Raw Audio: Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] It's not more of threat than walking past someone who has a gun; neither is guaranteed to kill you but both potentially could. Ok, say if you had a really valuable diamond that was worth more than your house. If someone stole it from you on the street would you be able to shoot at them?BrownNoeser

People do NOT pose a threat to you all the time. They COULD pose a threat. When they break into your house, they DO pose a threat...

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"][QUOTE="spazzx625"] Why are you so enraptured by the theft aspect of this? The whole point is personal safety. Self defense. If someone is attempting to harm you, regardless of if you're in your home or not you can defend yourself within reason. If someone is coming at you with a plastic straw you can't use a firearm, since they are unequal. bloodling

People do NOT pose a threat to you all the time. They COULD pose a threat. When they break into your house, they DO pose a threat...

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"]

There is a difference in between someone stealing your soda, and breaking into your house. The latter poses a serious threat to life and limb...

spazzx625

Better to be safe than sorry. I haven't ever heard someone breaking into someone's house to say hello. Most people knock, or use a doorbell. A random interaction on the street is much less likely to kill you than someone breaking into your home. Your sanctity of property question makes no sense, since my argument isn't about property rights.

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] It's not more of threat than walking past someone who has a gun; neither is guaranteed to kill you but both potentially could. Ok, say if you had a really valuable diamond that was worth more than your house. If someone stole it from you on the street would you be able to shoot at them?BrownNoeser

Self-defence IS the issue, dude. :|

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Not necessarily. The man who broke into her house could potentially have been coming in to say hello. Someone who steals your soda may be planning to lace it with poison. Someone who I meet on the street potentially poses a "serious threat to life and limb", but you can't just randomly shoot someone on the street, Can you? So the question remains: why is "the home" more sacred private property to soda.RushKing

Better to be safe than sorry. I haven't ever heard someone breaking into someone's house to say hello. Most people knock, or use a doorbell. A random interaction on the street is much less likely to kill you than someone breaking into your home. Your sanctity of property question makes no sense, since my argument isn't about property rights.

Define "pose a threat", because we're obviously not using the same definitions.BrownNoeser

My answer was quite obvious... I'm probably not saying it right because english is not my first language but you should understand my point very easily by reading what everyone's writing...

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Not necessarily. The man who broke into her house could potentially have been coming in to say hello. Someone who steals your soda may be planning to lace it with poison. Someone who I meet on the street potentially poses a "serious threat to life and limb", but you can't just randomly shoot someone on the street, Can you? So the question remains: why is "the home" more sacred private property to soda.RushKing

Better to be safe than sorry. I haven't ever heard someone breaking into someone's house to say hello. Most people knock, or use a doorbell. A random interaction on the street is much less likely to kill you than someone breaking into your home. Your sanctity of property question makes no sense, since my argument isn't about property rights.

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]

Better to be safe than sorry. I haven't ever heard someone breaking into someone's house to say hello. Most people knock, or use a doorbell. A random interaction on the street is much less likely to kill you than someone breaking into your home. Your sanctity of property question makes no sense, since my argument isn't about property rights.

coolbeans90

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] There is now way you can prove the man was attempting to harm her. He could of been a hungry bum like someone hear said.

BrownNoeser

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

The guy walking down your street didn't break into your house...

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]

Better to be safe than sorry. I haven't ever heard someone breaking into someone's house to say hello. Most people knock, or use a doorbell. A random interaction on the street is much less likely to kill you than someone breaking into your home. Your sanctity of property question makes no sense, since my argument isn't about property rights.

coolbeans90

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] There is now way you can prove the man was attempting to harm her. He could of been a hungry bum like someone hear said.

RushKing

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

Well, in that instance I probably would have given the warning shot. Then again, I do not know how many shots she had loaded, nor if she could pump a second round before the intruder would be able to disarm her.

that's intense.

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Can you prove that this "hungry bum" did not have murderous intentions? Personally, I would not risk my life to find out. If he wanted food he could have knocked. I have plenty of PB & J to spare.

coolbeans90

The guy walking down your street didn't break into your house...

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

I'm walking down the street. A man comes up to me. Can I prove he doesn't have murderous intentions? Better not risk it!BrownNoeser

The guy walking down your street didn't break into your house...

She could of at least gave out a warning before fireing. I doubt he even saw the gun.RushKing

How is a house any different from someone touching my drink in public.

RushKing

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] I'm walking down the street. A man comes up to me. Can I prove he doesn't have murderous intentions? Better not risk it!RushKing

The guy walking down your street didn't break into your house...

Because there are larger consequences typically associated with people breaking into houses than people messing with other people's drinks.

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Well the woman shot at the man and she didn't seem to acknowledge that he had a gun, everyone applauded so I assumed that killing trespassers was fine. Ok, so when are you allowed to shoot someone unwanted on your property?BrownNoeser

Breaking into someone's house IS a threat. Case in point.

Someone find the news article, I want to read more about it. Brainkiller05

Now why can't I do that in the street? Someone walks up to me who has a gun. I shoot him because he "poses a threat". The only difference is where it took place. Take note that in both cases neither of those who were shot actually drew their gun, they just had one and therefore "posed a threat."BrownNoeser

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

How is a house any different from someone touching my drink in public.

spazzx625

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"][QUOTE="spazzx625"] As self defense. :|coolbeans90

Breaking into someone's house IS a threat. Case in point.

[QUOTE="RushKing"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

The guy walking down your street didn't break into your house...

coolbeans90

Because there are larger consequences typically associated with people breaking into houses than people messing with other people's drinks.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="RushKing"] How is a house any different from someone touching my drink in public.

BrownNoeser

Because there are larger consequences typically associated with people breaking into houses than people messing with other people's drinks.

So in other words, in America, trespassers are assumed with certainty to be life threatening. Therefore the law is based on superstition. Assuming something to be true without reason to believe it s irrational. There is no certainty that anyone who trespasses into your home is intent on killing you.BrownNoeser

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Your argument is based on assumption; the assumption that trespassers are more dangerous than anyone else.BrownNoeser

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Well, I suppose what the women did was illegal then because he didn't seem to attack her in any way before she shot him. Ok. Lets define "self defence" here. I assume you mean that he "poses a threat". Lets say the trespasser has a gun. He comes onto your property and you shoot him. Now why can't I do that in the street? Someone walks up to me who has a gun. I shoot him because he "poses a threat". The only difference is where it took place. Take note that in both cases neither of those who were shot actually drew their gun, they just had one and therefore "posed a threat."RushKing

Breaking into someone's house IS a threat. Case in point.

Not to the same, frequently life threatening extent.

Well actually the law is framed around the presumption of innocent until proven guilty.F1_2004

[QUOTE="spazzx625"][QUOTE="BrownNoeser"] Your argument is based on assumption; the assumption that trespassers are more dangerous than anyone else.Pirate700

Well actually the law is framed around the presumption of innocent until proven guilty.F1_2004

That is how the legal system works. Not what individuals are legally allowed to make decisions based off of. However, based upon the "innocent until proven guilty" premise, one certainly make a reasonable assumption that someone isn't breaking into your house to play video games with you.

[QUOTE="RushKing"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Breaking into someone's house IS a threat. Case in point.

coolbeans90

Not to the same, frequently life threatening extent.

I heard that recording on the radio today. All the radio hosts were making fun of it. I think it may be fake because it just sounds so outrageous.