Boy who shot intruder says suspect 'cried like a little baby'
468 replies, posted
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50228609]Wasn't even trying to claim that was your argument. Just that it's a argument we see here a lot that is completely absurd. The escalation of violence isn't always the way forward (as you have said). I am allowed to discuss other arguments seen by our more concerning posters in my posts without it breaking some made up "debate etiquette" you're expecting me to follow.[/QUOTE]
It's disingenuous to imply that I have implied that though. I never said it, and to shove that onto me like that is my position isn't a very strong argumentative tactic imo, it has nothing to do with "etiquette".
I think it's an absurd argument. I'm not advocating for it, but what I actually said was ignored by you, Plunger, and AK'z and all of you ran with tangential arguments aimed at me, but not even about what I had actually said.
Just seems like, you know, bullshit.
[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;50227977]Totally meant it and wasn't just trying to scare an 11-year-old. Totally wanted to actually kill him.[/QUOTE]
yeah what a dumb fucking kid why didn't he realize the intruding criminal was just bluffing
[QUOTE=Morgen;50227343] Clearly wasn't taught that such weapons are to be used to defend your life, not from taking your replaceable inanimate objects.[/QUOTE]
Or he was a scared 11 year old. But I don't kno
[editline]29th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=ElectronicG19;50227977]Totally meant it and wasn't just trying to scare an 11-year-old. Totally wanted to actually kill him.[/QUOTE]
Have a stranger break into your house and say that too you. I don't think you would be as dismissive
[QUOTE=X12321;50228620]So turning your back just gives you instant godmode? Wow I'll keep that in mind next time I'm robbing someones house. I just get to keep getting away with it because my back is turned. Great idea dude![/QUOTE]
If they are fleeing then yes? They no longer pose a threat to you. Then it's the police's problem to deal with. Items can be replaced, people can't.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50228621]Did you read the post chain you initially replied to. AK was saying there's no reason to shoot someone just because you think they might come back again, and you disagreed with that.[/QUOTE]
Did you read my posts, or are you LITERALLY just going off what other people said, ignoring my words, and then arguing about what I said?
Because that's what you're doing as far as I can tell.
My first post was about shot count in response to AKz. My second post was about not understanding the mindset of letting the person in your home dictate your life. All my subsequent posts in that chain are about that.
[QUOTE=AK'z;50228036]the first natural response is to back away. I'm sorry if that's not cool, but unless you're barricaded indoors, I have no reason to engage with some crackpot.
my house is not my fort, it's just a few bricks and some records.[/QUOTE]
This was the post I responded to primarily Plunger.
I really don't know what the fuck you're going on about at this point.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50228622]It's disingenuous to imply that I have implied that though. I never said it, and to shove that onto me like that is my position isn't a very strong argumentative tactic imo, it has nothing to do with "etiquette".[/QUOTE]
Okay but I did none of that so cool your jets. I included the point in my post as an extension to the actual point I was quoting from you. That there is a weird belief amongst some posters here that every person who ever breaks in is a Satanist looking for fresh sacrifices so blow them away ASAP.
Nobody is actually attacking you, so calm it the fuck down. Maybe take a break from the thread or something? Because Christ almighty, not everything is an attack on you or an attempt to make you look like a bloodthirsty lunatic.
[QUOTE=Morgen;50228638]If they are fleeing then yes? They no longer pose a threat to you. Then it's the police's problem to deal with. Items can be replaced, people can't.[/QUOTE]
How do you [I]know[/I] that? You gunna take their word for it?
Oh and your second point, if items can be replaced why not just sit their and let them steal everything then? Let's say they didn't flee and didn't even say anything to you, what are you going to do then?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50228645]Okay but I did none of that so cool your jets. I included the point in my post as an extension to the actual point I was quoting from you. That there is a weird belief amongst some posters here that every person who ever breaks in is a Satanist looking for fresh sacrifices so blow them away ASAP.[/QUOTE]
could you quote specifically who you are talking about
[QUOTE=Morgen;50228638]If they are fleeing then yes? They no longer pose a threat to you. Then it's the police's problem to deal with. Items can be replaced, people can't.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, as long as someone is in my house or on my property and isn't complying with my commands they're a threat, back turned or no. So, if someone turns around I can assume they're just trying to move back to lay in wait for me, and open up on their back.
Thankfully, the law supports this where I live, and I am well within my rights to do so.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50228645]Okay but I did none of that so cool your jets. I included the point in my post as an extension to the actual point I was quoting from you. That there is a weird belief amongst some posters here that every person who ever breaks in is a Satanist looking for fresh sacrifices so blow them away ASAP.
Nobody is actually attacking you, so calm it the fuck down. Maybe take a break from the thread or something? Because Christ almighty, not everything is an attack on you or an attempt to make you look like a bloodthirsty lunatic.[/QUOTE]
Actually, Plunger is saying I implied you should shoot people in the back, so yeah, that's actually happening here. I don't take kindly to that.
I don't think everyone breaking in is trying to kill me. The thing is, I don't dare give them the benefit of the doubt.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50228644]Did you read my posts, or are you LITERALLY just going off what other people said, ignoring my words, and then arguing about what I said?
Because that's what you're doing as far as I can tell.
My first post was about shot count in response to AKz. My second post was about not understanding the mindset of letting the person in your home dictate your life. All my subsequent posts in that chain are about that.
This was the post I responded to primarily Plunger.
I really don't know what the fuck you're going on about at this point.[/QUOTE]
Did you read the post he was replying to? Justifying shooting a guy for running away?
[QUOTE=X12321;50228651]How do you [I]know[/I] that? You gunna take their word for it? [/QUOTE]
I think the action of them fleeing is a good way to confirm, y'know, they're fleeing.
I mean, by all means stay up for a bit longer and keep prepared in case they do come back. But whilst they are fleeing, they are actually fleeing and you can't really justify shooting them. They're running off, your life isn't at risk at that point in time.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50228645]Okay but I did none of that so cool your jets. I included the point in my post as an extension to the actual point I was quoting from you. That there is a weird belief amongst some posters here that every person who ever breaks in is a Satanist looking for fresh sacrifices so blow them away ASAP.
[/QUOTE]
It's much better and much safer to assume this than hope they're just a poor lovable oaf trying to get cash to buy bread. I don't think that everyone who busts into my house wants me dead, but there's literally no reason for me to hope that they're not the 1% who will wish harm on me instead of making sure they're not a threat.
Plus, I value my property I worked damn hard for, or is irreplaceable, over the life of a burglar.
[QUOTE=X12321;50228599]Because everyone has a choice? hahahaha
You people in this thread pretending like you're going to let a robber waltz around your house while you hide(?) are the ones with issues tbh.
No matter where you live you are always susceptible to being robbed. There is no "safe space" where police will show up in 10 seconds.[/QUOTE]
They're acting like they wouldn't because they're sheltered. They've never had to deal with this kind of situation before, face to face, so they have no fucking clue what they're talking about. Their opinions really don't matter-- not only because of the fact they're sheltered, but also because their mentality is completely wrong because it puts people at unnecessary risk by restricting their rights to a presumptuous extent.
If someone does something illegal and threatening to you/against your property, then you should have every right to retaliate against them in the moment that it's occurring. Again, this is why we need ironclad Castle Doctrines across the country. You shouldn't have to worry about this bullshit of, "Well he was retreating!" that might lead to you getting arrested and prosecuted in the end because a bunch of people who weren't there and don't know any better start claiming like armchair fighters that you went too far in your actions.
You don't know what the person is doing one way or another because you can't read minds. Maybe they are retreating. Then again, maybe they're just going to get their buddies and will come back. Maybe they're going to get a weapon. You don't know.
The only thing you do know for certain is that if you kill them, then they're dead, and the threat has been completely annihilated. And that's how it should be. This is not a complicated matter, and the people trying to turn it into one are running some serious mental gymnastics here to skirt around the fact that the person who has broken into your house is the one who is clearly in the wrong.
You should have every right to deal with them as you see fit in that situation, and if they get killed in the process, well that's too fucking bad-- they shouldn't have broken into your house in the first place. This isn't a difficult social contract to understand here: don't start trouble, there won't be trouble; if you start trouble, then there's a very real possibility that you might get killed, and the person you instigated against will be well within their rights to kill you.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50228665]Did you read the post he was replying to? Justifying shooting a guy for running away?[/QUOTE]
You mean Ninja Gnomes post? You mean the one that doesn't say anything, ANYTHING, about shooting someone in the back?
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50228007]i don't fear for my life, neither do many people, but i assume someone who has had multiple break-ins and had the guy directly tell them "i'll kill you" probably has some reason to fear for their life[/QUOTE]
You mean this post, which is not in anyway that I can tell at all defending shooting someone in the back, just explaining why an 11 year old might be fucking scared? That's the post you insist I'm defending, as well as parroting, all the while you entirely misinterpret said post to be vastly more bloodthirsty than it is?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;50228666]I think the action of them fleeing is a good way to confirm, y'know, they're fleeing.
I mean, by all means stay up for a bit longer and keep prepared in case they do come back. But whilst they are fleeing, they are actually fleeing and you can't really justify shooting them. They're running off, your life isn't at risk at that point in time.[/QUOTE]
Why should I have to go through all that when I can just shoot them and never have to worry about it again though? Why is it all the sudden on me? You play stupid games you win stupid prizes, sorry bud.
[editline]29th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Govna;50228669]They're acting like they wouldn't because they're sheltered. They've never had to deal with this kind of situation before, face to face, so they have no fucking clue what they're talking about. Their opinions really don't matter-- not only because of the fact they're sheltered, but also because their mentality is completely wrong because it puts people at unnecessary risk by restricting their rights to a presumptuous extent.
If someone does something illegal and threatening to you/against your property, then you should have every right to retaliate against them in the moment that it's occurring. Again, this is why we need ironclad Castle Doctrines across the country. You shouldn't have to worry about this bullshit of, "Well he was retreating!" that might lead to you getting arrested and prosecuted in the end because a bunch of people who weren't there and don't know any better start claiming like armchair fighters that you went too far in your actions.
You don't know what the person is doing one way or another because you can't read minds. Maybe they are retreating. Then again, maybe they're just going to get their buddies and will come back. Maybe they're going to get a weapon. You don't know.
The only thing you do know for certain is that if you kill them, then they're dead, and the threat has been completely annihilated. And that's how it should be. This is not a complicated matter, and the people trying to turn it into one are running some serious mental gymnastics here to skirt around the fact that the person who has broken into your house is the one who is clearly in the wrong.
You should have every right to deal with them as you see fit in that situation, and if they get killed in the process, well that's too fucking bad-- they shouldn't have broken into your house in the first place. This isn't a difficult social contract to understand here: don't start trouble, there won't be trouble; if you start trouble, then there's a very real possibility that you might get killed, and the person you instigated against will be well within their rights to kill you.[/QUOTE]
I completely agree I just wanted to prod at their "knowledge" without flat-out calling them sheltered(which they are)
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50228681]You mean Ninja Gnomes post? You mean the one that doesn't say anything, ANYTHING, about shooting someone in the back?
You mean this post, which is not in anyway that I can tell at all defending shooting someone in the back, just explaining why an 11 year old might be fucking scared? That's the post you insist I'm defending, as well as parroting, all the while you entirely misinterpret said post to be vastly more bloodthirsty than it is?[/QUOTE]
Is he talking about a different 11 year old shooting a robber?
[QUOTE=X12321;50228683]Why should I have to go through all that when I can just shoot them and never have to worry about it again though? Why is it all the sudden on me? You play stupid games you win stupid prizes, sorry bud.[/QUOTE]
Because someone's life is in your hands.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50228700]Is he talking about a different 11 year old shooting a robber?[/QUOTE]
What are you even on about at this point? How far are you going to go to insist I agree with something I have outright said I don't agree to? What the fuck dude.
No, he was referring to this shooter, who despite his statements, was no doubt fucking scared during the break in.
Or are you saying an 11 year old WOULDN'T feel fear in that situation?
[QUOTE=Govna;50228669]They're acting like they wouldn't because they're sheltered.[/QUOTE]
how am i sheltered lol i work in an emergency department of one of the rowdiest areas in britain.
by all your precautionary tales, I should be carrying bats, knives, spikes, just the works whenever I leave my house.
i've engaged with really incredibly dangerous people, but i've never once feared for my life.
[QUOTE=Govna;50228669]They're acting like they wouldn't because they're sheltered. They've never had to deal with this kind of situation before, face to face, so they have no fucking clue what they're talking about. Their opinions really don't matter-- not only because of the fact they're sheltered, but also because their mentality is completely wrong because it puts people at unnecessary risk by restricting their rights to a presumptuous extent.
If someone does something illegal and threatening to you/against your property, then you should have every right to retaliate against them in the moment that it's occurring. Again, this is why we need ironclad Castle Doctrines across the country. You shouldn't have to worry about this bullshit of, "Well he was retreating!" that might lead to you getting arrested and prosecuted in the end because a bunch of people who weren't there and don't know any better start claiming like armchair fighters that you went too far in your actions.
You don't know what the person is doing one way or another because you can't read minds. Maybe they are retreating. [B]Then again, maybe they're just going to get their buddies and will come back. Maybe they're going to get a weapon. You don't know.[/B]
The only thing you do know for certain is that if you kill them, then they're dead, and the threat has been completely annihilated. And that's how it should be. This is not a complicated matter, and the people trying to turn it into one are running some serious mental gymnastics here to skirt around the fact that the person who has broken into your house is the one who is clearly in the wrong.
You should have every right to deal with them as you see fit in that situation, and if they get killed in the process, well that's too fucking bad-- they shouldn't have broken into your house in the first place. This isn't a difficult social contract to understand here: don't start trouble, there won't be trouble; if you start trouble, then there's a very real possibility that you might get killed, and the person you instigated against will be well within their rights to kill you.[/QUOTE]
You're right, you can't read minds.
Self-defense is protection from immediate threats, that's not the case here.
[QUOTE=X12321;50228683]I completely agree I just wanted to prod at their "knowledge" without flat-out calling them sheltered(which they are)[/QUOTE]
Oh I know that's what you were doing dude, I wasn't going after you. I thought you had a good point and just wanted to run with it so I could expand further on what exactly is wrong with their mindset.
[QUOTE=X12321;50228651]How do you [I]know[/I] that? You gunna take their word for it?
Oh and your second point, if items can be replaced why not just sit their and let them steal everything then? Let's say they didn't flee and didn't even say anything to you, what are you going to do then?[/QUOTE]
If they are running away from you how can they be a threat? You don't have to let them steal things but you can make your presence known, gun drawn and tell them to get out. If they are running off with your stuff already then it sucks but that doesn't dictate the use of deadly force. Stand your ground, shoot them if they approach you or whatever. The majority of states will not allow you to shoot a thief that is fleeing.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50228720]You're right, you can't read minds.
Self-defense is protection from immediate threats, that's not the case here.[/QUOTE]
...but the problem in the first place is that you don't know if he's an immediate threat or not. In this case, the guy made threats against the kid previously. There wasn't anyway to tell if he was just temporarily retreating and would come back or what.
Nothing wrong was done here, and thank fuck we've got a lot of people rightfully supporting this kid. He did an excellent job defending himself under the circumstances and showed a lot of courage despite the situation.
[QUOTE=Govna;50228730]...but the problem in the first place is that you don't know if he's an immediate threat or not. In this case, the guy made threats against the kid previously. [B]There wasn't anyway to tell if he was just temporarily retreating and would come back or what.[/B]
Nothing wrong was done here, and thank fuck we've got a lot of people rightfully supporting this kid. He did an excellent job defending himself under the circumstances and showed a lot of courage despite the situation.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you understand what immediate means then.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50228700]Is he talking about a different 11 year old shooting a robber?[/QUOTE]
i wasn't saying "it is good the kid shot him", i was explaining why the kid wasn't psychopath for shooting him. i don't think this shooting was justified but i also don't expect a scared kid to act completely rationally
[QUOTE=Govna;50228730]...but the problem in the first place is that you don't know if he's an immediate threat or not. In this case, the guy made threats against the kid previously. There wasn't anyway to tell if he was just temporarily retreating and would come back or what.
Nothing wrong was done here, and thank fuck we've got a lot of people rightfully supporting this kid. He did an excellent job defending himself under the circumstances and showed a lot of courage despite the situation.[/QUOTE]
You're really stretching the definition of immediate if you include leaving-and-coming-back-later.
[QUOTE=AK'z;50228711]how am i sheltered lol i work in an emergency department of one of the rowdiest areas in britain.
by all your precautionary tales, I should be carrying bats, knives, spikes, just the works whenever I leave my house.
i've engaged with really incredibly dangerous people, but i've never once feared for my life.[/QUOTE]
Elaborate. This isn't the United Kingdom we're talking about here, this is the United States. Our "rowdiest areas"... go beyond being rowdy. They're fucking brutal. Also, if you've actually been in such dangerous situations and you claim to have been and have never once been afraid, then you're honestly behaving stupidly. Not to say that you should let fear get the better of you (you shouldn't), but fear is important to have because of its capacity to make us more cautious of our surroundings (including the people) and able to react faster if/when we need to.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50228742]i wasn't saying "it is good the kid shot him", i was explaining why the kid wasn't psychopath for shooting him. i don't think this shooting was justified but i also don't expect a scared kid to act completely rationally[/QUOTE]
Then I completely agree, he's a child so he can't be expected to understand what's happening, but if this was a 25 year old gunning down a fleeing burglar who's already hopping the fence I'd be pretty concerned.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;50228660]could you quote specifically who you are talking about[/QUOTE]
I could if I felt like digging through an archive that doesn't exist. But here's some choice cuts, fresh off the deli;
[QUOTE=DaMastez;50227953]Better to kill the piece of shit who is threatening your life then have to live in fear that they will come back while you're asleep and actually do it.[/QUOTE]
The implication here being that the criminal is in the process of fucking off (how would they come back if they're already there?), verbal threat? Fuck it just shoot them right there.
[QUOTE=DaMastez;50228005]Who knows if he meant it, he was already willing to illegally break into someone's home. Who knows what he wanted, why he was there, what his mental state was. Better to err on the side of caution and remove the threat then have to live in fear, to my view.[/QUOTE]
Shit dude, you're on a roll today, "fuck it just kill them as soon as they break in lol".
[QUOTE=X12321;50228683]Why should I have to go through all that when I can just shoot them and never have to worry about it again though? Why is it all the sudden on me? You play stupid games you win stupid prizes, sorry bud.[/QUOTE]
Good timing lad! Adding you to the collection of lunatics!
If a burglar doesn't just pack it in and flee or stay put until help arrives, yeah, I can understand actually taking them on as a threat because at that point they are probably willing to fight their way out. But to post shit like "not taking any chances, home invaders get shot" is totally asinine. Someone breaking in should be given warnings, if they surrender or flee that's it, end of story. Preventing the needless loss of life is kinda something you should strive for after all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.