[QUOTE=Urkel01;18807802]i was gonna make a real argument, but then i saw your username and decided against it.
[/QUOTE]
You don't have a real argument, you know this, this is your pussy way out, and look at your own username before dismissing others' arguments based on theirs.
That was your most pathetic reply in a long line of them and I just can't waste any more time with you.
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;18807839]Yes it is.
Let's say your friend got drunk at a party so tried to break into someone's house thinking it was his own.
He walks up to it and sees some stranger and yells "Get the fuck out of my house!"
So the owner of the home gets scared, threatens him with a shotgun and then since your friend is drunk, doesn't hear him.
He keeps walking and then breaks a window because he thinks he forgot his keys. Then the home owner shoots him without hesitation.
Course it was an accident but an innocent person just got killed. It'd be like manslaughter.[/QUOTE]
Yea... except that wasn't the case, if you take a look at the source, it shows where the crime occurred, Lincoln County Oklahoma = the middle of nowhere, it's the kind of place where the sheriff is 20 minutes away and the nearest neighbor is 2 miles away, people don't randomly walk over to people's houses, he had to have had a pretty good motive.
[QUOTE=Zeddy;18807848]Hah. Wow. Bring in something completely irrelevant to avoid facing the fact that what I said is true.
You know what, if you're gonna do that, its easier just to say this: [B]Go fuck yourself.[/B][/QUOTE]
i am so glad that I got to infuriate you so completely :smugdog:
[QUOTE=Malumbre;18807867]You don't have a real argument, you know this, this is your pussy way out, and look at your own username before dismissing others' arguments based on theirs.
That was your most pathetic reply in a long line of them and I just can't waste any more time with you.[/QUOTE]
you too
ok, this thread would be way better without you anyways :smile:
[QUOTE=Kyle902;18807837]I started insulting you after you call me a gun fapping moron.[/QUOTE]
well sorry dude i guess i made a stupid assumption :frown:
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18807885]Yea... except that wasn't the case, if you take a look at the source, it shows where the crime occurred, Lincoln County Oklahoma = the middle of nowhere, it's the kind of place where the sheriff is 20 minutes away and the nearest neighbor is 2 miles away, people don't randomly walk over to people's houses, he had to have had a pretty good motive.[/QUOTE]
V:v:V i haven't a clue where lincoln county is anyhow
who gives a shit about oklahoma anyways, it's like the worst state
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18807802]i would give him the benefit of the doubt in that I wouldn't immediately kill him[/QUOTE]
Sometimes 'immediately' is all the time you get.
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;18807839]Yes it is.
Let's say your friend got drunk at a party so tried to break into someone's house thinking it was his own.
He walks up to it and sees some stranger and yells "Get the fuck out of my house!"
So the owner of the home gets scared, threatens him with a shotgun and then since your friend is drunk, doesn't hear him.
He keeps walking and then breaks a window because he thinks he forgot his keys. Then the home owner shoots him without hesitation.
Course it was an accident but an innocent person just got killed. It'd be like manslaughter.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't really matter if he was drunk or not. The victim doesn't know. All he knows is that someone is using force to gain entry to their home and probably doesn't have very good intentions for anyone they find inside.
[QUOTE=lmaoboat;18807962]Sometimes 'immediately' is all the time you get.[/QUOTE]
immediately is enough time to point the gun and shout for him to put his hands in the air
[QUOTE=lmaoboat;18807962]Sometimes 'immediately' is all the time you get.[/QUOTE]
Like for instance if you didn't notice the person was breaking in and he was coming at you in your bedroom. Reach for gun, dead intruder. Anyone who thinks they'd react differently, as if they were a computer calculating motives, outcomes, tactical maneuvers to take the assailant down without fatally wounding him, etc, is an idiot.
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18807978]immediately is enough time to point the gun and shout for him to put his hands in the air[/QUOTE]
Dude this is making me want to kill you. I cannot believe you are an outcome of generations and generations of offspring. Please go kill yourself and let your ancestors not be ashamed.
I really wish the ignore list also blocked any quotes by blocked users.
Mr. Mcguffin, Shitting up threads since February 2009!
:downsbravo:
[QUOTE=Malumbre;18808005]Like for instance if you didn't notice the person was breaking in and he was coming at you in your bedroom. Reach for gun, dead intruder. Anyone who thinks they'd react differently, as if they were a computer calculating motives, outcomes, tactical maneuvers to take the assailant down without fatally wounding him, etc, is an idiot.[/QUOTE]
you have a point there. but assuming you know the person is coming, you can easily handle the situation using non-lethal methods
[QUOTE=Malumbre;18808029]I really wish the ignore list also blocked any quotes by blocked users.[/QUOTE]
"Heh. I'm [B]IGNORING[/B] you. You're on my [B]IGNORE LIST.[/B] What was that? Sorry, I can't read what you said because you're on my [B]IGNORE LIST.[/B] :smug::smug::smug:"
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18808049]you have a point there. but assuming you know the person is coming, you can easily handle the situation using non-lethal methods[/QUOTE]
Read my above post and DIE. I cannot any longer bear to see you show your infuriating stupidity.
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18807978]immediately is enough time to point the gun and shout for him to put his hands in the air[/QUOTE]
But it takes two seconds to say that, and immediately would be on the order of one Planck time. :buddy:
Now the question is what happens to the woman? I bet she gets life in prison......
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18808049]you have a point there. but assuming you know the person is coming, you can easily handle the situation using non-lethal methods[/QUOTE]
Like what? You going to use your uber kung-fu to disarm them?
EDIT: At Plokoon, she gets off scott-free, OK has Castle Statues adopted, she was within the law, and the NRA will send the best lawyers they have if anyone tries anything.
[QUOTE=plokoon9619;18808125]Now the question is what happens to the woman? I bet she gets life in prison......[/QUOTE]
If it was England, yes. She'd face life in prison for defending herself.
This happened in the US, and she was defending herself so no.
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18807978]immediately is enough time to point the gun and shout for him to put his hands in the air[/QUOTE]
She (allegedly) did. Of course this is Texas, so it possible that she forced him to the ground at gunpoint and shot him in the back of the head like that old guy.
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18808133]Like what? You going to use your uber kung-fu to disarm them?[/QUOTE]
Shoot 'em da' leg.
Though yeah, I'm with the majority of the thread on this one, the man knew she was armed and scared as a fuck and he still chose to advance.
[QUOTE=lmaoboat;18808159]She (allegedly) did. Of course this is Texas, so it possible that she forced him to the ground at gunpoint and shot him in the back of the head like that old guy.[/QUOTE]
It's in Oklahoma.
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18808133]Like what? You going to use your uber kung-fu to disarm them?
EDIT: At Plokoon, she gets off scott-free, OK has Castle Statues adopted, she was within the law, and the NRA will send the best lawyers they have if anyone tries anything.[/QUOTE]
no if you have a gun and you know they're coming you can get them to stand down pretty easily since most home invaders don't have guns :confused:
castle doctrine is the shittiest thing ever tho
You guys do know that shooting an intruder with the intent to harm or disable him (like aiming for the legs and such) is illegal? If you have the time and are calm enough to aim at a specific body part, the intruder obviously isn't much of a threat, therefore the intruder can actually sue your happy ass if you decide to put a cap in his legs.
Now if your aim is off and you hit the legs, you're fine. But if you tell the cops "I saw him coming so I shot him in the legs to slow him down", then you're going away in cuffs. You're only supposed to use lethal force on somebody if your life is in immediate danger, and having the time to target a specific body part means that you obviously weren't reacting on the spur of the moment.
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18808195]no if you have a gun and you know they're coming you can get them to stand down pretty easily since most home invaders don't have guns :confused:
castle doctrine is the shittiest thing ever tho[/QUOTE]
Yes, because that totally worked for her, "Stop! I'll shoot" *Throws table through the door and comes in*
And no, Castle Doctrine isn't, it finally gives some protection to a homeowner. No more, "Even though I broke into your house, screaming like a madman in the middle of the night, and was committing a felony in the process, I can sue you for damages because you shot me and I lived and now I have arthritis." or his family comes after you. You shoot when you have no other choice, and you shoot to kill, simple as that.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;18808215]You guys do know that shooting an intruder with the intent to harm or disable him (like aiming for the legs and such) is illegal? If you have the time and are calm enough to aim at a specific body part, the intruder obviously isn't much of a threat, therefore the intruder can actually sue your happy ass if you decide to put a cap in his legs.
Now if your aim is off and you hit the legs, you're fine. But if you tell the cops "I saw him coming so I shot him in the legs to slow him down", then you're going away in cuffs. You're only supposed to use lethal force on somebody if your life is in immediate danger, and having the time to target a specific body part means that you obviously weren't reacting on the spur of the moment.[/QUOTE]
so killing someone is better than having a small chance of getting in trouble, okay
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18808237]Yes, because that totally worked for her, "Stop! I'll shoot" *Throws table through the door and comes in*[/quote]
for the last fucking time i'm not talking about the old lady
[quote]And no, Castle Doctrine isn't, it finally gives some protection to a homeowner. No more, "Even though I broke into your house, screaming like a madman in the middle of the night, and was committing a felony in the process, I can sue you for damages because you shot me in the shoulder and now I have arthritis."[/QUOTE]
the "you shot me while i invaded now I sue you" is a stupid myth on par with "canadian healthcare has long lines" or something equally retarded. castle doctrine is merely an excuse for dumb redneck southerners to act like cowboys and be able to kill somebody without consequence under certain conditions.
What she did was perfectly acceptable. She called the cops, defended herself, and gave warnings before firing. She didn't do anything illegal, because she hadn't instantly fired on him when she saw him. She knew that he had intentions of harm because he continued even after she warned him. The woman did what she should have.
[QUOTE=Urkel01;18808254]so killing someone is better than having a small chance of getting in trouble, okay[/QUOTE]
It's not a small chance, it's called that fucking scumbag sues you for all you've got because he was a dumbass, committed a crime, paid the price, didn't die, and now has to walk with a limp.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;18808215]You guys do know that shooting an intruder with the intent to harm or disable him (like aiming for the legs and such) is illegal? If you have the time and are calm enough to aim at a specific body part, the intruder obviously isn't much of a threat, therefore the intruder can actually sue your happy ass if you decide to put a cap in his legs.
Now if your aim is off and you hit the legs, you're fine. But if you tell the cops "I saw him coming so I shot him in the legs to slow him down", then you're going away in cuffs. You're only supposed to use lethal force on somebody if your life is in immediate danger, and having the time to target a specific body part means that you obviously weren't reacting on the spur of the moment.[/QUOTE]Not in certain U.S. states.
A friend of mine who used to live in Missouri once told me it's perfectly legal to shoot someone who is trespassing on their land "with intent to not kill" where he used to live.
[QUOTE=Doug52392;18808285]Not in certain U.S. states.
A friend of mine who used to live in Missouri once told me it's perfectly legal to shoot someone who is trespassing on their land "with intent to not kill" where he used to live.[/QUOTE]
Shooting them is legal, but it doesn't grant you immunity from them suing you for "disabilities" later down the line.
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18808284]It's not a small chance, it's called that fucking scumbag sues you for all you've got because he was a dumbass, committed a crime, paid the price, didn't die, and now has to walk with a limp.[/QUOTE]
see my above post, it's a stupid myth
yes our justice system is fucked but it's not that fucked.
[QUOTE=XxPsychoxX;18808316]Shooting them is legal, but it doesn't grant you immunity from them suing you for "disabilities" later down the line.[/QUOTE]
if you think that a judge would look at a case like that and go "hm yes this is acceptable" then I dunno what to tell you dude
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.