|
| Thread: Right to Self Defense, Gun Ownership, and Deterence of Crime |  This thread is pages long: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... 20 30 40 50 55 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
posted February 27, 2012 01:53 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Errrrrr....I never said anything about "requiring" anyone to defend himself. Oh, but there is no technology to beam in a swap team when press a button. The practical reality is if someone is breaking into your house and you call 911, the cops are not going to be able to reach you after your 911 call before the home invader does. You can chose to exercise your right to defend yourself and your family or you can be at the mercy of the home invader.
Take a couple of minutes to re-watch the clip you posted. There's a bit where it says "lately homes all around this street have been burglarized."
Now pay attention to the conditions the man is living in. That's a rather run down neighbourhood we're talking about. His place is a mess. He's an elderly fellow, living alone, sleeping on a couch in his kitchen. He can't possibly afford a solid lock - hell, he can't even afford a normal door. His only defense against burglars, other than sleeping with a shotgun, is that he looks too impoverished to have anything worth taking.
So we have a poor Cleveland Ohio neighbourhood, around a single street, known for getting burglarized repeatedly for a while already. It all happens to take place in a nation whose federal tax receipts for the year 2011 are 2303 billion dollars. Doesn't any single part of you believe that's a bit too much money taken from people for something like this to happen to them, and for the only solution to be "get a gun and hope to God it doesn't jam"? How much would it cost to have a few cars patrol that specific Cleveland neighbourhood (or not even patrol, so as not to waste fuel, but chill in a few strategic checkpoints) at all times? How much to finance a wooden door and a normal lock, or to be more economic, just some iron bars to those several dozen homes, in the few places where the risk of home invasion is so high? What the hell are those people getting for all their tax money that goes in the 700-billion-dollars-per-year defense budget, other than being efficiently and preemptively protected from Iraqi WMDs, Gaddafi loyalists and rhinoceros stampedes? They can't even get something able to withstand a few minutes of junkie lockpicking, and a patrol car in the vicinity.
How many home invasions (especially armed ones) have you heard of happening in Europe? Or on the other side of the Great Lakes, in Canada? Or in any of the other places which are mildly civilized, but inferior to the greatest nation on Earth in your eyes, El? Muggings, street violence, well thought-out hits and robberies, yes, yes, yes. But regular random home invasions? Elderly retirees defending themselves with shotguns in their beds?
Why do you think that is? Because Americans aren't using adequate firepower? Because 70-year-olds use flamethrowers in Canada?
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted February 27, 2012 04:20 AM |
|
|
Quote:
So we have a poor Cleveland Ohio neighbourhood, around a single street, known for getting burglarized repeatedly for a while already. It all happens to take place in a nation whose federal tax receipts for the year 2011 are 2303 billion dollars. Doesn't any single part of you believe that's a bit too much money taken from people for something like this to happen to them, and for the only solution to be "get a gun and hope to God it doesn't jam"? How much would it cost to have a few cars patrol that specific Cleveland neighbourhood (or not even patrol, so as not to waste fuel, but chill in a few strategic checkpoints) at all times? How much to finance a wooden door and a normal lock, or to be more economic, just some iron bars to those several dozen homes, in the few places where the risk of home invasion is so high? What the hell are those people getting for all their tax money that goes in the 700-billion-dollars-per-year defense budget, other than being efficiently and preemptively protected from Iraqi WMDs, Gaddafi loyalists and rhinoceros stampedes? They can't even get something able to withstand a few minutes of junkie lockpicking, and a patrol car in the vicinity.
And they send hundreds of young men and women who are willing to serve in a law keeping duty to different countries, taking away from the law enforcement candidates could help their homes. Yeah, we really need to think these things out before we act...
Quote:
How many home invasions (especially armed ones) have you heard of happening in Europe?
Very few. Then again you don't have large controversies with gun control control in Europe, so if there is a regular home invader that gets blown away by some firearm or another, then it isn't publicized completely out of proportion by both sides of the issue. Maybe a local news station runs a report, but no major political party (ie: party that gets +2% of the votes/ that has been in the media) will run a special report on what happened. You also won't have a gun nutter trolling websites to put up this example just so that he can call people socialists and try to prove a very shallow point.
Quote:
Because 70-year-olds use flamethrowers in Canada?
Wait, you're telling me they don't?
Hopes and dreams, shattered. [/plans to retire in Canada]
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted February 27, 2012 12:12 PM |
|
|
Quote:
[/plans to retire in Canada]
Welcome home, son.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 12:28 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I believe in the rule of law. In order to have the rule of law rather than the rule of a despot a constitution is needed.
actually in both case people are giving up their power to follow an authority.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 01:53 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Pardon me if that was asked before:
Elodin, have you ever killed anyone?
Yes, I killed in the line of duty as a soldier.
@Baklava
No matter how much money you throw at it, the cops can't be everywhere and instantaneously respond to every call in time to stop the home invader from getting to the victims. There will always be a need for self-defense in the real world.
Quote:
How many home invasions (especially armed ones) have you heard of happening in Europe?
Earlier in the thread I posted links to studies that show home invasions are far more common in Europe than in the US. Home invasions in US states that don't try to restrict gun rights are infrequent.
Go back and read the initial post in the thread.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 12:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Earlier in the thread I posted links to studies that show home invasions are far more common in Europe than in the US. Home invasions in US states that don't try to restrict gun rights are infrequent.
As far as I have read, you just have quoted an article which compares London with New York refering to burglars.
Just do a little work and find out how many armed or unarmed home invasions we had in germany the last years. then compare this number with the USA (not with a single city...).
Then we can talk again how important arms for privates are...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 01:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
how many armed or unarmed home invasions
Whether armed or not is irrevelant, obviously in a country where citizens are permitted gun ownership burglars will be more likely to carry firearms. The real point should be whether the ability to own a firearm increases the rate of burglaries.
I don't know about you but I'd much rather attempt to raid a house with a conventional weapon like a knife against a probably unarmed homeowner, than raid a home with a firearm in a country where a homeowner will most likely have a firearm and is permitted by law to 'shoot to kill' home-intruders.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 02:20 PM |
|
|
Easiest way to get rid of: if burglar was caught armed, prison for life, judged as first degree murder attempt. And of course, prohibit any weapon, for everyone.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 02:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, I killed in the line of duty as a soldier.
And did you feel after that? no shock, no doubt, etc?
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 05:02 PM |
|
|
Who would Jesus shoot? 
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 28, 2012 05:57 PM |
|
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted June 11, 2012 10:33 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 22:34, 11 Jun 2012.
|
This is not technically a self defense, but it is a father defending his daughter. I don't think any Texas jury will convict the man of any wrongdoing, much less indict him.
What do you think, is this father a hero defending his daughter as he should or an evil man who needs to be punished for taking justice into his own hands? Maybe he should have just called 911 and asked the man to get off his daughter?
Father kills man sexually abusing his daughter
Quote:
A Texas father caught a man sexually assaulting his 4-year-old daughter and punched him in the head repeatedly, killing him, authorities said.
....
Asked whether they would press charges against the father, the sheriff responded, "You have a right to defend your daughter. He acted in defense of his third person. Once the investigation is completed we will submit it to the district attorney who then submits it to the grand jury, who will decide if they will indict him."
____________
Revelation
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted June 11, 2012 10:41 PM |
|
|
Hero? Hell no. The man was simply doing one of his duties as a parent. A man's got to do, what a man's got to do.  Murder was not the intent nor the result of 'punishment', immediate action had to be taken, and that action resulted in death.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 12, 2012 12:00 AM |
|
Edited by xerox at 00:01, 12 Jun 2012.
|
It was not nescessary to kill.
And with laws discouraging to do so, one less person might have had to die.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted June 12, 2012 12:07 AM |
|
|
Good riddance. We don't need child molesters in the world.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted June 12, 2012 12:07 AM |
|
|
Quote:
It was not nescessary to kill.
Agreed, though aversion of death wasn't priority in the father's mind, nor would've it been in any other person's mind (except the felon's) the fastest, and most efficient method of stopping the crime was and is physical force, though obviously it results in a destructive outcome, whether this is for ill or good, is not for us to decide.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 12, 2012 08:10 AM |
|
|
|
It depends on whether the dead guy did indeed molest the daughter. If so, all bets are off - you cannot expect a father to keep cool, and controlled in such a situation and stop once the molester is down and out, because you may not even register it, but instead punch on.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted June 16, 2012 07:11 AM |
|
|
This isn't a direct contribution to the topic and not meant to be an argument, but as a brief derailing for those that are interested in this particular case, the father has expressed hardship & regret over what happened:
Dad Who Killed His Daughter’s Molester Regrets It, So Stop Applauding Him!
"The debate over whether a father who found a man molesting his 4-year-old daughter and allegedly beat him to death has been raging for days now. And it's time to put it to bed. Cops say the Texas dad will likely not be prosecuted. What's more: he says he wishes it hadn't happened.
A grand jury will still debate charges of some kind for the father while police search for family of the deceased before releasing his name. And regardless of their decision, the father who acted out on his daughter's abuser has two things to live with for the rest of his life that I don't wish on anyone.
For the rest of his life, the dad, whose identity has been sealed to protect that of his daughter, the sexual abuse victim, will close his eyes and see a man hurting his precious child. There's no escaping that.
The molestation was not his fault. But here's betting it haunts him anyway. Because that's what happens when you're a parent: seeing your child hurt is not something you can put in a box and stow on some dusty shelf in your brain.
And then there's the beating, the death of the sick pervert who dared hurt that little girl. The father has expressed regret for the beating death, according to the Sheriff in Lavaca County. Sheriff Micah Harmon says he never meant to kill the man and has referred to the incident as accidental.
I'm not surprised. I said this week that beating someone to death, no matter the circumstances doesn't make someone a hero. It sounds like this dad agrees with me.
Hurting someone for hurting an innocent child sounds like it would fill you with satisfaction. But there's a distinction that the folks who have been thumping on their chests that this man is indeed a hero have failed to make. There's hurting, and then there's killing.
To cause the death of another is a whole other ball of wax. It isn't something you get over easily, even if you had the best of intentions. Maybe especially if you had the best of intentions ... after all, a person who kills on accident is not a cold-blooded killer. The person who kills on accident is more likely to have real feelings about it, because they are, at heart, a good person. Just ask anyone who has accidentally killed someone: the driver who came around a turn and hit the pedestrian because they couldn't stop.
No matter what happens with that grand jury, this Texas father's nightmare is just beginning. And throwing around the word "hero" is not going to lighten his load."
Article (... ...No dammit, I do not frequent "CafeMom" on a regular basis. I just followed a link there. I am totally way cooler than that)
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2012 01:21 AM |
|
|
Good article.
I think calling a murderer a hero shows a degenerate and twisted society.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 17, 2012 01:45 AM |
|
|
|
Only semantics are twisted. Now imagine the father surprising the molester in the act and run away, scared. You would call him a coward in no time. He jump to help his kid and showed courage. Maybe not close to hero definition, but a father acting right.
|
|
|
|
