One Alzheimer's victim + One Cowardly Gun Nut = Another Senseless Death

Cave Johnson said:
Have some respect for your racial betters knave. My lineage conquered and subjugated you inferior worms nearly 1,000 years ago, and you have remained chained to us since. I am BORN superior to you, best not forget it.
Click to expand...

Oh - you conquered England with Henry V11? Bloody good - taught 'em who was master, fair play, especially those French bastard's serfs. You've spent too long over there though, and lost your fingers masturbating - it was nothing like a thousand years since you went native and caught lice.
 
The Dude said:
They attend cult meetings!
They chant a thousand reasons to justify a shooting.
It's called NRA meetings
Click to expand...

I hate to say this but if someone rang my doorbell at 2:30AM, I'd answer, while keeping the chain on. If someone was trying to break in and rob the place I doubt they'd ring the bell first.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Oh, so the President, Congress and the SCOTUS don't count as part of "We The People"?
Click to expand...
NO you dipshit. something that you ignore from the founders is that once in office, they cease to be 'we the people'. you should understand that from the way they exempt themselves from numerous laws, yet you seem to approve of that crap.


"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

"Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
-- Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution
 
christiefan915 said:
I hate to say this but if someone rang my doorbell at 2:30AM, I'd answer, while keeping the chain on. If someone was trying to break in and rob the place I doubt they'd ring the bell first.
Click to expand...

Police warn about doorbell-ring burglaries

Palo Alto police said the incident is an example of a recurring type of residential crime: burglars who ring front door bells, posing as a solicitor or visitor, to see of anyone is home. Once they determine the house is empty, they go to the relative privacy of the house's yard, usually by way of an unlocked side gate, to find a way to break in, police stated.

Fremont: Home invasion robber rings doorbell, sprays woman in face, police say

FREMONT -- Police are searching for a violent home invasion robber who doused a woman in the face with pepper spray when she opened her front door, struggled with a man in the home, and then escaped Thursday night, police said.
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't have a reason to think the worst. It could be someone saying they're hurt, or the house is on fire, or other non-criminal reasons.
Click to expand...

Or it could be a child, used as a distraction to lure you into a false sense of security before someone takes a tire iron to your skull.

I mean, if I could think of it, why not someone else? The world is a dangerous place, and misplaced trust serves no one well.
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't have a reason to think the worst. It could be someone saying they're hurt, or the house is on fire, or other non-criminal reasons.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with USF on this one. welcome to your eventual victimhood. nobody has to always think the worst, but you should always be prepared for the eventuality of it. most people would agree with that theory, most liberals would just blame someone else for their unpreparedness.
 
Cave Johnson said:
Or it could be a child, used as a distraction to lure you into a false sense of security before someone takes a tire iron to your skull.

I mean, if I could think of it, why not someone else? The world is a dangerous place, and misplaced trust serves no one well.
Click to expand...

I don't have a gun but do have pepper spray and a cell phone. Why does the first resort have to be shooting? Not that you said it does but that's what I'm inferring from all the RW comments.
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't have a gun but do have pepper spray and a cell phone. Why does the first resort have to be shooting? Not that you said it does but that's what I'm inferring from all the RW comments.
Click to expand...

So you carry the pepper spray to the door and condemn those who carry a firearm.
Do you also dial 91 and then hold your finger over the last 1, just in case?
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't have a gun but do have pepper spray and a cell phone. Why does the first resort have to be shooting? Not that you said it does but that's what I'm inferring from all the RW comments.
Click to expand...
unlike what is portrayed in tv and the movies, you have the right to defend yourself. you also have the right to assume that someone breaking in to your home is intending to kill you, rape you, or at the very least intends to do grievous bodily harm to you. the surest way to protect yourself is to jump to lethal force. the law is on your side......at least for now.
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't have a gun but do have pepper spray and a cell phone. Why does the first resort have to be shooting? Not that you said it does but that's what I'm inferring from all the RW comments.
Click to expand...

As someone who has been pepper sprayed, I can say it's less than ideal for stopping a good number of people. Even less so if you're under stress. Can you say with good certainty that you'd hit your assailant in the eyes/face with the second or so you would have? Because pepper spray to the chest, or neck, or leg, is a minor annoyance at best. So in that vein, shooting is a far safer way to stop a threat. Assuming of course that there is a threat involved.

As to what constitutes a 'threat' I suppose that would depend on the individual and the circumstances involved. Sadly many people don't understand how to deescalate a situation.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I have to agree with USF on this one. welcome to your eventual victimhood. nobody has to always think the worst, but you should always be prepared for the eventuality of it. most people would agree with that theory, most liberals would just blame someone else for their unpreparedness.
Click to expand...

I have usf on ignore.

Also, I take the position that life is always going to be about choices and I choose not to live in constant fear. Maybe you're right and someday I'll be victimized. That's a possibility, not a probability. I never said I didn't use common sense measures to try and prevent danger, just that I don't look at everyone and everything as a potential threat. That kind of thinking uses up too much emotional energy that's better spent in laughing at the world's craziness.
 
Cave Johnson said:
As someone who has been pepper sprayed, I can say it's less than ideal for stopping a good number of people. Even less so if you're under stress. Can you say with good certainty that you'd hit your assailant in the eyes/face with the second or so you would have? Because pepper spray to the chest, or neck, or leg, is a minor annoyance at best. So in that vein, shooting is a far safer way to stop a threat. Assuming of course that there is a threat involved.

As to what constitutes a 'threat' I suppose that would depend on the individual and the circumstances involved. Sadly many people don't understand how to deescalate a situation.
Click to expand...

You may be 100% right about the pepper spray because I've never yet used it. And you're probably right about de-escalating too, if someone pulled a gun on me the first words out of my mouth would be "Are you joking? Put that silly thing away." Disarming, isn't it? :D
 
SmarterthanYou said:
unlike what is portrayed in tv and the movies, you have the right to defend yourself. you also have the right to assume that someone breaking in to your home is intending to kill you, rape you, or at the very least intends to do grievous bodily harm to you. the surest way to protect yourself is to jump to lethal force. the law is on your side......at least for now.
Click to expand...

See, I agree with you about the right to self-defense but my first thought would be to call for help. Even if I owned a gun, I'd stay behind a locked door after calling for help and only use the gun as a last resort.
 
christiefan915 said:
You may be 100% right about the pepper spray because I've never yet used it. And you're probably right about de-escalating too, if someone pulled a gun on me the first words out of my mouth would be "Are you joking? Put that silly thing away." Disarming, isn't it? :D
Click to expand...

It can be, to those who are expecting primarily to intimidate you. But if that's the primary means by which one assaults someone, I wouldn't consider them a big danger to begin with. But again, that's me. I assume everyone is a potential threat, even if I've known you for a long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top