Jump to content

Life saving right? You bet!


pz3
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm glad I'm Dutch, not that many guns around here.

In the States, most people killed by guns are victims of accidents, kids finding dad's gun and such. And I can tell you your gun is never hidden well enough, I was a very curios young lad and always knew what Santa had in store for me, no way my parents could hide somethingw ell enough. BAd for me I am no good liar, so my mom could tell by my exitement I had found something I wasn't supposed to..... And my mom would know what to do....give the present to my little brother instead of me...... OUCH!

But back on the guns. Over here burglary is scarce, and most burglers are scared to hell when they hear anything, and almost all burglers over here don't cary a gun, so all they do is whet their pants when they hear someone spotted them. The only people to watch out for are drug addiccts since they can behave different, they know not what they do..... (and one attack in Amsterdam by a drug addict is the only thing ever happened to me exept for stolen bicycles) OK we don't have that many ghetto's, but even there guns are scarce...... so less harm is done. Most people killed in gunfights here were crooks themselves. And that is why I am agains guns in public, with or without license, the only people to wear guns in public should be cops (or robbers....lol) If you see how many kids are killed in the states by gun accidents you cannot be in favor of the right to have em.....

Couldnt be more wrong. Accidental gun deaths result in around 1,000 deaths every year..... Accidental slip and fall accidents at work kill about the same number of people every year aswell.

People that keep pushing this garbage of kids killing themselfs so much really dont take into account how much other stuff really kills people. Like food poisining etc...

About 20,000 murders every year and most in drug/gang bad areas.

and the rest is about 20,000 suicides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Very true Prozac, and don't forget the 2+ million times that guns are drawn in self defense, with some 300,000 discharges in self defense.

@Forrester

My friends that have guns also have kids, but the thing is that all their kids have shot all the guns, so "novelty" has worn off and they now could not care less about the guns. The attitude is that it is just a gun, and "I really don't have any interest in it outside of the gun range". Some of the kids are even a bit bored of it, so there is no danger to the children. If the kids friends are over and they want to see it, then they just invite them to come over another time when dad or mom is home, and they can all go to the gun range and not only see the gun, but actually shoot it.

When handled properly guns are NOT dangerous around children. None of my friends have ever had an accident with their children.

On the topic of shoot now and ask questions later, I would always shoot first. Calling out to a potential criminal is not a smart move. You give your position away. How do you know he is the only one in your house? When you have your attention on him, there may be another person in the room next to you that can take you out when you call out to them.

Sorry, but I'm taking my NV and when I see that he is not someone I know and he does not appear to have any valid reason to be there, I'm taking a headshot. I'm not taking any chance of there being another person, or an entire gang I am not aware of being nearby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of shoot now and ask questions later, I would always shoot first. Calling out to a potential criminal is not a smart move. You give your position away. How do you know he is the only one in your house? When you have your attention on him, there may be another person in the room next to you that can take you out when you call out to them.

Sorry, but I'm taking my NV and when I see that he is not someone I know and he does not appear to have any valid reason to be there, I'm taking a headshot. I'm not taking any chance of there being another person, or an entire gang I am not aware of being nearby.

To me, just the fact that someone would even have NV in their house suggests mild paranoia, that or a serious problem with society if it's normal to expect to need them.

Here, people are in and out of my house all the time, be they relatives, family friends and colleagues, my younger brother's friends, neighbours etc. The few cases locally where people have found intruders, they have scarpered when challenged, and are usually after car keys in order to steal the car outside rather than anything else inside (it's easier and more profitable to sell a stolen car than it is to try and sell a stolen TV for example). My neighbour found someone in his house a while back and chased him out with a golf club and managed to land a few blows on the intruder - net result? Nobody is seriously hurt, nothing was taken and said lowlife has a chance to rethink his life.

Me? I have four dogs in the house, two of whom are fairly large and they all make one hell of a noise if anyone comes to the door. Have we ever had a break in? Nope (touch wood though 0:) ). There was one time when the dogs went crazy so we took a look outside to see someone running down the drive and away. Another time someone who said he was a salesman tried to push through the front door past my mother, only to find one of the said larger dogs on the other side with her - she told him if he tried again or ever came back, she'd set the dogs on him and guess what? Not a dickiebird since.

As far as I'm concerned there's nothing wrong with having a gun in the house if that's your hobby - even over here some people who belong to pistol clubs or who go out shooting may have a pistol or shotgun locked away at home (although it's very much the exception rather than the rule, even amongst people who go shooting for sport). If that's the case and someone does break in, it only makes sense to consider using it if it's close to hand - no different to my neighbour grabbing his golf clubs which happened to be close by at the time. But keeping weapons and other equipment stashed specifically in case of a break in is, to me at least, taking it a bit too far and like I say on the verge of paranoia.

Of course, even by checking out the situation with your NV kit you are 'asking the question mentally' to determine what is actually going on, which is at least better than running out and shooting and whatever moves in case it's a thief! As far as not challenging them for fear of giving away your position, would shooting not also give it away? More than that, you are making it clear that you are a threat to them, so if there are a number of them in certain states of mind they may well all start shooting back - leaving your position known to them and yourself outnumbered and presumably outgunned to boot. I'd personally challenge them anyway as the taking of a human life is not something to be done lightly especially whilst there is still even a small chance of resolving it peacefully or that there may still be a rational explanation to the situation, no matter how crooked a crook they may be. If you point your weapon at them and challenge, they might well give up, if they don't you still have your weapon aimed at them and should be able to get a shot off before they do likewise. I'd also probably feel guilty for not giving him a chance if I were to simply shoot at the first chance I got before challenging him. On the other hand though, if he's running towards you with a gun/knife/bottle/baseball bat/sword/whatever then it's all fair game.

This thread is now getting fairly pointless from my POV so I'll leave it alone - here I have no weapons in my house bar a sword and a few bows - basically nothing extreme, and neither does anybody else nearby and I'm happy with that. Crime is thankfully fairly low and nobody feels the need to turn their house into something akin to a fortress - again, I'm more than happy with that.

What goes on in other parts of the world is up to them and the individuals involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, just the fact that someone would even have NV in their house suggests mild paranoia, that or a serious problem with society if it's normal to expect to need them.

Ever think that some people like to collect things or maybe they even have them for other purposes?

Looks like you are taking a judge first before you ask questions stance here.

I know someone that does research for a university, and he studies noctural creatures, and he has tons of NV gear, I guess that makes him an absolute lunatic.

Dickie, shooting with a suppressor does not give your position away, so AGAIN you have made an assumption and you are incorrect. Go ahead, call out to your intruder, I won't judge you for doing what you feel is right, but you are clearly judging others that have family to protect for taking a different approach.

What ever happened to each their own?

Don't be so self righteous and judge others, we are all adults here, let people make their own choices. Nobody is calling you irresponsible and careless with the lives of your family by potentially letting an assailent kill them, so why can't you just let others take care of their own business?

I don't have a problem with you saying why you personally would call out first, or if you personally have a problem with owning a gun. Last I checked where I live you are free to live your life the way you want, so I don't care how someone decides to protect their home, as long as it does not affect my home.

Dickie, you may have a lot of people coming and going in your home, but don't assume that ti is the same for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know a lot of people with night vision hell I know one guy with a thermal scope.

You can call some one paranoid but it doesn't mean anything.... what you call paranoid some people call smart.

Think about it. I have a hurricane survival kit.... its smart....

now if some one has every thing they need to fight off an abusive government they are paranoid right? It think it sounds like insurance If all else fails. Which so far hasn't completely happened.

Its like why make a nuclear fallout shelter... You might think its paranoia right now but if a nuke goes off and that crap is coming your way you would be happy to have it.

You never know... its always best to have the tools to survive. Even if you may never have to use it in your life time its better safe then sorry right? You know prepare for the worse hope for the best.

Oh an a more practical night vision use for me.... During hurricanes power usaully goes out. So for me protecting my home It would come in quiet handy.

US national gaurd used it to bust looters here one year.... said they could sneak up right behind them and knock them out.

Edited by Prozac360
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In closing from me:

@ Jchung, when you talked about getting your NV kit and finding the intruder, I thought you were implying it was kept for that specific purpose - yes this was an assumption but you did not give any other reason why you had it, so it seemed logical to me.

As far as suppressors go, I will admit I know little of US law - however from comments some of my relatives on your side of the Atlantic have made I was under the impression that suppressors are illegal to own, therefore it was not reasonable to assume you had one from my prior knowledge, if this is not the case then obviously the situation different.

I'm not judging people for taking a different approach - I am commenting on a difference of opinion and trying to understand someone else's point of view by asking questions and offering mine. You are correct, each to their own, I believe I did say to the effect that if you can live with the consequences of your actions then go right ahead (within reason of course).

Re: "Nobody is calling you irresponsible and careless with the lives of your family by potentially letting an assailant kill them, so why can't you just let others take care of their own business?" - this comes across as something of a leading question although we may not be talking about the same circumstances, from my POV this person has obviously already gained access to the house and so far hasn't hurt anybody and isn't visibly armed or acting aggressively, so I'd be prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt to make sure that I'm as certain as I can be that he isn't innocent before I pull that trigger (or whatever). I have said several times though that if he is clearly being threatening (I include being visibly armed here), then he's fair game. As far as letting people take care of their own business, am I stopping you? I'm merely questioning in an effort to understand, as the thought of deliberately keeping firearms and other weapons for the specific purpose of defending my home is somewhat unusual to me (and I suspect, a lot of people over here).

I tried to make the point several times that you can't have a blanket reaction to every situation and that the action you do take depends on the specific situation you are in - so you are right, the 'right thing to do' where I live might not be the same as where you live, or during different times of day, or depending on how the person is acting or dressed etc. That was one of the original points I was trying to make.

@ Prozac - there is a fine line between 'paranoid' and 'smart', it's all to do with proportionality. You have a hurricane survival kit, I seem to recall you saying you live in Florida which as I understand it regularly has bad storms? That's a sensible response. If I were to go out and prepare for a hurricane - bearing in mind that we very rarely get any bad weather - it would not be a sensible response. Just as if you live somewhere where there is a high break-in rate and you think your house might be broken into, maybe buying a firearm for that purpose (as opposed to having one as a hobby) is a sensible idea. On the other hand, if there is no great danger (of course there is always some risk of a break in no matter where you are, but some areas obviously have less of a problem than others) hoarding weapons and body armour isn't really proportional in response to the threat. There is always a 'worst case scenario', but surely it would be more sensible to prepare for the 'worst realistic case scenario'?

As far as fighting off an abusive government goes, that is something that is written into your constitution and society. It is meant as the ultimate safeguard of democracy in your country, and it is logical, in fact England had a very similar system back in the 15th Century with most of the populace being armed in order to prevent any local Lords treating the peasants unfairly.

The reason I posted in this thread in the first place was because the general sentiment appeared to me to be a positive one towards the killing of criminals. Now, the arguments on the rights and wrongs of this aside (for the record, if someone actually is putting you or your family in danger, you are more than entitled to defend yourself), to my way of thinking if any human life is lost it is a bad thing. For sure, there are some people in society who will try and rape/kill/steal, and if arming the law-abiding population helps save lives there then that is a good initial solution, it is however sad that these people turned to crime and ended up in the situation where someone was forced to take their life and they are as much a victim of society and the system as their victim. But it should be an initial solution whilst the factors that cause people to turn to crime are addressed - someone mentioned drugs being a catalyst of break-ins, so surely there needs to be more work done to address the drugs problem? Then we can reduce the number of addicts who need to steal to get money for their next fix, so people won't need to defend themselves in the first place and we can all live in a happier, safer world.

Killing anyone at all = Bad, regrettable, but sadly sometimes necessary.

Right to defend yourself = Good, but sad that it should ever need to be used.

Solution? Address the issues in society which cause people to be put in situations where the above are needed.

That is where I am coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats fine dickie.

fixing society is a whole different debate.

Im just gunna say the War on drugs is the longest most retarded theme costing tax payers billions upon billions every president since 1980s....... drugs are cheaper now then ever. Just making drugs legal would solve a huge crime area not to mention instead of taking money away from society it would be putting more money back into it.

I like to call drug laws a Feel good law. Makes you feel good you made something that can destroy lives illegal.... but it doesn't stop destroying lives any whoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats fine dickie.

fixing society is a whole different debate.

Im just gunna say the War on drugs is the longest most retarded theme costing tax payers billions upon billions every president since 1980s....... drugs are cheaper now then ever. Just making drugs legal would solve a huge crime area not to mention instead of taking money away from society it would be putting more money back into it.

I like to call drug laws a Feel good law. Makes you feel good you made something that can destroy lives illegal.... but it doesn't stop destroying lives any whoo.

I'm not much of a gun guy, but drugs are something I know in and out. Drugs are in no way, shape, or form cheaper then they used to be. Supply and demand mate. Demand has gone up, supply could be larger or smaller, no way to really tell. As soon as more people want it though, the price is going to go up for anything be it shoes, cars, or drugs. $50 for an 1/8 ounce bag of weed is a lot more expensive then it was twenty years ago. Someone tried to sell me (I was not looking for it, someone just walked up and asked me) a gram of cocaine for $110 yesterday. People used to give away LSD to other people they didn't even know, because of the massive supply. I met a man who was selling LSD for about $8 a hit, which is a decent price on the street but doesn't reflect the actual value of it, because he bought it for around $0.25 a hit for the chemical and about $1 a hit for the blotter paper. Doesn't sound like much, but he sold en masse, regularly making $50,000 in one deal. If you wanted to make drugs cheaper, and in my opinion that is a good thing for a variety of reasons, legalize them. Once it's regulated and watched over by governments, drugs will not be nearly as harmful to people's lives as they are now. Their bodies, absolutely, but that's a grim realization that every user has in the back of their head's. That has nothing to do with this thread, so I'll leave it there. Drugs are incredibly more expensive then they ever used to be. Even a year ago, I could go down to Salt Lake City and buy an ounce of weed for about $250.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't followed this thread that closely, but I'm a bit confused.

Why would a gang of armed men be sneaking through Jchung's house?

Anyway, I don't have much else to contribute. Where I'm from the general idea is that you yell if someone is in your house/on your farm/whatever, instead of just leaping out and starting to shoot. Not many people (or groups of people, even) are going to think a TV or a car is worth defying the guy with the shotgun who's telling them to get off of his property, whether they outnumber him or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't followed this thread that closely, but I'm a bit confused.

Why would a gang of armed men be sneaking through Jchung's house?

Anyway, I don't have much else to contribute. Where I'm from the general idea is that you yell if someone is in your house/on your farm/whatever, instead of just leaping out and starting to shoot. Not many people (or groups of people, even) are going to think a TV or a car is worth defying the guy with the shotgun who's telling them to get off of his property, whether they outnumber him or not.

The general idea is to stop the threat. If that means yelling, fine. If it means shooting the guy, tough luck for him. If it means beating his ass unconscious with a plastic toy lawnmower (don't laugh, it's happened) then that's fine too. Never underestimate the sheer stupidity of criminals, my friend. You're under no obligation to yell, announce your intent, or anything else. If someone is in your home illegally, they know they're not supposed to be there. They also know the risks of encountering an angry and frightened homeowner. If the sight of you or the sound of you moving through the house doesn't scare him off, you yelling probably won't either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont know if its changed or not, but in this state if you shoot someone in your house they have to die in your house you cant shoot them running out the door away from your house and worse than that if you do shoot them and they survive they can sue you... like i said i dont know if its still like that, i hope not..... ill have to check it out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snoddy, welcome to the board. Where do you live? Sounds a lot like NC law to me. I believe that a lot of states are reviewing laws regarding criminals who are shot being able to sue. I think Para posted earlier in this thread that FL is working on such a law (or has already enacted it).

You're under no obligation to yell, announce your intent, or anything else.

A GR.net Legal Disclaimer: This varies from state to state here in the US. Check your local laws as to what your rights are in this situation. ;)

If the sight of you or the sound of you moving through the house doesn't scare him off, you yelling probably won't either.

:yes: I agree, entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont know if its changed or not, but in this state if you shoot someone in your house they have to die in your house you cant shoot them running out the door away from your house and worse than that if you do shoot them and they survive they can sue you... like i said i dont know if its still like that, i hope not..... ill have to check it out...

That's exactly how it worked here in Indiana, last I heard. In regards to a specific threat, back when my parents first bought a firearm, they were specifically instructed by both the store owners and the local small town cops to be absolutely sure that if they had to shoot someone, they did it in such a way that he fell inside of the house. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friendly cop always told me to clean up the blood trail leading back inside the house... hah.

I'd be willing to be that's how must states (aside from the anti-gun ones) have their law written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stories just keep on comming.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll...D=2007703050350

:thumbsup: to the guy who stopped him from lighting her on fire.

This infuriates me. To no end.

All those people just stood and watched?! Gun or no gun, at least two people can take a man on and stop him from doing more damage. Sounds like there was enough people there to have stopped him sooner. Some people...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This infuriates me. To no end.All those people just stood and watched?! Gun or no gun, at least two people can take a man on and stop him from doing more damage. Sounds like there was enough people there to have stopped him sooner. Some people...

it is upsetting, you would think after everything that has happened, people would be more willing to help those who need it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...