• 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!

Teen shot to death during home invasion

WillRockwell said:
Hitler was trying to "cleanse the gene pool".
Click to expand...

Hitler tried to purify the gene pool. I'm only suggesting that we prevent it, through matural selection, from being polluted.

This guy had plenty of time to call the police, but he decided he didn't need the police because he had a gun. He was untrained, inexperienced in the behavior of home intruders, and knew nothing except how to pull a trigger.
Click to expand...

Call the police, for what? So they can clean up the mess and tag the bodies if the dude had been a blood thirsty killer?

Do you ever get drunk? You yourself are a dumbass at that moment, and could stumble into a life or death situation without being aware of it. The more freedom people have to take the law into their hands, the more mistakes will be made. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah! Been drunker than a ****house rat; ****ed up like a snake in a lawnmower; higher than a rat on acid; and have never, ever, not even close tried to get into the wrong house, by mistake, or otherwise.
 
WillRockwell said:
Hitler was trying to "cleanse the gene pool".
This guy had plenty of time to call the police, but he decided he didn't need the police because he had a gun. He was untrained, inexperienced in the behavior of home intruders, and knew nothing except how to pull a trigger. Do you ever get drunk? You yourself are a dumbass at that moment, and could stumble into a life or death situation without being aware of it. The more freedom people have to take the law into their hands, the more mistakes will be made. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the first person to bring up Hitler in any thread not about WW2 or Nazi'ism itself, automatically loses and is ignored by everyone. :mrgreen:
 
I'm sorry, but doing 'shrooms does not justify breaking into someone's home and attacking them, as this young man did. When you do stupid crap like this, you may be killed, end of story.

Nor is the aggrieved homeowner obligated to make sure that you are
1. Not intoxicated
2. not mentally ill
3. not off your meds
4. otherwise not in your right mind
...nor is he obligated to wait until some member of his family is actually injured by you. You break and enter, you are very reasonably assumed to be a criminal threat. In my state, if you break and enter you are legally shootable and IMO your absence from society will not be missed greatly.

1. Don't break into houses.
2. Don't do shrooms, or if you're going to lock yourself in at home.

...and you won't get your butt shot off.

End of story.


G
 
Goshin said:
I'm sorry, but doing 'shrooms does not justify breaking into someone's home and attacking them
Click to expand...

The article says the man shot the teen and then the teen attacked.

The teen did not assault the homeowner first, and no braking into the building is not what I'm talking about.

See that's why I question the call. Someone brakes in and is NOT aggressive at all, I might observe the situation more before going all Rambo. I would have the right, but from the way this sounds I don't think I would let my emotions get the better of me and start squeezing the trigger.

Maybe this is where my pro-life side shows in an unrelated topic, but if a trespasser is not aggressive, I'm probably going to stand in the hall way (blocking the bedroom, but I don't know the layout of the homeowners in the article) with my gun at the ready and yes I would call the cops and wait unless attacked. Even if then directly attacked, if I don't think he has a weapon I might still not fire, opting for a quick take-down instead.

Lethal force is authorized, but from the limited information given here I might have used my discretion for less force.

In any event, this story serves as an example of how gluttony is a deadly sin.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
The article says the man shot the teen and then the teen attacked.
Click to expand...

Possibly I misunderstood that part. I still consider B&E to be sufficient cause to shoot, since you don't know the perps intentions. He may have a concealed weapon, he may attempt to get your gun, he may not be alone.



See that's why I question the call. Someone brakes in and is NOT aggressive at all, I might observe the situation more before going all Rambo. I would have the right, but from the way this sounds I don't think I would let my emotions get the better of me and start squeezing the trigger.
Click to expand...


If it is your house, it is your call. I give this man the benefit of the doubt; it is his house and family that were potentially at risk, and I wasn't there when it happened. If you're willing to risk yourself for the sake of someone who breaks into your home, well then God be with you.

G.
 
WillRockwell said:

If the kid thought he was in his own home then I doubt the gun wielding home owner was in much danger. All we have here is another example of how misunderstandings become tragedies when firearms are involved.
Click to expand...





So the homeowner should be a mind reader? Seriously, do you people think before you bring forth this nonensical argument?


What if he wasn't some stupid kid, and instead was a home invader who was thier to rape, steal, maim, and kill?


How would the home owner know.


And this "harmless kid" bit the homeowner as he was in a drug induced rage. Attacking the homeowner as "gun weilding" is weak, and ignorant.
 
WillRockwell said:
Hitler was trying to "cleanse the gene pool".
Click to expand...


GODWIN FAIL

This guy had plenty of time to call the police,
Click to expand...


When the facts don't fit, Will likes to make things up like above.

but he decided he didn't need the police because he had a gun.
Click to expand...

Once upon a time....

He was untrained, inexperienced in the behavior of home intruders, and knew nothing except how to pull a trigger.
Click to expand...


What next? Are you going to make up that he had a machine gun and had blue eyes? You speculate and make it up as you go along. Its pathetic. :lol:


Do you ever get drunk? You yourself are a dumbass at that moment, and could stumble into a life or death situation without being aware of it. The more freedom people have to take the law into their hands, the more mistakes will be made. Congratulations.
Click to expand...



So much for personal responsibility, huh? :roll:
 
Moderator's Warning:
Personal attacks need to cease. Keep the discussion civil without personal commentary or name calling
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
The prohibition of drugs isn't working.
Click to expand...

Well I can guarantee you, legalizing them will increase the STD rate by about 100000000%

Come on by the ER around here sometime. There you get to see what all the wonderful drug people do. Between the dripping penises and oozing vaginas, you might start to think, "How the hell do people on welfare get the money to buy these drugs and then to spend the rest of their days in and out of the ER every other week? Oh I know, they spend their welfare checks on drugs!"

Yeah, legalizing drugs: Dumbest thing I ever heard. Unless of course, you like dripping penises and oozing vaginas on a daily basis.
 
TheHat said:
Well I can guarantee you, legalizing them will increase the STD rate by about 100000000%

Come on by the ER around here sometime. There you get to see what all the wonderful drug people do. Between the dripping penises and oozing vaginas, you might start to think, "How the hell do people on welfare get the money to buy these drugs and then to spend the rest of their days in and out of the ER every other week? Oh I know, they spend their welfare checks on drugs!"

Yeah, legalizing drugs: Dumbest thing I ever heard. Unless of course, you like dripping penises and oozing vaginas on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

If this is actually serious this may be the dumbest post I've seen in ages.

Really, its going to go up 10000000% times? Why is that exactly? Because people **** a lot when they're on drugs? Or are you talking about needles and transfering it through that, something that'd quite possibly be lessoned if things were legalized?

Or please...what drugs cause penis leakage? I'd love to hear which thing has that direct side effect. I'm going to guess it'll not be that big of a seller.
 
Zyphlin said:
If this is actually serious this may be the dumbest post I've seen in ages.

Really, its going to go up 10000000% times? Why is that exactly? Because people **** a lot when they're on drugs? Or are you talking about needles and transfering it through that, something that'd quite possibly be lessoned if things were legalized?
Click to expand...

People excercise poor judgement when they're on drugs.
 
TheHat said:
Well I can guarantee you, legalizing them will increase the STD rate by about 100000000%

Come on by the ER around here sometime. There you get to see what all the wonderful drug people do. Between the dripping penises and oozing vaginas, you might start to think, "How the hell do people on welfare get the money to buy these drugs and then to spend the rest of their days in and out of the ER every other week? Oh I know, they spend their welfare checks on drugs!"

Yeah, legalizing drugs: Dumbest thing I ever heard. Unless of course, you like dripping penises and oozing vaginas on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

You first establish that this happens already, while drugs are illegal. The legal status of drugs is irrelevant to those people, obviously.

BTW, correlation does not causation. Smoking a doobie won't give you the clap.
 
apdst said:
People excercise poor judgement when they're on drugs.
Click to expand...

People exercise poor judgement when they aren't on drugs too. In fact, the have to exercise poor judgement before they decide to take the drug.

Remember, alcohol is a drug.
 
apdst said:
People excercise poor judgement when they're on drugs.
Click to expand...

People exercise poor judgement when they drink alcohol. Did STD's go up 1000000% when prohibition was removed?

People exercise poor judgement when they are sleep deprived. Are truck drivers 1000000% more likely to get STD's?

I could go on if you wish. The fact that people exercise poor judgement when on drugs in no way shape or form even remotely goes on to prove or suggest what he's stating will happen.
 
People exercise poor judgment when they get pissed off by stupid little things, and act aggressively out of frustration. In the all-gun world, more of these people would be shot down by "patriots" before they could explain themselves. That's why law enforcement requires intensive training, and why police departments favor gun control.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
People exercise poor judgement when they aren't on drugs too. In fact, the have to exercise poor judgement before they decide to take the drug.

Remember, alcohol is a drug.
Click to expand...

But they excercise better judgement, as a general rule, if they're not wasted.
 
Zyphlin said:
People exercise poor judgement when they drink alcohol. Did STD's go up 1000000% when prohibition was removed?

People exercise poor judgement when they are sleep deprived. Are truck drivers 1000000% more likely to get STD's?

I could go on if you wish. The fact that people exercise poor judgement when on drugs in no way shape or form even remotely goes on to prove or suggest what he's stating will happen.
Click to expand...

Are STD rates higher among drug addicts?
 
apdst said:
Are STD rates higher among drug addicts?
Click to expand...

Those stats can be misleading to a degree because IV drug users get what is labeled as a STD from sharing needles and not form sexual contact.

The rates of HIV infections for IV drug users would most likely decrease if the drugs were legalized and regulated.

I'm not sure the stats for other STD's but I know HIV infection rates are higher for heroin addicts even though it is not caused by sexual contact.
 
Tucker Case said:
Those stats can be misleading to a degree because IV drug users get what is labeled as a STD from sharing needles and not form sexual contact.

The rates of HIV infections for IV drug users would most likely decrease if the drugs were legalized and regulated.

I'm not sure the stats for other STD's but I know HIV infection rates are higher for heroin addicts even though it is not caused by sexual contact.
Click to expand...

So, STD's are higher among drug addicts? Hepititis too, huh?
 
Tucker Case said:
Yeah! When something clearly doesn't work, the best approach is to do more of it!
Click to expand...

Oh right, because legalizing what we are trying to beat is so much more logical! (do you remember WHY we are trying to stop drugs)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom