• 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!

Masked gunman killed after shootout in Lauderhill home invasion

Poor people in poor neighborhoods can't afford that.



I'm not so sure of that. A pistol could easily cost $500. You can get a dog from the pound, a burglar alarm sign and some locks for the same or even less. A lot to do with security is just remembering to secure your home at all entry points.
 
I'm not so sure of that. A pistol could easily cost $500. You can get a dog from the pound, a burglar alarm sign and some locks for the same or even less. A lot to do with security is just remembering to secure your home at all entry points.

My family has steel roll down shutters on all windows in Phoenix. Plenty of Mexican gangs around. :shock:
 
So? Isnt it best left up to those who know their own circumstances and risks to decide what is best for them and not strangers or the govt?

Being entitled to home defense, the keeping of firearms in the home to protect family....what new laws would change what you 'described' in your post?



“So? Isnt it best left up to those who know their own circumstances and risks to decide what is best for them and not strangers or the govt?”

“Being entitled to home defense, the keeping of firearms in the home to protect family....what new laws would change what you 'described' in your post?”

It is more a matter of public attitude changes as a result of unacceptable experience that bring about change in law and culture/practices that improve poor experience of whatever kind. In this case, death and injury caused by firearm. Gun laws to do with public safety that correlate with improved experience in turn help shape public attitude/opinion to some extent.
 
Last edited:
And when they break in anyway? Then what?

Many gun owners have all those things as well. I do. Except for the burglar alarm sign. But I also have other preparations.




“And when they break in anyway? Then what?”

“Many gun owners have all those things as well. I do. Except for the burglar alarm sign. But I also have other preparations.”


If all guns on premises are locked-up in a secured gun safe whenever the owner is away, obviously, there would be much less likelihood of an innocent killed or injured by a gun from that home. While that’s an exception, if the gun is left available to the owner while at home for self-defense, it would also then be available to others. The majority of burglaries or casual theft are committed by people known to someone in the home.
 
I'm not so sure of that. A pistol could easily cost $500. You can get a dog from the pound, a burglar alarm sign and some locks for the same or even less. A lot to do with security is just remembering to secure your home at all entry points.

Has it ever dawned on you that It's really none of your damn business how anyone chooses to defend themselves?
 
I am pleased to know that there is one less bad guy preying on innocent people.

Glad to know that a gun saved the homeowner's life.

(P.S. For lovers of the English language, I do not think that I can say, "... one fewer bad guy ….")
 
Why should other people be forced to play odds that *you* find acceptable? You (and it can also be the general 'you') are not the one(s) that will suffer our consequences when the odds dont go in our favor.

I'm not saying you believe that something should be forced by law...but if not, then what is the purpose of your posts?



“Why should other people be forced to play odds that *you* find acceptable? You (and it can also be the general 'you') are not the one(s) that will suffer our consequences when the odds dont go in our favor.”

“I'm not saying you believe that something should be forced by law...but if not, then what is the purpose of your posts?”

You don’t bother doing any research to back up what you say, do you?

What I find acceptable are what the facts support. When public safety is a concern, then others may not be allowed certain practices that are the concern of such public safety.

For the yrs 2003 – 2007, hshld burglaries ending in homicide made up 0.004% of all burglaries during that period, or about 86 per yr.

Michael Moore flubs stats on people killed with guns during home invasions | PunditFact

From 2002 – 2014, unintentional deaths by firearm for children alone was about 78 each yr.

Guns kill nearly 1,300 US children each year - CNN

From 2006-2016, almost 6,885 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings. About 626 per yr over 11 yrs.

Examining Accidental Shooting Death Statistics

The purpose of my posting is to get the facts straight, that the prevalence of guns in our society does more bad than good and that gun law that focuses on public safety lowers death by firearm and does not result in any corresponding increase in death by other cause.

What is your purpose for what you post in this matter?
 
No, eveyone in my household is safer with guns in the house than without.



That's what you think. What is known, the fact of statistics, say otherwise. If you take the measures that maximize safety, then you considerably lower the likelihood of an innocent dying or being injured by firearm. Still, less than 100 deaths a year occur due to burglary, though I don't know how many of those deaths are the burglar. Many more deaths are innocents.
 
That's what you think. What is known, the fact of statistics, say otherwise. If you take the measures that maximize safety, then you considerably lower the likelihood of an innocent dying or being injured by firearm. Still, less than 100 deaths a year occur due to burglary, though I don't know how many of those deaths are the burglar. Many more deaths are innocents.

I'll paraphrase Lursa: that's a decision for me to make, not a decision for you to make for me. Sound fair?
 
So? Isnt it best left up to those who know their own circumstances and risks to decide what is best for them and not strangers or the govt?

Being entitled to home defense, the keeping of firearms in the home to protect family....what new laws would change what you 'described' in your post?

“So? Isnt it best left up to those who know their own circumstances and risks to decide what is best for them and not strangers or the govt?”

“Being entitled to home defense, the keeping of firearms in the home to protect family....what new laws would change what you 'described' in your post?”

It is more a matter of public attitude changes as a result of unacceptable experience that bring about change in law and culture/practices that improve poor experience of whatever kind. In this case, death and injury caused by firearm. Gun laws to do with public safety that correlate with improved experience in turn help shape public attitude/opinion to some extent.

You didnt answer my other question. Because then that would better inform your attempt at the answer to the second.

Can you, please?
 
“And when they break in anyway? Then what?”

“Many gun owners have all those things as well. I do. Except for the burglar alarm sign. But I also have other preparations.”


If all guns on premises are locked-up in a secured gun safe whenever the owner is away, obviously, there would be much less likelihood of an innocent killed or injured by a gun from that home. While that’s an exception, if the gun is left available to the owner while at home for self-defense, it would also then be available to others. The majority of burglaries or casual theft are committed by people known to someone in the home.

So my life should be placed more at risk, with laws that force me to keep my self-defense firearm locked up and inaccessible if there is a break in?

Why are other people's lives more valuable than mine or other gun owners that make choices in our own best interests, knowing our circumstances best? Please answer, because this is exactly what you response implied.
 
Why should other people be forced to play odds that *you* find acceptable? You (and it can also be the general 'you') are not the one(s) that will suffer our consequences when the odds dont go in our favor.

I'm not saying you believe that something should be forced by law...but if not, then what is the purpose of your posts?
You don’t bother doing any research to back up what you say, do you?

What I find acceptable are what the facts support. When public safety is a concern, then others may not be allowed certain practices that are the concern of such public safety.

Again, you dont answer direct questions directly. Please answer mine and I will respond further. I have done and read loads of research on the subject.

Why do you believe that you or the govt are entitled to decide for everyone what fits their lives and security risks? As if one size fits all? Where is the personal liberty that this country is based on, that you would place others at a disadvantage, literally deciding that our lives are less valuable?

It's not true of course, because you cant predict or save the gun owners OR the non-gun owners with your preferences, but your preferences indicate which you value more.
 
That's what you think. What is known, the fact of statistics, say otherwise. If you take the measures that maximize safety, then you considerably lower the likelihood of an innocent dying or being injured by firearm. Still, less than 100 deaths a year occur due to burglary, though I don't know how many of those deaths are the burglar. Many more deaths are innocents.

you're absolutely wrong: the anti gun "researchers" use homes where there have been shootings, even if the shootings were facilitated by guns that were brought to the homes by a non-occupant. Then then extrapolate that to other homes. They don't factor out things such as drug abuse, alcohol abuse, or engaging in other criminal behavior-which is a huge factor for gun shot injuries. They also intermix suicides with actual violent crimes.
 
I'm not so sure of that. A pistol could easily cost $500. You can get a dog from the pound, a burglar alarm sign and some locks for the same or even less. A lot to do with security is just remembering to secure your home at all entry points.

10 Cheap Guns Under $250
 
A Lauderhill homeowner traded gunfire with a masked intruder and killed the assailant early Saturday, police said.
Officers responded to the home in the 4400 block of Northwest 16th Street after a 911 call about 12:45 a.m. They found a dead man and a weapon.
“There was a masked gunman on the floor, deceased,” said Lt. Michael Santiago, spokesman for Lauderhill police.


Masked gunman killed after shootout in Lauderhill home invasion - South Florida Sun-Sentinel

Michigan...

A man was fatally shot after he broke into a Manistee County home with a knife and assaulted the occupants inside, according to Michigan State Police.
On Dec. 22 at 1:30 p.m. troopers were sent to a report of a home invasion and shooting on 1st Street in Copemish.
MSP said a 29-year-old Copemish man, identified as Nathan Reed, forced his way into a house while brandishing a knife when a man and woman were inside.
There was a physical struggle and one of the occupants shot Reed with a firearm.
Police said Reed died at the scene from gunshot injuries.


MSP: Man armed with knife shot, killed by homeowners during home invasion | News | wnem.com

Violent home invasion appears to be an extremely dangerous career choice.

I truly hope he died slowly and as painfully as possible.
 
Yes, did you ?

Can you explain how she was shot dead even though she had a gun in the house ?

Please quote from the article where she had a gun in the house.
 
Please consider how her husband shot her if there was NOT a gun in the house.

Maybe he stashed it in a secret place ?

Very doubtful that you read the article you posted.

Start with the fact she wasn't shot in her house.
 
Back
Top Bottom