247 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

First of all "home invasion" is only defined by law in seven US states and nowhere outside the US, second how can you ascertain if a trespasser has violent intent?

"Home invasion" is synonymous with trespassing, which is what you would legally call it. Trespassing, as I hope you would know, is illegal everywhere in the US (although the severity and punishments differ per state).

 

Again, if someone is unlawfully on your property, knowing that they are unlawfully on your property, what intent could they possibly have that's not malicious? 

[Hazegurl]

Uh god, it's this paranoid, inward-looking attitude that just makes me sick.

According to the Bureau of Justice, the vast majority of burglaries is non-violent and that's not even taking into account other home invasions. And according to most reports, the presence of a gun within a robbed household generally increases the likelihood of the homeowner themselves being hurt or killed in a burglary.


Yep, that attitude seems to be workin real well for the US lately.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, in law, there's no difference between trespass and "home invasion". Yes, believe me, there are reasons why someone could be on your lawn, garage or even house without intending to cause harm.

You sound crazy. I live in a not so great neighborhood. I'm sure there are others who can say the same. Who on earth is going to sit around trying to figure out if a burglar only wants to take your stuff and not want to rape, beat you to a bloody pulp, or worse. Being on someone's lawn is way different than being in their freaking home. You have no business being there period and should get shot. Don't want to get shot? Don't rob people.

 

 

My elderly neighbor once fell down his stairs in his home, luckily I heard the commotion and ran to his house. I had to kick the door in to get to him.. But I suppose he had every right to blow my head off with a shotgun... After he had stopped the bleeding from his own cracked skull of course... I mean, how dare I enter his house uninvited?

 

Let's see, your neighbor was in danger and needed help and you kicked in their door to help them. That is not the same as simply kicking in your neighbor's door with malicious intent. If there is no reason at all to kick in someone's door and you do it, then why are you doing it? Most certainly not to invite them out for tea.

[Colonelkillabee]

Where did you pull that one from? Firearms accounted for 50.9% of suicides in the US last year, drowning 1.1%.
 



That argument is silly and what does it have to do with soccer? Fact is, having a gun accessably in the house puts you and others in far greater danger than not having one.
 

You didn't discredit any of my arguments, pal.

That's because more people have guns than they do pools? And more people have accidental deaths with pools in proportion to guns.

 

The argument was silly because it was in response to a silly argument in turn, and no, a gun in the house doesn't put you in danger, irresponsibility does. We in the south have been around guns all our lives. We respect it as a dangerous tool and know better than to play with it or leave it hanging around. Guns don't kill people, irresponsible idiots do.

 

I discredited your whole ****. If accidental deaths means guns should go, so should cops and cars, as they kill more than private gun owners do.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

[Colonelkillabee]

Where did you pull that one from? Firearms accounted for 50.9% of suicides in the US last year, drowning 1.1%.
 
 

http://www.m1-garand...mming-pools.php

[raging_monkey]

pass the bowl its getting funny

[Sir DeLoria]

When you kick a ball into someone else's garage, you should inform the homeowner of what you did and tell them it was an accident. I'm not saying the kid should have died for it, but just coming onto someone else's property and going into their garage is not an OK thing to do.

It's impossible to argue with this, because a scenario like this probably wouldn't have occured anywhere else in the world. In most countries, if you loose your ball on someone's property, you just run over and fetch it, nowehre else are people so paranoid about their property as in(parts of the) the US.
 

@ the bold: What do any of these have to actually do with guns?

Simple really, if you have a gun, you're more likely to get hurt or killed in a burglary/home invasion.

Attacking someone with a firearm is a better idea than attacking them barehanded or with a melee weapon. If you get in close to somebody who is potentialy armed, you're only opening yourself up to danger. Also, you can miss a melee attack as well, which again, only opens you up to danger. If a burglar is able to reach your gun before you are, that's your fault and not a problem with the gun. A burglar who is willing to harm or kill you will harm or kill you regardless of whether they have a gun or not, and you are the least responsible person on the planet if you leave a gun out in the open like that.

Then why attack the crook at all and not let professional law encorcement handle it? Unless the guy is actually out to kill you(highly unlikely) you're better off not attacking, that's why cops tell you to stay calm and wait for them and not storm out guns blazing. Judging by the frequency of news reports about gun related accidents and how many guns aren't even properly registered or taken care of, I'd say this isn't as unlikely as you might think.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

pass the bowl its getting funny

*passes popcorn*

[Colonelkillabee]

Simple really, if you have a gun, you're more likely to get hurt or killed in a burglary/home invasion.

 

Bullshit. People aren't bears. When a human breaks into your home, you don't play dead. When someone comes in to try and rape someone's kids, and someone gets killed because they used a gun against the intruder and they had one too, are you going to say "You stupid ******, you should have let him so you wouldn't get hurt!"

 

 

???

 

Knowing you, your answer's probably yes.

[Dave of Canada]

Sir DeLoria, on 13 Dec 2014 - 5:14 PM, said:
Uh god, it's this paranoid, inward-looking attitude that just makes me sick.

 

Next time I'll apologize to the guy who breaks into my house if it makes you feel any better.

 

You sound like you've lived a sheltered life in a good neighborhood for most of your life. Be grateful, not everyone experiences that.

 

Yep, that attitude seems to be workin real well for the US lately.

 

Overall? The amount of gun-related deaths are a drop in a bucket in the US.

[raging_monkey]

*passes popcorn*

thanks * takes some popcorn*

[Sir DeLoria]

http://www.m1-garand...mming-pools.php

Lmao, yes of course drownings are a more common cause of death than guns, but most people drown in boat accidents, at sea or in rivers not frikking pools.

The argument was silly because it was in response to a silly argument in turn, and no, a gun in the house doesn't put you in danger, irresponsibility does. We in the south have been around guns all our lives. We respect it as a dangerous tool and know better than to play with it or leave it hanging around. Guns don't kill people, irresponsible idiots do.

Actually yes, guns do kill people and please don't use that stupid NRA saying anymore because it makes you sound dumber than you are. Guns are the means of deaths, yes irresponsibility may be the ultimate cause, but what's the solution? Simple, make guns less accesible and make self-defense laws more strict.

I discredited your whole ****. If accidental deaths means guns should go, so should cops and cars, as they kill more than private gun owners do.

Law enforcement and cars are actually necessary to maintain society and economy, guns aren't. But I'm not even advocating a toal ban on guns, I'm advocating moderate gun control and self-defense laws that match a civilized society.

[Colonelkillabee]

 

 

Next time I'll apologize to the guy who breaks into my house if it makes you feel any better.

 

You sound like you've lived a sheltered life in a good neighborhood for most of your life. Be grateful, not everyone experiences that.

 

 

Overall? The amount of gun-related deaths are a drop in a bucket in the US.

 

Yep and yep. This guy's the type that says "Well I never got harassed by the police so they must've had a good reason to murder an innocent teenager."

 

And the gun deaths really are blown out of proportion here, and by other countries that don't know what the **** they're talking about.

[Rainbow Wyvern]

Wow. Thanks to this thread, I've been taught that when someone breaks into my house, I should just sit there while they try to rape me/stab me/take my stuff. I shouldn't fight back because... reasons.

 

Good to know.

 

Coming from someone who lives in southern Louisiana, a few miles away from a street lovingly nicknamed 'Murder Street', lol that's just bs.

 

Anyway, how is gun control in any way similar to mage control? Mages are like mentally ill patients in an asylum, not metal weapons.

[Sir DeLoria]

Next time I'll apologize to the guy who breaks into my house if it makes you feel any better.
 
You sound like you've lived a sheltered life in a good neighborhood for most of your life. Be grateful, not everyone experiences that.

I didn't and I still don't think killing people who walk on your property is righteous.
 

Overall? The amount of gun-related deaths are a drop in a bucket in the US.

And yet much, much higher than pretty much every other Western country.

[Colonelkillabee]

Lmao, yes of course drownings are a more common cause of death than guns, but most people drown in boat accidents, at sea or in rivers not frikking pools.


Actually yes, guns do kill people and please don't use that stupid NRA saying anymore because it makes you sound dumber than you are. Guns are the means of deaths, yes irresponsibility may be the ultimate cause, but what's the solution? Simple, make guns less accesible and make self-defense laws more strict.



Law enforcement and cars are actually necessary to maintain society and economy, guns aren't. But I'm not even advocating a toal ban on guns, I'm advocating moderate gun control and self-defense laws that match a civilized society.

First of all, that link I sent you just showed that people die more often from pools than accidental gun shootings. So by your logic no one should have a pool.

 

Second, the only one that sounds like a dumb ass here is your ass, hence why most here are telling you exactly that. The NRA statement is accurate. Only people saying it's not are ignorant fucks like yourself that can't think on their own. Law enforcement and cars are necessary, and to us in our society, we think the right to be able to protect ourselves is necessary as well. You may not agree, living off in lalaland Finland in your sheltered little home with very little experience with the outside world... But that means little given that you don't know **** about our gun laws, or the rate of deaths here in relation to other things, which DOES matter.

[EmperorSahlertz]

And the gun deaths really are blown out of proportion here, and by other countries that don't know what the **** they're talking about.

All I know about gun deaths, is that USA has an alarming rate of them, considering they don't have any wars going on within their borders.

[raging_monkey]

Ok now its getting hostile... let have this thread just die... peacefully

[Colonelkillabee]

And yet much, much higher than pretty much every other Western country.

Britain proves that the crime rate has very little to do with what weapons are legal.

 

They banned guns like Australia. Tell me why Britain's crime rate stayed the same?

[Colonelkillabee]

All I know about gun deaths, is that USA has an alarming rate of them, considering they don't have any wars going on within their borders.

Like I said, Britain banned guns like Australia did. Didn't do a damn thing to their crimerate. Talk smack about our society if you want but the gun deaths and gun regulations do not corelate.

[BronzTrooper]

thanks * takes some popcorn*

 

Can I have some too?  I'll grab the drinks!  

[EmperorSahlertz]

Britain proves that the crime rate has very little to do with what weapons are legal.

 

They banned guns like Australia. Tell me why Britain's crime rate stayed the same?

Because it was high even before guns were introduced. Collateral damage has been lowered though.

[Colonelkillabee]

Because it was high even before guns were introduced. Collateral damage has been lowered though.

That's exactly the point.

 

And if you look at our crimerate, murders have actually dropped drastically, while the number of private gun owners has risen.

[raging_monkey]

Can I have some too?  I'll grab the drinks!  

here you go chief * passes bowl of popcorn*

[EmperorSahlertz]

Like I said, Britain banned guns like Australia did. Didn't do a damn thing to their crimerate. Talk smack about our society if you want but the gun deaths and gun regulations do not corelate.

I don't think it has much to do with crime rate in the first place. Criminals are going to do their thing, with or without guns. It is about death rates and collateral damage.

 

And you cannot deny, that USA has a high gun death rate. It is also only a logical outcome of accesible guns. Obviously more people are going to die from them. But if I wanted to kill someone, homicide style, then I wouldn't let my lack of access to a gun prevent me. So again, it doesn't have much to do with crime rate in the first place.