Well, gee, Debaser, dumb ol’ Diogenes didn’t have any problem figuring it out, and we both know he’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer. So what’s your prob, Bob?
Huh? You’re kidding, right? There hasn’t been a single gun thread in this forum, ever, that hasn’t turned into a MASSIVE pro-gun pile-on. Also, I wouldn’t really call the article “pro-2nd Amendment”; it’s actually giving an opinion that the law wasn’t effective. Saying, “this law didn’t work” is not equivalent to saying", “I believe the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to own assault weapons”. That actually has nothing to do with the article.
OK, we’ve sorted out that “defensive violence” is OK. Now, what or who gets to decide after the fact that the “defensive violence” was at an appropriate level? What happens if the “defensive violence” was not violent enough, and you get maimed/crippled/“vegetated”/killed by the perp?
I maintain that the home owner or burglary/robbery victim should get to decide whether lethal or nonlethal force (or the threat of it) should be used. Further, that person should not be second guessed after the fact. This is not a game where you get to elevate the situation in a piecemeal fashion or in prearranged stages. The baddies won’t play by your rules. So, let’s all just throw the rules out. How do you know he’s just after your stuff? Maybe he’s a rapist or killer. Maybe he’ll kill you for not having enough money or stuff. Care to take the chance to find out?
All this gun/nongun/violence level/rights of criminals - It’s all mental masturbation and bull shit. Someone breaks in, sneaks in, forces his way in, you smash/stomp/stab/shoot/whatever you can do. You don’t worry about the law or anything else until later.
I would invite you to take up your petition for an unrestrained right to kill anyone and everyone who enters your home with your congressman. perhaps you can succeed in persuading him that actual self-defense is an unreasonably high standard for the justification of deadly force. I don’t think you’ll get very far. For the record, I will oppose you.
Oppose all you want. It’s a free country. If there were ever a nationwide vote or referendum, we would just cancel each other out. If anyone is in my home that I don’t know, and he’s uninvited, it’s his ass. I won’t stop to ask what he’s doing, or whether he is only after my stuff, I’ll just flatten him. I doubt any cops would be too heartbroken about it - they never were in the past when I stomped someone. Hell, they thought it was funny.
Thanks for dispelling the perception that gun nuts sit around all day, stroking their firearms and daydreaming about getting a chance to shoot someone.
He probably gets a rock-hard boner thinking about it, too.
Johnny said everything I was going to say (but much nicer). Your open-ended post made it sound like you just call up Shotgun News and ponyed up the cash and instantly got Class III parts and accessories. 'Tain’t so. 'Tain’t anything likle that. I’m not and FFL dealer, but can order through Shotgun News; I have to make arrangements with a local FFL dealer to arrange shipping and transfer documents, as well as background checks. It’s not like ordering a stereo from Sears & Roebuck.
As for clips, since the lapse of the AWB, most people can buy them at their local gun store much more easily than mail-order (local variances apply), but not all gun stores stock such items, or want to hastle with ordering stuff for customers, so many are left resorting to on-line and mail-order sources.
Tell the whole story, not just a selectively abbreviated version of it.
Yeah right. I used a baseball bat and work shoes, and he was sure happy to see the cops, to get away from me. You want to register or outlaw bats and shoes too, numbnuts? After a rash of thefts, suddenly it all stopped, and never happened again. The robberies and burglaries (amazingly) came to a dead halt for the entire rest of the block too. Hmmm. I wonder if there is a connection. And no, I don’t stroke all the guns that I don’t have.
You had a baseball bat. What did he have?
What did he have? What difference does that make? He was in my place, taking my things - for the SECOND TIME. I didn’t wait to see if he had anything, and I didn’t care. Fuck him if he did have something, it would have been very bad for him.
So, nothing then? Such courage. You must be very proud.
Let’s see now-I gave a direct link to a great pro-gun site that tells you what is available out there, which items are available to the unlicensed public and which are available to licensed dealers, all without editorial comment about the Second Amendment, criminals, “gun nuts” etc. When it was rightly pointed out that I didn’t give specific information about class 3 licenses, I posted another link to another great pro-gun site that gave information on the requirements for said license and the low cost of said license, again without editorial comment. For this, you think I am a detriment to the SDMB and ought to be fired from my job as moderator(to put it very, very mildly).
Besides posting links to sites that support your position and telling people that they should go to these websites to get firsthand information, what the flying fuck have I done to incur your holy wrath?
I’d use a baseball bat against an intruder in my home anytime. What should I do, cower in the closet till he leaves? I wouldn’t kill him, but I’d certainly injure him enough so that I could restrain him while I called the cops.
And in my state, if he and I were both unlucky enough that I did kill him (with the first blow, not by beating on him for half an hour), I am explicitly allowed by law to use deadly force to protect my person and property inside my home.
What? An intruder comes in his house and you want to even the odds? An intruder deserves a fair fight?
Why bother to have laws at all? If you can pass judgement on the spot, find the offender guilty and dispense instant justice…why bother with all these rules and the vexations of law? After all, this fellow broke the law, didn’t he? Somebody who breaks the law surrenders his humanity, he’s fair game, right? Got a little streak of sadism itching for an outlet, well, there you go! Things get a little out of hand, maybe you kill the guy, its not like he’s people, or anything.
Say, anybody know where Ken Lay lives?
Well, you can have a nice civillized chat with the miscreant who breaks into your house. I’m sure he’ll be receptive to that kind of thing.
Were you born on that moral highground or did you have to work your way up there?
If someone breaks into my house, be him an unarmed crackhead looking to steal my DVD player or a ruthless, coldblooded killer, I’m going to fuck him up. Period. And I am not a bad person for doing so.
I’ve met some people seemed like they were born good, don’t have to work at it. I’m not one of them, most likely neither are you.
Let me see if I can break this down for you, and maybe gracefully kill this hijack with my fingerprints all over it.
You got a baseball bat just sitting around, or maybe you got it as a weapon, whatever. So far nothing, no hurt, no foul. Intruder alert, you take hold of the baseball bat as a defensive weapon, right on the beam so far. You have every right to protect yourself. Maybe you even pop him one, just to be sure he’s no threat, you got kids in the house, like that. Long as you’re doing it 'cause you have to, got no issues.
But at the point he ceases to present a viable threat, you start wailing on him, you cross from defensive to aggressive. You can’t claim violence for the sake of protection, your violence isn’t a necessary evil, just evil. Violence against someone helpless to resist, for whatever reason, is no good. Not no kind of no good, it stinks, don’t do it.
I don’t see anything radically pacifist. The real pacifists I’ve known would criticize my position as a half-assed committment to ahimsa, leaving myself a trap door so I can temporarily change my mind, and resume my committment to non-violence after I’ve washed my hands. Their argument has merit.
The police in your town do limit themselves to the use of sweet reason to convince thieves of the error of their ways?
Sorry, but the fact is that you benefit from society’s willingness to use force to protect property.