92 Year Old Shoots and Kills Burglar

dena wrote:Never has a username been more appropriate, Childish Logic. In the heat of the moment few people have the peace of mind to consider all the possibilities one you realize your home is being broken in to, more often than not the most aggressive action is the safest.

And that's exactly why guns should be outlawed. At the moment of fear, most people are going to do crazy things. Giving them a weapon that almost guarantees death is not such a good idea.

ahlycotc wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:So there's absolutely no defensive purpose for a gun?

There is, but this old man did not use it in a defensive manner. He was going for the offense (just like guns are intended for). A gun becomes defensive when someone is attacking you and you shoot their leg or something to stop them, but not kill them. Considering that in most cases, guns aren't used "defensively", it's better if they were outlawed and people used other weapons defensively like tasers, bats, pepper spray, non lethal guns, etc.

He was protecting his person and home from an invader. Anyway, you want to ensure that the criminals are the only people who have guns? Is that a good plan? You don't believe that outlawing guns is going to magically make them disappear, do you?

Criminals are the only one's that have guns over here (apart from Police and Hunter's/Farmers). I can count on one hand the amount of times I've seen a news report of a civilian being shot. The last one was some nurse and this was a good few years ago. Or maybe it was a little girl that got shot in the spine.

Either way, it's so rare. The "gangs" shoot each other. You sometimes get people caught in cross fire, but it's rare. We don't have criminals running around like they have some advanced technology and are going to take over the world.

We do have more gun violence than most other western countries but outlawing guns isn't going to change that. Aside from being unconstitutional, I think it would increase gun violence in the states.


btw-what about hunting? How do you taser a deer?

I believe a homeowner with a gun is more threatening than a robber with a gun.

Drew wrote:I believe a homeowner with a gun is more threatening than a robber with a gun.

Yea...to the robber.

Do you also believe in unicorns?

Drew wrote:I believe a homeowner with a gun is more threatening than a robber with a gun.

All the more reason not to break into someone's house.

Pico wrote:

Drew wrote:I believe a homeowner with a gun is more threatening than a robber with a gun.

All the more reason not to break into someone's house.

Not what I'm getting at, but yes you're right. I just believe a robber uses a gun to look threatening and start pointing it at people to make sure they can get away with their objective. They don't think.. "I plan on shooting some people." Where as, the homeowner is shoot first, worry after.

menalawyerguy wrote:We do have more gun violence than most other western countries but outlawing guns isn't going to change that. Aside from being unconstitutional, I think it would increase gun violence in the states.


btw-what about hunting? How do you taser a deer?

Cover yourself in deer shit then sneak up behind in camouflage against the wind.

But really, I don't have a clue what you're on about. I said hunter's are allowed guns over here.

Drew wrote:

Pico wrote:

All the more reason not to break into someone's house.

Not what I'm getting at, but yes you're right. I just believe a robber uses a gun to look threatening and start pointing it at people to make sure they can get away with their objective. They don't think.. "I plan on shooting some people." Where as, the homeowner is shoot first, worry after.

Fair point. That said, we wouldn't be having this debate in the first place if people didn't break into each other's houses.

Agreed. Not a fan of guns either. Don't believe people in a society should be able to threaten the 'harmony' built within the society. That's why we have government, officials, etc.

CollieBuddz wrote:

menalawyerguy wrote:We do have more gun violence than most other western countries but outlawing guns isn't going to change that. Aside from being unconstitutional, I think it would increase gun violence in the states.


btw-what about hunting? How do you taser a deer?

Cover yourself in deer shit then sneak up behind in camouflage against the wind.

But really, I don't have a clue what you're on about. I said hunter's are allowed guns over here.

My comment was more of a general comment to the people who want to outlaw guns. Ahli said there are alternatives like tasers. So for those who want to outlaw guns wholesale, what about hunting? Can't hunt with a taser.

Drew wrote:Agreed. Not a fan of guns either. Don't believe people in a society should be able to threaten the 'harmony' built within the society. That's why we have government, officials, etc.

If that's what governments are for, then mission unaccomplished. Sheesh.

Drew wrote:

Pico wrote:

All the more reason not to break into someone's house.

Not what I'm getting at, but yes you're right. I just believe a robber uses a gun to look threatening and start pointing it at people to make sure they can get away with their objective. They don't think.. "I plan on shooting some people." Where as, the homeowner is shoot first, worry after.

Whaaa? I would guess that most people who break into a home have some past criminal record or have done illegal things that before, so obviously not getting caught is a pretty high priority, to ensure that you arent caught if shit goes down you have a gun to clean things up. They have purpose and reasonable intent to use a gun which is probably illegal anyway. And the home owner is the more threatening person? I disagree.

EDIT: I can't spell.

menalawyerguy wrote:

Drew wrote:Agreed. Not a fan of guns either. Don't believe people in a society should be able to threaten the 'harmony' built within the society. That's why we have government, officials, etc.

If that's what governments are for, then mission unaccomplished. Sheesh.

Oh well.

menalawyerguy wrote:

CollieBuddz wrote:

Cover yourself in deer shit then sneak up behind in camouflage against the wind.

But really, I don't have a clue what you're on about. I said hunter's are allowed guns over here.

My comment was more of a general comment to the people who want to outlaw guns. Ahli said there are alternatives like tasers. So for those who want to outlaw guns wholesale, what about hunting? Can't hunt with a taser.

My bad thought it was to me.

dena wrote:

Drew wrote:

Not what I'm getting at, but yes you're right. I just believe a robber uses a gun to look threatening and start pointing it at people to make sure they can get away with their objective. They don't think.. "I plan on shooting some people." Where as, the homeowner is shoot first, worry after.

Whaaa? I would guess that most people who break into a home have some past criminal record or have done illegal things that before, so obviously not getting caught is a pretty high priority, to ensure that you arent caught if shit goes down you have a gun to clean things up. They have purpose and reasonable intent to use a gun which is probably illegal anyway? And the home oner is the more threatening person? I disagree.

I can agree with that as well.

Yeah, there was a record number of murders using guns in Chicago this year. They should ban guns.

Oh, wait. They already did.

It doesn't work. If criminals want guns, they aren't going to not get guns because it's against the law. That's retarded logic.

@ Dena from page one: No, semi autos should not be otulawed. People dont seem to understand. If a gun is SEMI automatic, you have to pull the trigger one time for one shot. Automatics are and should be banned from civilian use.

Mustangt125 wrote:Yeah, there was a record number of murders using guns in Chicago this year. They should ban guns.

Oh, wait. They already did.

It doesn't work. If criminals want guns, they aren't going to not get guns because it's against the law. That's retarded logic.

@ Dena from page one: No, semi autos should not be otulawed. People dont seem to understand. If a gun is SEMI automatic, you have to pull the trigger one time for one shot. Automatics are and should be banned from civilian use.

And the opposite of that logic is making guns available to everyone. You have to start from somewhere don't be stupid

But the point has already been made. Outlawing guns will not make these stop happening, because the criminals are criminals and will get guns anyway. Just like drugs that are illegal and are still had and sold..

We did start somewhere. Automatic weapons are banned and rightfully so. Guns are not available to anybody. To get a gun you have to wait a three day period while they do a background check.

Mustangt125 wrote:But the point has already been made. Outlawing guns will not make these stop happening, because the criminals are criminals and will get guns anyway. Just like drugs that are illegal and are still had and sold..

We did start somewhere. Automatic weapons are banned and rightfully so. Guns are not available to anybody. To get a gun you have to wait a three day period while they do a background check.

What a fucking shocker that is

They are still distributed that much is clear. Drugs are available everywhere because most can be created in a household or area, no ones making gun weaponry. England has barely any guns whatsoever on a casual street level, that's just an example

Fonseca wrote:

Mustangt125 wrote:But the point has already been made. Outlawing guns will not make these stop happening, because the criminals are criminals and will get guns anyway. Just like drugs that are illegal and are still had and sold..

We did start somewhere. Automatic weapons are banned and rightfully so. Guns are not available to anybody. To get a gun you have to wait a three day period while they do a background check.

What a fucking shocker that is

They are still distributed that much is clear. Drugs are available everywhere because most can be created in a household or area, no ones making gun weaponry. England has barely any guns whatsoever on a casual street level, that's just an example

Nobody is mass producing coke or heroin in their homes. The majority comes from plantations in Central and South America, as well as central and southeast Asia.

menalawyerguy wrote:

Fonseca wrote:

What a fucking shocker that is

They are still distributed that much is clear. Drugs are available everywhere because most can be created in a household or area, no ones making gun weaponry. England has barely any guns whatsoever on a casual street level, that's just an example

Nobody is mass producing coke or heroin in their homes. The majority comes from plantations in Central and South America, as well as central and southeast Asia.

It wasn't a question of where it comes from, I was just saying it can be done