let others determine if what I did was moral or not(i.e. letting a criminal go free to harm others who do not carry guns). I had my own particular reasons at the time in those 2 instances to not kill nor arrest. It is not my job for me to protect “anti-gun” people, nor to eliminate criminals who harm unarmed people. Even if thses 2 bad guys were arrested by the police, and even if he was put in jail, it would only be months, or a few short years, before they both would be out again anyways to harm unarmed people, so any effort by me to put them in jail for a few months would only be a very temporary effect in the great scheme of things.

In both cases, those 2 bad guys avoided me like the plague from that point on, never had another problem with those 2 .

165

I thought we were laboring under the assumption the little bastard had a knife? If I believe that to be the case, there ain’t no way I’m getting near enough to him use a lousy stun gun.

And I don’t have any golf clubs.

166

I’ll back up what pk says about getting sued. When I took my CCL in Texas, my instructor took some time emphasizing the point that, even if you’re square in the eyes of the law, the family of your justifiably dead victim will be getting phone calls from personal injury lawyers before the perp’s body gets to the morgue.

Win or lose (and if your shooting is legally justifiable by law, they’ll probably lose, at least in Texas; YMMV), the lawyer(s) still win, as you still have to shell out for a lawyer, as well, and appear in court for a wrongful death civil suit.

I’m pretty sure that beats being dead, severely injured, or raped six-ways-to-Sunday. But added to the stress of a home invasion and lethal shooting, it’s another aggravation you won’t be in any kind of mental or emotional shape to put up with.

Bottom line: when you pick up a gun, you have an incredible amount of power in your hands. Most [American] gun owners realize that, and almost all criminals do, too. The real difference between the two is that the first understands that power, and knows that with power comes responsibility, and behave accordingly; the second only cares that that power allows them to compel others to obey them towards the end of satisfying their own selfish, harmful and destructive desires.

BTW, Phoenix, I totally agree with your sig line.

“Gunner! HEAT! Sniper!” is a much better expenditure of ammunition.

Besides, Armor already violates Murphy’s 3rd Law of Combat: “Don’t look conspicuous, it draws fire.” So if you’re de facto in violation of Murphy just by existing, why not violate a few more?

Nobody ever said us tankers were a subtle, or particulalry intelligent lot.