Call the cops.
You americans are insane. :?
Cops take too long. by the time they get there. The person that broke in could already of butt f*cked you. You need to do things your self, ;) ... And buy a gun.This topic is locked from further discussion.
Call the cops.
You americans are insane. :?
Cops take too long. by the time they get there. The person that broke in could already of butt f*cked you. You need to do things your self, ;) ... And buy a gun.Cops take too long. by the time they get there. The person that broke in could already of butt f*cked you. You need to do things your self, ;) ... And buy a gun.codymcclain14
I like this guy.
Shoot first, ask questions later.Xeogua
Him as well.
[QUOTE="codymcclain14"]Cops take too long. by the time they get there. The person that broke in could already of butt f*cked you. You need to do things your self, ;) ... And buy a gun.airshocker
I like this guy.
Shoot first, ask questions later.Xeogua
Him as well.
Annnnnnnd... that proves my point.Annnnnnnd... that proves my point.Am_Confucius
Sorry, hiding in a closet hoping not to be killed while you wait on the cops doesn't sound like the brightest idea in the world. I mean, hey, if that's your cup of tea, have at it. Don't expect us to sit around and put our lives at risk.
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Annnnnnnd... that proves my point.airshocker
Sorry, hiding in a closet hoping not to be killed while you wait on the cops doesn't sound like the brightest idea in the world. I mean, hey, if that's your cup of tea, have at it. Don't expect us to sit around and put our lives at risk.
You seriously think your chance of injury is lowered by attacking someone? Also, stastically, when you think someone has broken into your house and you shoot that person, there's a 50% chance that it was a friend/relative.[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Annnnnnnd... that proves my point.airshocker
Sorry, hiding in a closet hoping not to be killed while you wait on the cops doesn't sound like the brightest idea in the world. I mean, hey, if that's your cup of tea, have at it. Don't expect us to sit around and put our lives at risk.
Depending on the size of the house hiding in a closet is probably safer if the intruder has a gun himself (which is likely in the US). You could always hide in a closet with a gun for the best of both worlds I guess.You seriously think your chance of injury is lowered by attacking someone? Also, stastically, when you think someone has broken into your house and you shoot that person, there's a 50% chance that it was a friend/relative.Am_Confucius
Yes, I know it is. Firearms are the great equalizer and I'm trained to use mine.
Friends/relatives know not to walk into my house without calling or knocking.
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]You seriously think your chance of injury is lowered by attacking someone? Also, stastically, when you think someone has broken into your house and you shoot that person, there's a 50% chance that it was a friend/relative.airshocker
Yes, I know it is. Firearms are the great equalizer and I'm trained to use mine.
Friends/relatives know not to walk into my house without calling or knocking.
"Equalizer"? Let me ask you something, are you for or against legalised guns?I had some guys break into my house. I just complied with everything they said, they tied me and my family up, searched the place and then left. If I had reacted they would have killed me and my family, they were like 5, all armed.kuraimenWell of course it's situational, I'm sure most people here would do what you did. On the other hand, if you know someone's in your house, and they don't know you're there, a more pro-active approach is totally reasonable.
"Equalizer"? Let me ask you something, are you for or against legalised guns?Am_Confucius
Guns are already legalized. There are certain restrictions on them, though.
[QUOTE="airshocker"][QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]You seriously think your chance of injury is lowered by attacking someone? Also, stastically, when you think someone has broken into your house and you shoot that person, there's a 50% chance that it was a friend/relative.Am_Confucius
Yes, I know it is. Firearms are the great equalizer and I'm trained to use mine.
Friends/relatives know not to walk into my house without calling or knocking.
"Equalizer"? Let me ask you something, are you for or against legalised guns? You haven't been here very long, have you?[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]"Equalizer"? Let me ask you something, are you for or against legalised guns?airshocker
Guns are already legalized. There are certain restrictions on them, though.
I already know that. But that is not what I asked.[QUOTE="kuraimen"]I had some guys break into my house. I just complied with everything they said, they tied me and my family up, searched the place and then left. If I had reacted they would have killed me and my family, they were like 5, all armed.TylendalWell of course it's situational, I'm sure most people here would do what you did. On the other hand, if you know someone's in your house, and they don't know you're there, a more pro-active approach is totally reasonable. Well yeah if I had the chance to take them by surprise and a weapon at hand I think I would take the shot.
attempt to sneak up on him from behind with a knife, then i cover his eyes/face with one hand and with the other i slit his throat. i then stab him as many times as it takes to get him on the ground before i go in for the final blow where i stab him in the heart/chest area rendering him dead. i then call the police and tell them what happened.mingmao3046Oh god, you truly are insane.
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]I already know that. But that is not what I asked.airshocker
Obviously I support gun rights, yes.
Eh... why?[QUOTE="airshocker"][QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]I already know that. But that is not what I asked.Am_Confucius
Obviously I support gun rights, yes.
Eh... why? In case the English invade sillyEh... why?Am_Confucius
Because an armed, responsible populace has proven to be a deterrence against crime? Just looking at the stats regarding DC and Chicago.
Plus, I'm a cop and know full-well that we can't be everywhere at once.
In case the English invade sillyOverlord93
The brits don't know how to fight. Who are you kidding? :)
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Eh... why?airshocker
Because an armed, responsible populace has proven to be a deterrence against crime? Just looking at the stats regarding DC and Chicago.
Plus, I'm a cop and know full-well that we can't be everywhere at once.
Sure, it's a good thing that you are responsible. However, alot of people aren't. And guns wouldn't really be necessary if no-one else had guns.Sure, it's a good thing that you are responsible. However, alot of people aren't. And guns wouldn't really be necessary if no-one else had guns.Am_Confucius
The vast majority of LEGAL gun owners are responsible. It's the criminals who aren't.
The gun crime statistics for legal owners in my county(Rockland, NY) are in the SINGLE DIGITS. There are over a hundred thousand permit holders for a pistol in my county. That's pretty damn good.
Too bad criminals have guns and always will.
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Eh... why?airshocker
Because an armed, responsible populace has proven to be a deterrence against crime? Just looking at the stats regarding DC and Chicago.
Plus, I'm a cop and know full-well that we can't be everywhere at once.
As far as deterrents go, I'd have to say that I think that's one of the most insignificant factors, merely because the average person is so often irresponsible, arming them just makes it worse. That being said, I'm all for the right to own guns. I also strongly believe in registry (Stephen Harper and the Conservative government are pandering idiots for not only abolishing long gun registry, but DESTROYING the records so that any attempt by another government to reinstate it would be next to impossible), but the point is, there isn't really any reason to keep someone who feels that they should be able to own a gun, from having one, and I do agree that it can be a deterrent in certain situations.I believe that ready access can make many situations worse, but I do agree that a more casual potential criminal can definitely be deterred from crimes such as the home invasion in question, knowing that firearms could be a factor.
As far as deterrents go, I'd have to say that I think that's one of the most insignificant factors, merely because the average person is so often irresponsible, arming them just makes it worse. That being said, I'm all for the right to own guns. I also strongly believe in registry (Stephen Harper and the Conservative government are pandering idiots for not only abolishing long gun registry, but DESTROYING the records so that any attempt by another government to reinstate it would be next to impossible), but the point is, there isn't really any reason to keep someone who feels that they should be able to own a gun, from having one, and I do agree that it can be a deterrent in certain situations. I believe they can make many situations worse, but I do agree that a more casual potential criminal can definitely be deterred from crimes such as the home invasion in question, knowing that firearms could be a factor.Tylendal
Long gun registration is stupid, IMO. Not even New York does that and we're one of the most liberal states in the country. Handguns I'm reluctantly okay with, but I see no reason to have to register long guns.
[QUOTE="Tylendal"]As far as deterrents go, I'd have to say that I think that's one of the most insignificant factors, merely because the average person is so often irresponsible, arming them just makes it worse. That being said, I'm all for the right to own guns. I also strongly believe in registry (Stephen Harper and the Conservative government are pandering idiots for not only abolishing long gun registry, but DESTROYING the records so that any attempt by another government to reinstate it would be next to impossible), but the point is, there isn't really any reason to keep someone who feels that they should be able to own a gun, from having one, and I do agree that it can be a deterrent in certain situations. I believe they can make many situations worse, but I do agree that a more casual potential criminal can definitely be deterred from crimes such as the home invasion in question, knowing that firearms could be a factor.airshocker
Long gun registration is stupid, IMO. Not even New York does that and we're one of the most liberal states in the country. Handguns I'm reluctantly okay with, but I see no reason to have to register long guns.
It goes both ways. I see no reason NOT to register them.It goes both ways. I see no reason NOT to register them. Tylendal
Long guns aren't used to commit many crimes. Pistols and assault weapons are. I see no reason to bog authorities down when it comes to registering long guns when hand guns are much more common in crime.
[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Sure, it's a good thing that you are responsible. However, alot of people aren't. And guns wouldn't really be necessary if no-one else had guns.airshocker
The vast majority of LEGAL gun owners are responsible. It's the criminals who aren't.
The gun crime statistics for legal owners in my county(Rockland, NY) are in the SINGLE DIGITS. There are over a hundred thousand permit holders for a pistol in my county. That's pretty damn good.
Too bad criminals have guns and always will.
Not really.In most countries where guns are not legalized, crime that involves guns are extremely rare. You see, the main problem I have with guns is that they are made for one single thing: Killing people. You see, if no-one has guns, they will have to use weaker weapons that are less effective at killing. This doesn't reduce crime a whole lot, but it makes killing much more rare when crime is commited. And because of the weapons that the crime-commiter has aren't much better than random stuff you can find at home, burglars will more often escape if they accidently rob someone that is at home.EDIT: Have to get some sleep now.
I think it's obvious, you think it's obvious... I don't think he's been here long enough to recognize you though.Tylendal
Taking into consideration that he said under certain conditions he would use a firearm against an intruder, it was obvious regardless.
Not really.In most countries where guns are not legalized, crime that involves guns are extremely rare. You see, the main problem I have with guns is that they are made for one single thing: Killing people. You see, if no-one has guns, they will have to use weaker weapons that are less effective at killing. This doesn't reduce crime a whole lot, but it makes killing much more rare when crime is commited. And because of the weapons that the crime-commiter has aren't much better than random stuff you can find at home, burglars will more often escape if they accidently rob someone that is at home.
EDIT: Have to get some sleep now.
Am_Confucius
All that's well and good...if the criminal population doesn't have weapons. That's not the case in America.
Living in Australia, getting shot by someone breaking into the house would be the least of my worries.....unless they're carrying a hunting rifle...
So that being the case, I'd probably try intimidation.....and if that dosen't work.....I suppose there's always always the option of smashing my guitar over their head (trust me, it's better off in a million pieces...).
Cops would probably take 10-30 minutes to get to my house. I live in the predominately white suburbs of a southern city with low-crime rates...the sheriffs are probably at home watching TV. We and some of our neighbors have had to call the sheriff a few times. It takes him a good 30 minutes to get to the house. And some friends of ours that live about a minute away were getting robbed by armed robbers and called the cops and they didn't arrive for almost an hour.Call the cops.
You americans are insane. :?
Am_Confucius
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment