• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Burglar armed with claw hammer meets homeowner armed with gun

iguanaman said:
Funny but I think the guy with the gun was the lucky one. He would have been dead if the thief had a gun and fired back at him. That's why having a gun makes you more likely to get shot. Those who live by the gun die by the gun alot more times than you would like toi admit.
Click to expand...

And if he had not had a gun, the best he could hope for is not getting beat to death with a claw hammer. Most of those with guns getting shot you use as an example are also the pinheads that would not think twice about dropping you or me where we stand. So I am not worried about my gun causing me to get shot by someone else as I am not a thug who "lives by the gun". Care to show me some actual data to back up your pacifism? You are correct though concerning the shooter. He was incredibly lucky. Next time he will think twice about taking care of his firearms properly.
 
iguanaman said:
Actually I was thinking of the people that shoot through the front door. It seems that it is hard to control yourself with all that adrenaline pumping and a gun in your hand. That and the fact that you are FINALLY going to get to use that weapon and you don't want to miss the chance.
Click to expand...

My wife did just fine with all that adrenaline. Perhaps your tolerance level is a bit low and you should not own firearms.
 
iguanaman said:
No kidding...But look what happen if you google it
Click to expand...

For what it is worth, I would say each of these individuals should be charged. I don't think anyone here has a problem with that.
 
Cisero said:
1) In case you don't have a gun & want to appear menacing to the homeowner.
2) To check if the homeowner is not home.

If the guy did not leave while the gun was pointed at him, but didn't attack him... what about a warning shot ? I really think you shouldn't shoot people unless they've attacked you.
Click to expand...

Rings the bell for 10 minutes, irate homeowner opens the door, smacked repeatedly with a hammer.
 
iguanaman said:
Like I said, the homeowner is risking his own life by pretending not to be home. So I guess if he gets shot he is also getting what he deserves? That's why having a gun makes you more likely to be shot in a confrontation with criminals.
Click to expand...

the fundamental flaw in your reasoning is this..... the homeowners is not risking his life at all... the perp is risking the life of the homeowner with his actions, and that's why it's legally and morally permissible to stop the threat.


tactically speaking, warning an intruder away is fine, as long as he is still outside ( though i wouldn't do so with a verbal warning... turning the porch light on and off is preferable).... once entry is gained, it's incredibly stupid to give away your position with any warnings at all....the time for warnings is since past, and it's now time to defend yourself with superior force.
 
iguanaman said:
Actually I was thinking of the people that shoot through the front door. It seems that it is hard to control yourself with all that adrenaline pumping and a gun in your hand. That and the fact that you are FINALLY going to get to use that weapon and you don't want to miss the chance.
Click to expand...

Oh, like Biden. Most people aren't as stupid as him. If there is a case for gun control it is Biden. Maybe he is that stupid on purpose.
5 of the Most Absurd Gun Comments from Joe Biden - Yahoo News
Well, the way in which we measure it is--I think most scholars would say--is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense. I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, "Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there's the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself."

I said, "Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door." Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semi-automatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming. We can argue whether that's true or not, but it is no argument that, for example, a shotgun could do the same job of protecting you.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom