3 Teens Shot and Killed Breaking into a House - Stand Your Ground Rule? How?

[phrodeau]

Anyone who enters my home with criminal intent gives up their right to life upon entry. If he didn't want/deserve to die he should have stayed out.

I disagree with your Sharia law.

 

[jaF0]

Maybe the getaway car driver can eventually shine light on why that particular house was targeted--and why someone in that house thought he needed to have an AR-15.

Like I said early on, there's more to this story. We may find out more if it goes to trial, or we may not. But it will not surprise me at all to find out that certain 'recreational chemicals' are the root of it all.

 

[Chris_Michael]

I disagree with your Sharia law.

I disagree with yours.

 

[My I]

I disagree with your Sharia law.

ROFLMAO @ your ignorance. Childish insults do not change my oppinions, nor do they instill in me any shred of respect for yours.

 

[phrodeau]

ROFLMAO @ your ignorance. Childish insults do not change my oppinions, nor do they instill in me any shred of respect for yours.

It's supposed to be an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, not a life for a plasma screen.

 

[My I]

Sorry, comparing a car to a rapid-fire weapon is lame.

And yet last year high performance vehicle crashes killed and injured more people than all semi-auto rifles COMBINED. There IS a comparison for those who have the guts to look.

Cell phone usage while driving killed 5 times more people than ALL shootings in the US.

Rapid fire? Civilian ARs are semi-auto. I know several people who can fire a Colt SAA just as fast as you can pull the trigger on an AR.

Spreading ignorance should be a criminal offense.

 

[sr71plt]

Like I said early on, there's more to this story. We may find out more if it goes to trial, or we may not. But it will not surprise me at all to find out that certain 'recreational chemicals' are the root of it all.

I think you may be right. It seems that the majority of house break-ins in my region turn out to be drug related--like that's what the intruders were after and knew that's where it could be found and that the possession of fire power at the house was all part of what was going on there. That's a separate issue, of course, from the stand your ground situation. It's just that more might be involved in this case than that.

 

[sr71plt]

And yet last year high performance vehicle crashes killed and injured more people than all semi-auto rifles COMBINED. There IS a comparison for those who have the guts to look.

Cell phone usage while driving killed 5 times more people than ALL shootings in the US.

Rapid fire? Civilian ARs are semi-auto. I know several people who can fire a Colt SAA just as fast as you can pull the trigger on an AR.

Spreading ignorance should be a criminal offense.

I continue to hold that your attempt to conflate cars with guns is lame.

 

[My I]

It's supposed to be an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, not a life for a plasma screen.

Then he should fekkin' leave my plasma screen alone. HIS decision. Not mine. But when he forces me to make a decision I am NOT going to decide to let someone just walk into my house and take everything I have WORKED for just because he doesn't want to work for it himself.

And if you are one of those brainless fucking MORONs that believe criminals rights outweigh MINE then I sincerely hope your house becomes a target for a few criminals. We'll see how you feel about it after.

 

[My I]

I continue to hold that your attempt to conflate cars with guns is lame.

And I continue to hold that you are as well.

 

[sr71plt]

And I continue to hold that you are as well.

Thanks for personalizing that on me rather than the issue.

The car has a base function--getting from one place to another. The base function of an AR-15 is to overkill things. The base function of a car isn't to overkill things. You want to make them equal to avoid facing holding an antisocial position. And we can stop exchanges on this now, because your going outside of the issue and attacking me personally means you've lost.

 

[My I]

Soooo.... That make it alright when someone plows into a parade with with a Hyundai and we should ignore the half-million AR 15 owners who have never shot anything but paper?

Please. Your rationale bears no logic.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Sorry, comparing a car to a rapid-fire weapon is lame.

It's not rapid fire....you lying sack of dishonest shit.

The base function of an AR-15 is to overkill things.

And more lies from SR71Poser......surprise surprise!!

 

[Boxlicker101]

It's supposed to be an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, not a life for a plasma screen.

The shooter could have had no idea of the intentions of the intruders, except they were inimical to him and his family. He was absolutely right in acting as he did. Anybody but the most chuckleheaded of pacifists would have done the same.

 

[phrodeau]

And yet last year high performance vehicle crashes killed and injured more people than all semi-auto rifles COMBINED. There IS a comparison for those who have the guts to look.

Cell phone usage while driving killed 5 times more people than ALL shootings in the US.

Rapid fire? Civilian ARs are semi-auto. I know several people who can fire a Colt SAA just as fast as you can pull the trigger on an AR.

Spreading ignorance should be a criminal offense.

Yeah, we know. One goes pew pew pew pew pew, and the other goes pewpewpewpewpew.

 

[My I]

Yeah, we know. One goes pew pew pew pew pew, and the other goes pewpewpewpewpew.

Wow. Intelligent, mature and to the point. I didn't expect that from you.

 

[someoneyouknow]

If you break into someone's house you shouldn't expect them to shake your hand.

 

[someoneyouknow]

From the CDC. Figures are for 2014:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

In short, there were 33,736 motor vehicle deaths, of all kinds, compared to 33,599 firearm deaths, of all kinds.

Further, in 2014, gun deaths outnumbered motor vehicle deaths in 21 states plus D.C.:

http://www.vpc.org/regulating-the-gun-industry/gun-deaths-compared-to-motor-vehicle-deaths/

What makes this statistic so interesting is this:

Nine out of 10 American households have access to a motor vehicle while a little less than a third of American households contain a gun.​

 

[jaF0]

What makes this statistic so interesting is this:

Nine out of 10 American households have access to a motor vehicle while a little less than a third of American households contain a gun.​

The principle purpose of a car/vehicle is transportation. Deaths are incidental to that main purpose.

The principle purpose of a firearm is to kill. Any other use is incidental to that main purpose.

 

[sr71plt]

The principle purpose of a car/vehicle is transportation. Deaths are incidental to that main purpose.

The principle purpose of a firearm is to kill. Any other use is incidental to that main purpose.

Is there an echo in here?

That's why I posted up the line that trying to rationalize a comparison between the two was lame.

 

[My I]

The principle purpose of a car/vehicle is transportation. Deaths are incidental to that main purpose.

The principle purpose of a firearm is to kill. Any other use is incidental to that main purpose.

But both are the result of someone being criminal or irresponsible or both. The exception being guns used for self/family/home defense and police officers in the line of duty.

How many of those auto related deaths can be attributed to crime prevention/stopping?

 

[jaF0]

But both are the result of someone being criminal or irresponsible or both.

False.

Hunting is killing. Legal, responsible, but still killing. Ethical is another matter.

War is killing. Legal, some say responsible. Again there are the ethics.

The purpose of a firearm is to kill. Somebody. Something. Somewhere. Sometime. They have no other primary purpose.

 

[My I]

False.

Hunting is killing. Legal, responsible, but still killing. Ethical is another matter.

War is killing. Legal, some say responsible. Again there are the ethics.

The purpose of a firearm is to kill. Somebody. Something. Somewhere. Sometime. They have no other primary purpose.

You misunderstood my post. Yes. Guns are made for killing, though there are many gun owners who will never take a life with one. But what I was talking about was the deaths.

Deaths by firearms OR motor vehicles is caused by criminal/irresponsible/careless use of those. The difference is your average car owner isn't going to use his car to kill in defense of his life or his loved ones. And although it has happened, just recently in Texas, the police are not ordinarily going to use a cruiser to kill a dangerous criminal.

You can take away everyone's guns. England banned everything but single shot shotguns and rifles years ago. Now they are banning kitchen knives because while murder by firearms is significantly down, stabbing deaths have more than made up for it. Bludgeoning death also show a significant increase.

Australia passed VERY strict gun regulation in the 80s (If I remember properly) The Australian government recently admitted that those gun restriction laws have done nothing to decrease crime rates.

Meanwhile the number of auto related deaths is increasing. And while DUIs are down. Cell phone related related car crashes have more than made up for it.

Again, it is not the gun, vehicle or any type of those that are the problem. The problem lies in people using them for criminal activities and being just plain foolish and irresponsible.

 

[JawnKarTurr]

The problem with having people on ignore is that even people you dislike can make valid points - sometimes.

Most of the time I use 'virtual ignore'. I don't respond to the posts and skim over them instead of blocking them.

I would agree with you there, but some people I've given up on them. I don't need to read their venomous replies. I think the problem people can't just disagree....


Who are you voting for? I'm voting for Reagan. Oh I'm not here is why? Oh okay but this is why I'm voting for him. Oh okay well have a good day. That type of interaction seems to be going away.

 

[oggbashan]

...

Who are you voting for? I'm voting for Reagan. Oh I'm not here is why? Oh okay but this is why I'm voting for him. Oh okay well have a good day. That type of interaction seems to be going away.

I think social media is partly to blame for the antagonism in modern politics. In the past I knew that some of my wider family had widely diverging views on political matters. With some of them I could just agree to disagree; some were fanatical in their political beliefs and couldn't accept that any other view was acceptable. But we could agree NOT to talk about politics and remain on good terms.

Now the younger members of my wider family are also divided in their politics. Some are strongly in favour of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader. I can accept that the Labour Party has (and still has) some reasonable policies but I see Jeremy Corbyn as an unelectable nonentity who is damaging his party. One of the family is a Councillor for the Green Party; another has been an Alderman (a senior councillor) and office holder for the Conservative party in the City of London.

But then I have a Roman Catholic Priest as a relation. He is married with two children because he was a Church of England Priest before being accepted by the Catholic Church. Yet he can talk reasonably to other relations who are:

- members of a weird evangelical Christian church that believe in talking in tongues;
- married to a Muslim woman;
- atheist
- and last but not least, a follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

But in the wider world tolerance of different views seems to be less acceptable - "You are either with me, or you are against me" is common, not "I don't like your views but they're yours, not mine".