Mother of three shoots intruder...

[Terminus]

So they'll change the constitution to remove birthright citizenship but they won't change it to make it illegal to possess a firearm?

Americans need better politicians. How is it that it took one school shooting in the 80s for our government to make gun ownership illegal but America won't do a damn thing even with school shootings every other week?

Click to shrink...

Because the Magna Carta didn't say anything about guns. Here, for better or (mostly) worse, they remain enshrined in the highest law of the land. And no, they're not changing the constitution, they're just ignoring it. Even if they retake all three branches of the federal government someday, the Democrats would never in a million years have the spine to advance their own agenda like that.

 

[F34R]

Just let the robber take what they want. Hell, help em bring it out. Then call cops and insurance.

This is a rare occurrence, and even more rare someone break in to randomly hurt you. Most robberies are done for cash reasons. Not worth it to keep a gun in the house, especially with kids. More likely the gun in your house kills a family member than a gun outside the house.

Click to shrink...

I dunno. He was already warned that she had a gun. He didn't care. Do you think he would have just taken the stuff and leave after she can identify him? Is that a risk you're willing to take? Do you want to risk your kids lives?

 

[Hoo-doo]

It would take decades, hell maybe even an entire generation of people having to slowly readjust to the promises of a gun-free world while the old 'gun nuts' slowly die off. But it's got to start somewhere.

Just going 'won't ever happen' and ending the discussion is just as childish and dishonest as the alternative presented.

 

[Dali]

"No one needs to own a gun when you can just call the cops."

Click to shrink...

Lol, who believes the cops would be useful in that situation? The caller is just as likely to get shot.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

I dunno. He was already warned that she had a gun. He didn't care. Do you think he would have just taken the stuff and leave after she can identify him? Is that a risk you're willing to take? Do you want to risk your kids lives?

Click to shrink...

No I dont want to risk my kids lives which is why I don't keep a gun in the house.

And yes, I think most people who break into houses do so to take things.

 

[astro]

It can't be done easily because many of the people who currently have the guns will shoot the people coming to take them. It's that simple.

This is something blatantly obvious if you have any degree of familiarity with the US and its issues with gun nuts, and reducing it to "something easy that people are just too cowardly to do" is completely detached from reality.

Click to shrink...

Exactly, the reality is banning firearms in the US is next to impossible at this point.

It might be possible in the future AFTER they've enhanced gun control regulations, etc... but right now it's not going to happen.

People need to be realistic, and if they actually care get out there and help campaign, protest, raise awareness etc... on ways to increase gun regulations. I guarantee you most of the posters saying "banning is easy" don't even do anything further than saying that on forums.

 

[F34R]

No I dont want to risk my kids lives which is why I don't keep a gun in the house.

And yes, I think most people who break into houses do so to take things.

Click to shrink...

I'm asking if you would just let someone in and take your stuff with you and your kids being there. Do you think that person would just take your stuff and leave? Knowing you can identify them?

 

[Hoo-doo]

Exactly, the reality is banning firearms in the US is next to impossible at this point.

It might be possible in the future AFTER they've enhanced gun control regulations, etc... but right now it's not going to happen.

People need to be realistic, and if they actually care get out there and help campaign, protest, raise awareness etc... on ways to increase gun regulations. I guarantee you most of the posters saying "banning is easy" don't even do anything further than saying that on forums.

Click to shrink...

You're being intellectually dishonest here.
No-one is positing that just blanket banning of guns is something that could happen in the current climate. It'll take decades at least with lots of slow incremental regulation and a cultural shift.

 

[Pandaman]

Oh, so you're just trolling outright. Okay then, bye. I don't care if people disagree with me, but saying something can't be done easily just because people in power are too cowardly to do it and calling me dishonest is just trolling.

Click to shrink...

There's always going to be some asshat who thinks it's impossible unless you can magically disarm the whole country overnight, you're best served just ignoring them.

The fact is most guns used in crime start out legal and these people will never acknowledge how addressing law abiding ownership also curbs criminal access to firearms.

 

[Deleted member 7051]

Because the Magna Carta didn't say anything about guns. Here, for better or (mostly) worse, they remain enshrined in the highest law of the land. And no, they're not changing the constitution, they're just ignoring it.

Click to shrink...

It's funny you bring up the Magna Carta because it hasn't been legally relevant for centuries. Like any sensible country we write new laws as required, keep the laws that are relevant and adapt them for modern times and ditch everything else.

America has no excuse not to throw the constitution out the window and write up new laws to replace it.

 

[Sky Chief]

Glad one lady could protect herself at the cost of literally tens of thousands of others.

Click to shrink...

Pretty much

 

[Deleted member 15737]

I'm asking if you would just let someone in and take your stuff with you and your kids being there. Do you think that person would just take your stuff and leave? Knowing you can identify them?

Click to shrink...

I wouldn't invite them over to rob me. What are you asking? If I would try to kill or fight off an intruder? No, I would comply, hope for the best, gladly give up my possessions, then file insurance and police reports. Which is the best, safest way to handle that situation. Was the burglar is this situation armed?

Why are you applying that level of logic to someone a.)who commits brute force burglary and b.) Does so even after being told there's a gun?

I don't think most burglars kill any potential witnesses. Those concerned with being identified usually conceal their face.

 

[sooperkool]

these threads are hilarious to me. guns in America are never going away, ever.

 

[Kirblar]

You're being intellectually dishonest here.
No-one is positing that just blanket banning of guns is something that could happen in the current climate. It'll take decades at least with lots of slow incremental regulation and a cultural shift.

Click to shrink...

The person I was replying to originally in the chain posted exactly that.

 

[boontobias]

Got em. A more belligerent person wouldve shot him through the window or something. She made the right call

 

[Deleted member 19003]

Good for her. I've never had much of a problem with home defense with shotguns/single shot rifles. As long as there are laws for mandatory safety and lock up to keep away from children. We really don't need assault weapons and handguns though.

 

[astro]

There's always going to be some asshat who thinks it's impossible unless you can magically disarm the whole country overnight, you're best served just ignoring them.

Click to shrink...

What are you even talking about? Have you read my posts ITT at all?

It's unrealistic to say "ban all guns", because right now the country can't even agree on enhanced regulations that are OBVIOUSLY required due to the huge amount of shcool shootings etc...

So the poster you were replying to, like yourself, was misrepresenting my posts or not even bothering to read them.

The fact is most guns used in crime start out legal and these people will never acknowledge how addressing law abiding ownership also curbs criminal access to firearms.

Click to shrink...

Again, read before you reply...

The only answer here is to campaign for enhance gun regulations, to actively get involved outside of talking on forums about banning all guns which is unrealistic in the current reality.

Do you actually do anything to help? Or are your actions limited to dishonestly representing posters online in gun debates?

Pretty much

Click to shrink...

Another lazy post that doesn't operate within reality.

 

[Cocaloch]

Because the Magna Carta didn't say anything about guns.

Click to shrink...

The Magna Carta isn't the equivalent of the Constitution in itself...

Here are two very important documents in English and Scottish law on the topic.

English Bill of Rights (Sounds familiar?):

"That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law"

Scottish Claim of Right (1689):

"That the disarming of Protestants and employing papists in the places of greatest trust, both civil and military, the thrusting out of Protestants, to make room for papists, and the entrusting papists with the forts and magazines of the Kingdom are contrary to law"

Protestant should be read in both cases as essentially actually English/Scottish respectively.

.

Click to shrink...

If you feel like what you're saying isn't very contentious or complex and you're getting a lot of pushback maybe you should be open to the possibility that you're wrong or articulating yourself poorly instead of just insisting that 50% of the people in a thread are all totally at fault.

 

[F34R]

I wouldn't invite them over to rob me. What are you asking? If I would try to kill or fight off an intruder? No, I would comply, hope for the best, gladly give up my possessions, then file insurance and police reports.

Why are you applying that level of logic to someone a.)who commits brute force burglary and b.) Does so even after being told there's a gun?

I don't think most burglars kill any potential witnesses. Those concerned with being identified usually conceal their face.

Click to shrink...

I'm asking if this guy in the video, unmasked and all, broke into your home, would you just let them do what they want? At what point do you defend yourself and your family? That's what I'm asking.

 

[Terminus]

It's funny you bring up the Magna Carta because it hasn't been legally relevant for centuries. Like any sensible country we write new laws as required, keep the laws that are relevant and adapt them for modern times and ditch everything else.

America has no excuse not to throw the constitution out the window and write up new laws to replace it.

Click to shrink...

I'm aware and agree. I'm just commenting that the reason gun reform hasn't happened as "easily" as it has elsewhere is that putting something in the foundational document for your nation's body of law gives it a hell of a lot of social inertia.

Americans also fought a war with guns to gain their independence, then turned around and spent the next century marching across a continent "conquering" a vast frontier with those guns. They're embedded in our history and tied up in our cultural identity in a way that I really think has no good analogue anywhere else in the world.

 

[gozu]

I'm asking if you would just let someone in and take your stuff with you and your kids being there. Do you think that person would just take your stuff and leave? Knowing you can identify them?

Click to shrink...

I'm glad the woman is ok but I feel like this story is put there to scare people and perpetuate the myth that firearms make us safer, when in fact, most deaths are firearms suicides, and 10 times more good guys are killed by guns than bad guys every year. Therefore, from a statistical point of view. Not having firearms makes society 10 times safer.


The NRA and fox news want you to believe otherwise and if I were you, I would stay far away from both because they are trying to poison your mind to divide and pilfer the middle class like they've just done with their massive tax cut, and their attempts to take away healthcare from us all.

Fox news are trying to make society less safe, not safer. They are a cancer on America, as Jon Stewart said many times. And I say this as someone who enjoys shooting guns because i'm good at it. Guns are pretty cool toys. But ideally, they should stay on the gun range.

 

[Rangerx]

"No one needs to own a gun when you can just call the cops."

Click to shrink...

Gum ownership is very rare in my country and the cops aren't even armed. We manage to survive.

 

[astro]

I'm glad the woman is ok but I feel like this story is put there to scare people and perpetuate the myth that firearms make us safer, when in fact, most deaths are firearms suicides, and 10 times more good guys are killed by guns than bad guys every year. Therefore, from a statistical point of view. Not having firearms makes society 10 times safer.
The NRA and fox news want you to believe otherwise and if I were you, I would stay far away from both because they are trying to poison your mind to divide and pilfer the middle class like they've just done with their massive tax cut, and their attempts to take away healthcare from us all.

Fox news are trying to make society less safe, not safer. They are a cancer on America, as Jon Stewart said many times. And I say this as someone who enjoys shooting guns because i'm good at it. Guns are pretty cool toys. But ideally, they should stay on the gun range.

Click to shrink...

This is a sensible post.

Gum ownership is very rare in my country and the cops aren't even armed. We manage to survive.

Click to shrink...

Which has nothing to do with the US.

Of course it would be better if no one could own guns, but you can't turn the clock back on that now. The only way forward is to enhance regulations surrounding guns and hope that, at some point in the future, this leads to less and maybe in time no gun ownership at all.

 

[F34R]

I'm glad the woman is ok but I feel like this story is put there to scare people and perpetuate the myth that firearms make us safer, when in fact, most deaths are firearms suicides, and 10 times more good guys are killed by guns than bad guys every year. Therefore, from a statistical point of view. Not having firearms makes society 10 times safer.


The NRA and fox news want you to believe otherwise and if I were you, I would stay far away from both because they are trying to poison your mind to divide and pilfer the middle class like they've just done with their massive tax cut, and their attempts to take away healthcare from us all.

Fox news are trying to make society less safe, not safer. They are a cancer on America, as Jon Stewart said many times. And I say this as someone who enjoys shooting guns because i'm good at it. Guns are pretty cool toys. But ideally, they should stay on the gun range.

Click to shrink...

I don't take any news from Fox/CNN/etc. to make my choices.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

I'm asking if this guy in the video, unmasked and all, broke into your home, would you just let them do what they want? At what point do you defend yourself and your family? That's what I'm asking.

Click to shrink...

Yes as I said, I would let them take my stuff.

Was this burglar armed? I don't defend myself and my family with a firearm, as that puts us at greater risk.

I'm not going to use paranoia of fringe case scenarios lead me to putting my family at risk on a daily basis.

 

[Deleted member 19003]

The fact that the dude went ahead and kicked the door down after she verbally warned him that she had a gun and was willing to shoot him... that's extremely dangerous. At that point you would be risking yourself and your children's lives by *not* shooting him. It was no longer a burglary, it was a home invasion, which is much more likely to end in people being murdered. Someone so aggressive like that is not rational at all and would most likely hurt you.

 

[Cocaloch]

I'm aware and agree. I'm just commenting that the reason gun reform hasn't happened as "easily" as it has elsewhere is that putting something in the foundational document for your nation's body of law gives it a hell of a lot of social inertia.

Click to shrink...

The Constitution isn't the founding document of America, it's just its current (and second) constitution.

Britain (and England/Scotland) also had gun ownership, for at least some people, built into its constitution.

It's obvious that the American case will be harder, and it's hardly easy, though things worth doing rarely are, but just saying it's in the Constitution and acting like the case is shut and America is doomed to be the absolute backwater of the West is defeatist and pointless.

 

[Kingpin Rogers]

Shouldn't the house alarm have gone off if he was kicking the front door? The noise should have scared him away or attracted the neighbours attention.

Click to shrink...

House alarm? As far as I know, only rich people have those, odd to assume just a normal woman would have.

 

[LookAtMeGo]

Holy shit. A story where a gun was actually used in a justifiable way.

 

[YMB]

It can't be done easily because many of the people who currently have the guns will shoot the people coming to take them. It's that simple.

Click to shrink...

As someone who grew up in Michigan and knows a lot of hunters and militia types running around with AR15's, I would not put it past a lot of them to try and kill you if you tried to take their guns. People up here get REAL serious about that.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

The fact that the dude went ahead and kicked the door down after she verbally warned him that she had a gun and was willing to shoot him... that's extremely dangerous. At that point you would be risking yourself and your children's lives by *not* shooting him. Someone so aggressive like that is not rational at all and would most likely hurt you.

Click to shrink...

Yup. And shit happens. I don't wear a rubber suit when it's lighntning you can't prevent all catastrophes. You have to be aware of the concessions/risks you take in trying to do so. Like gun culture. It can prevent some robberies. It's not worth the risk/societal repurcussions just to have that option which is only beneficial in a very small subset of occurrences with an already low percent.

 

[F34R]

Yes as I said, I would let them take my stuff.

Was this burglar armed? I don't defend myself and my family with a firearm, as that puts us at greater risk.

I'm not going to use paranoia of fringe case scenarios lead me to putting my family at risk on a daily basis.

Click to shrink...

I'm not willing to take that risk of them breaking in, and just being allowed to come on in and hope for the best.

 

[Hokahey]

This doesn't have to be a this or that issue. It's possible to have guns but also have better gun control, smart locks, etc. Its silly that if someone grabbed my phone that they'd have a near impossible task to access it, but the same isn't true of deadly weapons...yet.

 

[Braaier]

There's no reason for her to use a gun in this situation.

I keep a bat in my house for self defense, but a gun is just dangerous. Sure things worked out this time, but this story would be quite different if she had missed, or a bullet hit one of the children accidently.

People deserve a right to defend themselves but guns aren't the answer IMO.

Click to shrink...

A bat wouldn't work here. Gun works!

 

[Cocaloch]

This doesn't have to be a this or that issue. It's possible to have guns but also have better gun control, smart locks, etc. Its silly that if someone grabbed my phone that they'd have a near impossible task to access it, but the same isn't true of deadly weapons...yet.

Click to shrink...

A quick search turns up that one person in this thread said ban all guns unironically.

 

[nekkid]

I keep a cricket bat in the wardrobe for this reason.

You're kinda fair game once you cross the threshold imo.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

I'm not willing to take that risk of them breaking in, and just being allowed to come on in and hope for the best.

Click to shrink...

K. You are willing to risk their lives daily then, in the name of hypothetically preventing (but also potentially escalating) something with a low likelihood. Thats your choice in america, its just a dumb, irresponsible one. You aren't alone though. Many use that fear to justify poor decisions.

You're at virtually an identical risk for being broken into successfully whether you have a gun or not. There must be a name for the illusion of control that many gun owners seem to possess.

 

[vertigo]

arm all women

 

[F34R]

K. You are willing to risk their lives daily then, in the name of hypothetically preventing (but also potentially escalating) something with a low likelihood. Thats your choice in america, its just a dumb, irresponsible one. You aren't alone though. Many use that fear to justify poor decisions.

Click to shrink...

There isn't any risk just because I gun in the house, no more than the risk of getting in the car and driving on the road. Education, experience, communication, and responsibilities are key. If you can show me instances of responsible gun owners' kids taking charge of the weapons and something bad happens, I'll concede you're correct.

 

[astro]

There isn't any risk just because I gun in the house, no more than the risk of getting in the car and driving on the road. Education, experience, communication, and responsibilities are key. If you can show me instances of responsible gun owners' kids taking charge of the weapons and something bad happens, I'll concede you're correct.

Click to shrink...

This post is just silly, guns increase the risk of bad shit happening. This is not debatable. And there are countless examples of accidents (many fatal) happening with fire arms.

 

[Cocaloch]

If you can show me instances of responsible gun owners' kids taking charge of the weapons and something bad happens, I'll concede you're correct.

Click to shrink...

The problem is this is a contradiction in terms since the normal definition of responsible gun owners is people who don't let this happen (well up to the instant that they do).

 

[F34R]

This post is just silly, guns increase the risk of bad shit happening. This is not debatable. And there are countless examples of accidents (many fatal) happening with fire arms.

Click to shrink...

What risk is there in my house? That my kids, who have been around these guns for 17+ years. Know the rules, the guns aren't simply accessible for them, yet, they are statistically at risk? Yeah.

 

[Burrman]

Too bad this isn't the story we hear enough. The negatives outweigh any positives this story brought.

 

[smellyjelly]

K. You are willing to risk their lives daily then, in the name of hypothetically preventing (but also potentially escalating) something with a low likelihood. Thats your choice in america, its just a dumb, irresponsible one. You aren't alone though. Many use that fear to justify poor decisions.

Click to shrink...

did you even watch the video? it wasn't a robbery. it was some random dude banging on her door and then kicking it down when she told him to stop and that she had a gun. you saying you'd let someone in into your home in that kind of state and hope for the best, jeopardizing your family is baffling. don't use a gun, i understand that. but to put yourself and your family completely at the mercy of someone who is acting irrational and dangerous and hope for the best is one of the worst takes i've ever heard.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

There isn't any risk just because I gun in the house, no more than the risk of getting in the car and driving on the road. Education, experience, communication, and responsibilities are key. If you can show me instances of responsible gun owners' kids taking charge of the weapons and something bad happens, I'll concede you're correct.

Click to shrink...

Gun owners are responsible until they're not. They are all human and fallible. Your kids are at a greater risk of accidental gun death than mine are. Your kids are more likely to use a gun for suicide than my kids. All on the merit of having a gun (or guns) in the house.

Also, a quote from a Coates blog from 2012 "But the fear (of home invasion) is also easily out of proportion to the threat. I had the Chicago police run the number on homicides. In 2011, precisely one homicide listed "burglary" as the motive. Nationwide, there are about 100 burglary-homicides every year. When you compare that to more than 18,000 gun suicides, the conclusions seem pretty obvious."

https://www.theatlantic.com/nationa...-the-irrational-fear-of-home-invasion/266613/

 

[astro]

What risk is there in my house? That my kids, who have been around these guns for 17+ years. Know the rules, the guns aren't simply accessible for them, yet, they are statistically at risk? Yeah.

Click to shrink...

There is plenty, but for a start you could get in an actual situation you need to use it and shoot a family member instead.

And just because rules are in place doesn't mean accidents won't happen.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

did you even watch the video? it wasn't a robbery. it was some random dude banging on her door and then kicking it down when she told him to stop and that she had a gun. you saying you'd let someone in into your home in that kind of state and hope for the best, jeopardizing your family is baffling. don't use a gun, i understand that. but to put yourself and your family completely at the mercy of someone who is acting irrational and dangerous and hope for the best is one of the worst takes i've ever heard.

Click to shrink...

I wouldn't let them in. They broke the door down?

I would comply with the demands of an unstable criminal once they broke my door down.

I'm also not concerned with that happening.

 

[Burrman]

There isn't any risk just because I gun in the house, no more than the risk of getting in the car and driving on the road. Education, experience, communication, and responsibilities are key. If you can show me instances of responsible gun owners' kids taking charge of the weapons and something bad happens, I'll concede you're correct.

Click to shrink...

Do you seriously not hear the news of kids killing with their parents guns? That happens way more than this story here.

 

[Felt]

On gun control in the US; it's as described "GUN...CONTROL". There's no "take-away-your-guns" being discussed. It's about control, information, and security. If you live in CA, you already have some gun control but still not enough. Flyover country have very little to no gun control.

If we made it so that every single person had 20 shotguns in their possession and that's it - we'd all be a hell of a lot safer than we are now. You can't really hide a shotgun and carry it into a crowd unless you planned it out - and even if you did, you couldn't cause the death and destruction that handguns/semi-autos cause. BUT you could certainly protect your home from intruders, so why not, oh right - USA is the gun manufacturing country.

 

[Deleted member 15737]

What risk is there in my house? That my kids, who have been around these guns for 17+ years. Know the rules, the guns aren't simply accessible for them, yet, they are statistically at risk? Yeah.

Click to shrink...

Yes. They are statistically at greater risk.