[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39121297]But the victims of that home invasion directly caused the perpetrators to act out by alerting police and trying to resist. Sandy hook was an unprovoked school shooting that nobody could've predicted or prepared for.[/QUOTE]
How was a home invasion not a unprovoked incident that no one could have predicted?
[QUOTE=laserguided;39121311][url]http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?ls=c26&Parl=41&Ses=1&source=library_prb[/url]
I'm Canadian.[/QUOTE]
So what if you're canadian? The OP is about these incidents in the US.
[QUOTE=laserguided;39121257]If anybody breaks in to steal my property they can expect to have a rifle aimed at them.[/QUOTE]
In some states this doesn't look good in court in front of a judge.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39121324]How was a home invasion not a unprovoked incident that no one could have predicted?[/QUOTE]
It isn't. But the murder itself didn't occur until hours after the initial home invasion, and was directly provoked by resistance from the victims. If they hadn't fought back, they would not have been killed.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39121333]In some states this doesn't look good in court in front of a judge.[/QUOTE]
He lives in Canada, he'd probably be tried for not having his rifle or ammo locked up properly before they even started on him for defending himself. Ass backwards if you ask me.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39121328]So what if you're canadian? The OP is about these incidents in the US.[/QUOTE]
And? The law is on my side, as I said.
[QUOTE=laserguided;39121354]And? The law is on my side, as I said.[/QUOTE]
I was under the impression we were talking about the US specifically, as it wasn't stated anywhere else.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39121350]He lives in Canada, he'd probably be tried for not having his rifle or ammo locked up properly before they even started on him for defending himself. Ass backwards if you ask me.[/QUOTE]
Not true, you don't need to keep it locked up if its unloaded and the safety is on. You can keep it loaded if its locked up.
[editline]6th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39121366]I was under the impression we were talking about the US specifically, as it wasn't stated anywhere else.[/QUOTE]
Yeah we are, but I said the law is on MY side.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39121276]intent is irreverent, all that matters is their capability. Theres absolutely no way to tell if a person breaking into your home is there to steal your socks, or kill you. It's better to act off the worst case scenario than the best one in that sort of situation.[/QUOTE]
-dumb comment, didn't think it through-
[QUOTE=laserguided;39121397]Not true, you don't need to keep it locked up if its unloaded and the safety is on. You can keep it loaded if its locked up.
[/QUOTE]
There was a man in Canada recently that defended his home, but they tried to charge him because he had a magazine or his ammunition on his nightstand, no clue if the charges went through.
[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/karen-selick/ian-thomson-charged-with-defending-self_b_2410861.html"]Article[/URL]
[editline]6th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=RobbL;39121425]Wouldn't that justify shooting some random you walk past in an alleyway because they look a bit dodgy?[/QUOTE]
No, not at all. Theres a pretty massive fucking difference between passing a scary person in an ally, and someone breaking into your fucking house. Come on man.
[QUOTE=RobbL;39121425]Wouldn't that justify shooting some random you walk past in an alleyway because they look a bit dodgy?[/QUOTE]
This is a straw man fallacy, correct?
[editline]6th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39121438][B]There was a man in Canada recently that defended his home, but they tried to charge him because he had a magazine or his ammunition on his nightstand, no clue if the charges went through.[/B]
[editline]6th January 2013[/editline]
No, not at all. Theres a pretty massive fucking difference between passing a scary person in an ally, and someone breaking into your fucking house. Come on man.[/QUOTE]
Thats messed up, in theory that should be legal though.
[QUOTE=RobbL;39121425]Wouldn't that justify shooting some random you walk past in an alleyway because they look a bit dodgy?[/QUOTE]
Um, no it wouldn't.
[QUOTE=RobbL;39121425]Wouldn't that justify shooting some random you walk past in an alleyway because they look a bit dodgy?[/QUOTE]
There's no visible intent in that, if someone breaks into your house it's a whole new can of worms.
what bedazzles me is that facepunch thinks they understand every motive/reasoning behind every crime past/present/future. of course some home-invaders only come to rob without harming the victims, some come to kill/rape, and some end up killing for unforseen reasons. the whole point behind self-defense laws is that your decision to act against the original perpetrators isn't whether you know their intent(because you can't), but rather if you believe in you were in reasonable danger. generally the court decides if this belief is valid or not.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39121333]In some states this doesn't look good in court in front of a judge.[/QUOTE]
Yeah maybe if they are related to Dianne Feinstein.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39121343]It isn't. But the murder itself didn't occur until hours after the initial home invasion, and was directly provoked by resistance from the victims. If they hadn't fought back, they would not have been killed.[/QUOTE]
[quote]During this time, Hayes and Komisarjevsky escalated the aggravated nature of their crimes. Komisarjevsky sexually assaulted the 11-year-old daughter, Michaela. Komisarjevsky, who had photographed the sexual assault of the youth on his cell phone,[13] then provoked Hayes to rape Hawke-Petit. While Hayes was raping Hawke-Petit on the floor of her living room, Komisarjevsky entered the room announcing that William Petit had escaped. Hayes then strangled Hawke-Petit, doused her lifeless body and parts of the house including the daughters' rooms with gasoline. The daughters, while tied to their beds, had both been doused with gasoline; each had her head covered with a pillowcase.[14] A fire was then ignited, and Hayes and Komisarjevsky fled the scene. 17-year-old Hayley and 11-year-old Michaela both died from smoke inhalation.[/quote]
Are you serious? Are you seriously blaming the victims for being murdered?
You definitely live up to at least one part of your username.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39121343]It isn't. But the murder itself didn't occur until hours after the initial home invasion, and was directly provoked by resistance from the victims. If they hadn't fought back, they would not have been killed.[/QUOTE]
Thats like saying if a rape victim hadn't resisted she wouldn't have been murdered or raped. Did you drink bleach as a child or something?
What really pisses me off about gay_idiot is he clearly didn't even bother to actually read the article before deciding to blame a bunch of people for getting killed in their own home.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39121836]What really pisses me off about gay_idiot is he clearly didn't even bother to actually read the article before deciding to blame a bunch of people for getting killed in their own home.[/QUOTE]
Well I have reason to believe he is a gay idiot.
facepunch: where victim blaming is ok as long as rape isn't the issue
90% chance of troll, move along folks
"Yeah some guy decided to run away after being bludgeoned with a baseball bat and restrained in his basement. Totally his fault for the home invaders deciding to kill everyone." -gay_idiot
[editline]6th January 2013[/editline]
Ok I need to calm down.
gay_idiot and laserguided, the shining stars of SH
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39120021]Did you only post to personally attack me? At least try to explain your stance before getting upset, dude.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;38963289]
Why not? Lying about being the victim of any crime is an easy way to garner attention and moral support.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Trolling / dumb" - MaxOfS2D))[/highlight][/QUOTE]
It's not like you have a history or anything
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39121770]Are you serious? Are you seriously blaming the victims for being murdered?
You definitely live up to at least one part of your username.[/QUOTE]
Nice cherrypicking, next time maybe you should include [b]the paragraph directly above it saying that they alerted the police[/b].
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39121308]The majority follow the castle doctrine.[/QUOTE]
Castle doctrine isn't all that important really. Most home defense scenarios are very legal in countries that have no even heard the slightest of castle doctrine.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39122048]Nice cherrypicking, next time maybe you should include [b]the paragraph directly above it saying that they alerted the police[/b].[/QUOTE]
If you are actually saying that this justifies you blaming them for getting killed then you are a truly disgusting person.
I'm done talking with you.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39122166]If you are actually saying that this justifies you blaming them for getting killed then you are a truly disgusting person.
I'm done talking with you.[/QUOTE]
Don't put words into my mouth. They got killed because they provoked the perpetrators. I'm not blaming them for being in an impossible situation. Everyone's actions influences their future and both sides made their beds and laid in them that day.
[QUOTE=gay_idiot;39122048]Nice cherrypicking, next time maybe you should include [B]the paragraph directly above it saying that they alerted the police[/B].[/QUOTE]
So, you speak earlier about how its better to let the police handle things because we pay for them to exist with tax money, and [I]then[/I] you say that its the [I]victim's fault[/I] for getting killed because [I]they called the police,[/I] which you say they [I]should be doing anyway because defending yourself will get you killed.[/I]
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39122208]So, you speak earlier about how its better to let the police handle things because we pay for them to exist with tax money, and [I]then[/I] you say that its the [I]victim's fault[/I] for getting killed because [I]they called the police,[/I] which you say they [I]should be doing anyway because defending yourself is wrong.[/I][/QUOTE]
Would you call the police when some dudes have held you hostage for all of your belongings, and are prepared to kill you if you resist?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
