Would you really shoot?

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Is it ok if I just kneecap them?
Never pull a gun unless you intend to use it. Never threaten, never back down. A well trained, acurate, and calm shooter does not have to kill.

Look, the law is going to consider ANY firing of the weapon "use of deadly force." You won't save yourself much in the eyes of the law if you go into court and claim that the reason you hit the guy in the leg or shoulder and that's why he's still alive is because you were not shooting to kill. Your actions were, simply, deadly dangerous, and it will not be assumed that you were just super pinpoint accurate and able to fire a nonlethal shot.

I just don't see what favor people think they'd be doing society by sparing the life of a shitbag criminal whose crime permits his victim to kill him justifiably.

I would have no problem with every violent criminal waking up tomorrow and committing suicide. The world can get past whatever inconvenience it would suffer by losing the sales tax they pay or the marginal jobs they may have... We'd even take up the slack of replacing them as fathers and mothers if they happened to be. These are not the precious lives we think of when we think of human lives. These are pernicious, dangerous lives that are more of an evil than a force for good. So just as I wouldn't mind them committing suicide or dying in accidents, I wouldn't have a problem with dispatching one if he were threatening my life or that of someone I care for.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Would I shoot?

Probably not, but I'd beat him about the head with the fire extinguisher I carry, and then detain the perp with the bandages from the first aid box that I also never leave the home without.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

But if some drunken asswipe is stealing your car or is using a knife or a club to threaten you at some distance; shoot him in the fricken thigh. No need to kill someone because you are scared. Main thing is don't show it, shoot it!

What is the compelling argument for preserving the life of this hypothetical shitbag criminal who's attacking me? Why would I WANT him to continue to live, once he has given me the moral and legal justification for taking his life to save mine? Why would I want him to live to possibly sue me (it happens) or contradict my statements about how it happened -- because you know he is going to lie, if he was truly the criminal doing the unprovoked attack on me. Who needs that shit? And why should society be upset with you if you killed him flat out?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

In TX (as well as some other states) its perfectly legal to shoot that person, since the law states that its ok to protect yourself AND your property. I'd have a hard time shooting someone if they're running away with my TV, but it would still be legal.

The moral of the story is check your state's laws and KNOW your state's law very well.

I think that this ought to be considered part of "HUMAN law."

When someone steals from you, he is stealing that part of your time in this life that you had to "spend" in order to acquire the possession being stolen. If it's, say, the uninsured-for-theft car you bought for $3000, and you need that car and will have to work to replace it, the thief has just stolen from you the period of time you will now have to work to pay for a replacement car. We don't get vouchers back from god for more time on earth after some piece of shit steals from us.

I think that if the majority of humanity knew that it was "human law" to kill those who would steal in addition to those who would kill, we'd have a better society. Because we generally say that theft does not warrant death, we end up with a lot more theft than we would otherwise have.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

Why would I WANT him to continue to live

Dunno?... Maybe out of humane decency? a mutual respect for life? or maybe the idea that the punishment fits the crime?

If a DRUNKEN yob runs at me... I will try to avoid him... Alot of drunken people are out of control, not too many of them deserve to die for it.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

Why would I WANT him to continue to live

Dunno?... Maybe out of humane decency? a mutual respect for life? or maybe the idea that the punishment fits the crime?

If a DRUNKEN yob runs at me... I will try to avoid him... Alot of drunken people are out of control, not too many of them deserve to die for it.

We see things differently.

My view is that people choose their actions in life, and those actions help determine whether they are worthy of others giving respect to their lives or not.

A guy who goes about hurting others, stealing from them, raping them, killing them, there is no reason to grieve for the end of his life coming as early as possible. He is a DETRIMENT to the human decency and respect for human life you mention.

You and I seem to be at odds as to whether a person can allow himself to degenerate to where he is no longer worthy of life because his life stands to represent all that is evil in a human being.

I feel that a person can push his misbehavior to a point where he forfeits his right to any "respect for (his) human life."

To fail to realize that a person can do this is to grant his life value and importance equal to that of, say, a doctor who saves lives, or a volunteer who helps people at personal expense of time, effort and wealth. For instance, if I were in a lifeboat with two others, one a volunteer, and one a convicted felon, and the time came to push one overboard because there was food enough for only two to survive, I would not have to flip a coin, but I guess you would, based on what I can gather of your opinions on this subject. I can't understand why, though.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

Why would I WANT him to continue to live

Dunno?... Maybe out of humane decency? a mutual respect for life? or maybe the idea that the punishment fits the crime?

If a DRUNKEN yob runs at me... I will try to avoid him... Alot of drunken people are out of control, not too many of them deserve to die for it.

Odd -- I just realized that your post links to the one in which I spoke about theft, but you quoted a line from a different one, in which I was talking about killing a guy who ATTACKED ME FOR MY LIFE.

You replied as though I had asked, "Why would I WANT him to continue to live" in the post about the car theft, but that's not where I typed it. I typed it in the post about a guy attacking me to kill me. Did you deliberately splice the two to misrepresent me? Or was it just a mistake that you will now clear up for us?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

A guy who goes about hurting others, stealing from them, raping them, killing them, there is no reason to grieve for the end of his life coming as early as possible. He is a DETRIMENT to the human decency and respect for human life you mention

I would agree whole heartedly with the sentiment that some people deserve more repsect (of life or any other) than other low life scumbos..

The issue I have is that when someone is Drunk.. and not necessarily acting in a rational manner, you do not have the background knowledge to know if this is a lowlife or just someone acting based on alcohol and visions! - yes, protect your own life but you dont have the ability to fairly judge who deserves to live.

This is why - courts carry out sentencing and not mobs on a street.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

If a DRUNKEN yob runs at me... I will try to avoid him... Alot of drunken people are out of control, not too many of them deserve to die for it.

Why do you excuse a guy from attacking you just because he's drunk? Do drunk people never successfully kill innocent people?

If a guy who is drunk is breaking into my house -- forget about the fact I might not even be able to know he's drunk -- I am not going to give him quarter just for that fact. If he seems to be no threat to me, I may withold deadly force pending a less-violent outcome (like, if he's an affable, harmless drunk who tried to get into my house because he mistook it for his own). If he's a belligerent drunk who is screaming that he's going to kill me, and I have reason to believe he has that capability, I'll kill him without remorse about it. That's my human right.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

Why do you excuse a guy from attacking you just because he's drunk? Do drunk people never successfully kill innocent people?

All I am saying, is that there are very few times (certainly Ive never encountered any) where I genuinely believe I am going to die.... less likely at the hands of an obvious Drunk.)

As I said... I can accept killing to defend your life. Certainly not your house or car... and not if its just a drunk guy running at you screaming... I can run faster than most drunks and in a straight line.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

A guy who goes about hurting others, stealing from them, raping them, killing them, there is no reason to grieve for the end of his life coming as early as possible. He is a DETRIMENT to the human decency and respect for human life you mention

I would agree whole heartedly with the sentiment that some people deserve more repsect (of life or any other) than other low life scumbos..

The issue I have is that when someone is Drunk.. and not necessarily acting in a rational manner, you do not have the background knowledge to know if this is a lowlife or just someone acting based on alcohol and visions! - yes, protect your own life but you dont have the ability to fairly judge who deserves to live.

This is why - courts carry out sentencing and not mobs on a street.

Courts have the luxury of being able to determine, at leisure what kind of a threat someone was.

A guy busts out the window of my house, reaches around and unlocks the doorknob, I don't HAVE to care one shit whether he's drunk or not, or what a great father he is to his kid (which is debatable, given that he engages in such maleficent criminal acts), or how much he donates to charity. I have the right to defend my own life in that situation, and drunk or not, it is his responsibility to act in a manner that is not consistent with giving the appearance of threatening my safety. If the reason he acts in a manner that threatens me and makes me fear for my life is that he is drunk, well too fuckin' bad, Mr. Drunken Lout, because a drunk killing me is no less guilty than a sober guy killing me, and I would be just as dead if I let it happen simply because I couldn't bring myself to hold a drunk guy accountable for his crime just because he was drunk. The decision to get out-of-control shitfaced is not exculpatory. One decides whether to imbibe enough alcohol to get drunk. One must pay the cost of making such a decision.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

Most burglars dont enter a house with the intention of killing the occupants. Likewise - I also believe (much as I hate the arseholes for doing it) that most burglars dont deserve to die or be shot.

Like I said - defend your life, fine. Shoot a burglar as he climbs through your window? Not if saying... oi.. stop climbing through my window would have done the job.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

As I said... I can accept killing to defend your life. Certainly not your house or car... and not if its just a drunk guy running at you screaming... I can run faster than most drunks and in a straight line.

You happen to be taking the trash out to the curb for pickup when a man comes walking up your driveway holding a flaming torch, yelling something about burning your house to the ground. He pays no mind to you, walks right by you, in fact.

You know there are no occupants in the house -- only all your worldly possessions, pictures of your deceased mother, your comic book collection, your passport, all your sentimental and/or expensive belongings. You also have no insurance to cover the financial loss (to say nothing of the emotional loss).

Do you really feel it is proper to be denied the right to use force to stop this guy from torching your house? I feel I should have that right.

Who knows, I don't recall whether the laws on use of deadly physical force extend to imminent acts of arson... I do know that if the fire kills a firefighter, the arsonist will face felony murder or manslaughter charges. Theoretically, you could argue that you were preventing the danger to and possible death of a firefighter.

But again, I'm talking about defending things with deadly force. Sure, they're just "things," but they may represent all that I have built for myself in my life up to this point, and I have a right to defend that.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

Do you really feel it is proper to be denied the right to use force to stop this guy from torching your house? I feel I should have that right.

This is probably where we can draw the line and you will sit on one side with me on the other....

In short no. You shouldnt have the right to kill someone for burning your shit.

A court certainly wouldnt give someone the death penalty after the fact - so why should you be allowed to prior?

I personally would try to stop them - with non-deadly force. If my life was on the line, I would let them get on with it. (rational me obviously and not emotional me at the time)

Certainly in the UK you would be jailed for killing someone who wanted to burn your house (without you in it) And would be surprised if you are allowed to in the states.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Most burglars dont enter a house with the intention of killing the occupants. Likewise - I also believe (much as I hate the arseholes for doing it) that most burglars dont deserve to die or be shot.

Like I said - defend your life, fine. Shoot a burglar as he climbs through your window? Not if saying... oi.. stop climbing through my window would have done the job.

The problem with letting the burglar in without shooting him is that you have no way of knowing what his intentions are. The law lets you assume the worst, since if you assume less, and the intruder intends more, you could end up killed because you understimated the threat.

Let's say you let the burglar come in through that window. He gets in. Now what? You calmly instruct him to get out? What if he doesn't comply? I'm assuming you have a gun in your hand at this time, and that he can see it. If you beat around the bush with the guy, all you are doing is prolonging the period during which he can decided to rush you and fight you for the gun you had in case he came bursting in shooting or swinging an axe or a bat or whatever.

Waiting to see whether the intentions of a home-breaker are lethal or not is stupid, since by virtue of breaking into your home, he is committing a crime against the sanctity of your home and your life. He is a threat to you, proved by virtue of that alone. You could keep erasing the line that you won't let him cross, and redrawing it closer and closer to you until you end up dead. First it's, "I won't let someone break into my house." Then it's, "If he has a weapon on him." Then it's, "If he raises the weapon." Then it's, "If he fires/swings the weapon..."

As far as "do they deserve to die or be shot," I say yes. They have crossed the boundary into an attack on a person. The social contract between us all requires that we do not commit acts of aggression against others, and that if we do, we forfeit the protections of that contract and are fair game for retaliatory attack.

I am just not as charitable as some people are, for example those who cut people slack because they "had a bad upbringing," or stuff like that. Bad life or not, everyone understands that stealing from or hurting people is BAD and is not supposed to be done. Ya make the decision to do it anyway, I think it's best for society that someone remove you from it.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Certainly in the UK you would be jailed for killing someone who wanted to burn your house (without you in it) And would be surprised if you are allowed to in the states."

To be fair, thats going to depend on the state you are in (the american government can't make their minds up about this, so we have no chance), I'm pretty sure if you tried this in Texas you could be shot by the homeowner.

But in a different scenario, if the guy was wounded, lying on a mosque floor, and about to be taken prisoner, I probably wouldn't shoot him in the back of the head, certainly not if there were any journalists around.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4014901.stm

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

But in a different scenario, if the guy was wounded, lying on a mosque floor, and about to be taken prisoner, I probably wouldn't shoot him in the back of the head, certainly not if there were any journalists around.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4014901.stm

Unlike you, I won't presume to judge the actions of a person who has just been conducting himself through the life-and-death action of clearing buildings in a freakin' WAR ZONE with snipers shooting at him and his buddies, and killing them daily.

How the fuck do you know what his mental state was. Guys like the one he shot had just in the immediate past been trying to kill him.

I'm prepared to cut him some slack. His head is at war right now. His head is afraid for his own life, and thinking about his family losing him, and he them. People here are asking me to forgive a fucking DRUNK who might break into my house, and won't do the same for a young kid who's thousands of miles away from home in the desert being shot at?!

I don't have all the details of the story, nor of how egregious this was. It has not been investigated yet, so why are you jumping to judgement on this soldier?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

But in a different scenario, if the guy was wounded, lying on a mosque floor, and about to be taken prisoner, I probably wouldn't shoot him in the back of the head, certainly not if there were any journalists around.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4014901.stm

You speak condescendingly about this soldier so casually. Did you read the part of the article where they said he had been shot in the cheek (um, that's INCHES FROM DEATH, in case you don't know) by Iraqi insurgents, and a soldier in his unit had been killed by explosives that had been placed in the body of a dead insurgent. These animals are booby-trapping their own dead. This soldier had a brush with death at their hands, and lost what was possibly a buddy of his. And you presume to judge him as though his mindset should be firmly fixated on some noble "rules of engagement" against an enemy that refuses to follow them, even when he discovers an enemy soldier feigning death. That enemy could have been perhaps sitting on grenades or a rifle or handgun, waiting for a suicide ambush of the U.S. marines in the room (and the news correspondent). Maybe he thought he was preventing the detonation of explosives, or the firing of a concealed weapon.

At any rate, how do you presume to judge him?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"At any rate, how do you presume to judge him?"

I wasn't aware I was judging anyone. I didn't say whether this guy was right or wrong, I didn't question his actions. I merely said that if the cameras were running, I probably wouldn't shoot a wounded person in the back of the head.

Have another Red Bull PJ, it will calm you down a little.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[D22369 0]

A well trained, acurate, and calm shooter does not have to kill. ***

BS.......

center mass my friend......
you have watched too much tv.....

Roy

They say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it.

[dtpilot 0]

im going to check out the website www.idpa.com a little later but a quick question for you. Is is very expensive to join and participate? I really need to increase my real world practice with my carry gun. I put most rounds through a sigpro which I dont carry. My carry weapon is a Taurus PT140. Really light and small for me but still accure. I have put about a 1000 rounds through it in the year i have owned it. Do you think that is to little for the year. I have heard that the taurus subcompacts arnt the best for putting tons of rounds through. They wear down faster or something. So far I cant tell a differense in the accurace after the 1000 rounds. Still shoots good and draws fast.

"Believe me! The secret of reaping the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment from life is to live dangerously!"
-- Friedrich Nietzsche

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

People here are asking me to forgive a fucking DRUNK who might break into my house

No. Just dont kill him.

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Would I shoot?

Probably not, but I'd beat him about the head with the fire extinguisher I carry, and then detain the perp with the bandages from the first aid box that I also never leave the home without.

There it is, the hidden secret:
Great Britain is armed.


ROFLMAO

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[AggieDave 6]

If the weapon was built right, you shouldn't notice a difference with only 1000 rds through it. Hell, that's just barely barely broke in. I've put just about 1000 rds through my kimber and it still feels too fresh, it doesn't feel like its broken in yet, I've put over 14,000rds through my Glock and it shoots like a champ. Its my dependable weapon.

IDPA isn't expensive as shooting sports go, especially since its basically a "run what ya brought" event. You're not going to have to spend thousands buying a .38 super "race gun" and accessories to be competitive and more importantly, to have fun and learn, like you would at some IPSC clubs.

You'll find the most expensive thing about the IDPA is the ammount of ammo you go through. I shot my .45 this time, next time I'm taking my 9mm. I'm still learning and practicing the skills that I can easily translate to a different weapon, I'm just saving money due to ammo costs.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

A well trained, acurate, and calm shooter does not have to kill.
Quote

BS.......

center mass my friend......
you have watched too much tv.....

You know, this sort of bullshit that people believe from watching TV is clogging the court system. Why? Civil suits from people dumb enough to believe that if people were good enough they could have shot to disable/disarm with out serious injury or death. 1. Due to the design of the human body, there is no such thing as a "shot not to kill." If you're shot in the arm, if could still kill you, the death may take a little longer, but it can happen. 2. In a high stress situation, even the best shooters in the world are still aiming centermass, since that's the easiest thing to hit, and not aiming there will almost guarentee a miss. 3. If I'm shooting for a knife in a perp's hands to disarm instead of centermass, what if I miss? What's behind the shooter that I could hit? In TX I am legally liable for any shot that goes through the perp into someone or any shot I miss with that hits anyone. So all of my shots are center mass simply to stop the bullet from going anywhere else with any force.


People need to get off their ass and actually learn about these things instead of thinking they know about the world from simply watching TV and movies.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."