Homeowner Fatally Shoots 3 Home Invaders

@bmanva:

LOL...When I need a diagnosis delivered by meme I know who to call. Could you send me your address in case I ever need a gun cache?

@timsup2nothin: You will never have that need. You can explain to whatever threatens you the statistical improbability of it all.

Good point. Common sense is pretty persuasive when backed with self confidence.

When a criminal dies the world is made a better place. That criminal will never again victimize the people that have the poor luck of having him in the vicinity.

My first thought was "can't argue with that." But I must admit that right after that I thought "does that include jaywalkers?"

It's a shame that all three of those guys threw their lives away by breaking into a house. Still, I have to side with the shooter. How would you react if you saw three guys dressed in black with weapons breaking into your home?

Well if they get hit by cars...yea..their own fault lol..or are you gonna blame the driver?..

Nahhh. Hit by a car is justice. I was just looking at the "the world is made a better place" part and thinking that removal of a jaywalker here and there really isn't doing much for me.

Better to have a gun without a need for it rather than to not have a gun and have a need for it. This guy needed it and had it.

Another drug dealer with a gun. Its the American way.

Who are the jaywalkers victimizing?

I hope for your sake you are far more convincing in person because your ability to persuade online is shit.

Well, no one. That was my point. Using the word "criminal" was probably a bit extreme, since "when a criminal is killed the world is a better place" would include some people that probably do less harm than good, like a jaywalking heart surgeon.

@bmanva:

Well, I did end up agreeing that you probably need a house full of guns, but I don't think that being convinced once by you is enough data for you to jump to that conclusion. I mean, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that you were an intractable case.

Now, why don't you go out and try to browbeat someone into silence in real life, where you can use a gun if they don't give in? You'll have much better luck than you will with me.

I'd be more tractable if you actually provided the actual data to back your claim.

Jaywalking is a misdemeanor. Contextual definition of the term, crime would exclude traffic violations and misdemeanors. E.g. when work applications asks for a criminal record.

I already agreed with you. What makes you think I want you to be "more tractable"?

Jerks that crave agreement and want to browbeat it out of people do need guns. No amount of demonstrable risk associated with gun ownership can change that. In their balance the rewards outweigh those risks and always will.

People who live in homes that attract crime have a valid reason to believe they need guns to defend their home. The fact that a house full of guns in itself attracts crime is sort of a "self fulfillment" aspect of that, but I don't deny that it is still valid.

So, I've acknowledged that there are situations where the need for guns in the home is real. I've acknowledged that this guy in Oklahoma won the gun owner lottery and got to legally shoot people. What more are you looking for from me, exactly?

Hmmmm.... here's a thought....how about you let Riverwolf decide if he wants to supply a context for the comment he made that I was more than willing to discuss further with him?

Or have you been officially appointed as some sort of interlocutor here?