Forfeiture of Life on Gaylord Street? Home Invasion and Self Defence (1 Viewer)

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
#1
Saw this today and it reminded me of what happened on a famr here in Ireland

In early morning home invasion robbery attempt reportedly ended with one suspect dead and his accomplices on the run, after a homeowner fired in self defense.

Police say that three robbers set out to burglarize a home on the 3100 block of Gaylord Street in Denver, Colorado at 2:20 AM. Fearing for his safety upon the burglars' forced entry to his house, the homeowner reportedly grabbed his self defense gun and fired, striking one of the suspects and sending the other two fleeing. One suspect, identified as 17 year old Marcus Duran, was found dead at the scene from gunshot wounds, according to police. Police are seeking the other two suspects, and the homeowner was unharmed.

As I’ve noted before, criminals often work in groups, using superior numbers to overwhelm their victims. When that happens, even the strongest unarmed victims can be overpowered by the numerically superior criminals.

When a crime victim is armed for self defense, things can be quite different. Every day, firearms allow a single crime victim to successfully defend themselves against multiple attackers. Here, this homeowner used his handgun to fend off 2 attackers. Similarly, this man used his handgun to defend himself against 3 violent men who broke into his apartment. This business owner used his shotgun to stop 4 armed robbers who where pistol whipping an employee and threatening the lives of everyone present. This mother used her handgun to defend herself and her young children from a pair of home invading prison escapees. This woman used her gun to fend off 4 home invaders. This man used his gun to save himself and his wife from 4 armed robbers. This 91 year old man used his gun to save himself and his wheelchair bound wife from a pair of armed criminals who broke in to their home. I could go on with more examples, but the point should be clear: Armed self defense works, and is often a crime victim’s best chance at avoiding harm.


http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-Sel...rmed-homeowner-shoots-burglar-in-self-defense

Should we be able to kill people that set foot on our property and threaten the lives of our family?

Should forcible detainment be a right?

I think Burglars and Thieves are the lowest form of scum after the surprise-sexists :shifty:
I wonder what my family would have done to those youths that tried to get around the side gate of our house, not to mention both the dogs that tried to bite their testicles off.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

X Æ A-12

Senior Member
Contributor
Sep 4, 2006
86,576
#3
Yes, owning the means to defend yourself should be a basic right in all societies.

There has been a recent string of home burglaries all across my town although most of them occur when the burglars know that nobody is home my dad keeps a loaded handgun in a drawer that is in an easily accessible spot.

Anybody that breaks into my house better be hungry for a lead salad.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
#6
I see. Here you've to be over 30 and have a family to own a lousy one and in case of a shooting in your neighborhood you'll be the first to be picked for investigation.
 
OP
IrishZebra

IrishZebra

Western Imperialist
Jun 18, 2006
23,327
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #8
    So there's no bleeding heart liberal among us espousing the rights of criminals?

    There are 560 privately owned legal handguns here at they are all Olympic exhibition ones. The thugs have guns and there's not that many police.

    Does age play a factor? I'd still hatchet a 15 year old that broke in.
     
    Apr 12, 2004
    77,165
    #11
    So there's no bleeding heart liberal among us espousing the rights of criminals?

    There are 560 privately owned legal handguns here at they are all Olympic exhibition ones. The thugs have guns and there's not that many police.

    Does age play a factor? I'd still hatchet a 15 year old that broke in.
    560?

    In the whole country?

    :lol2:

    Between me and my father I'm guessing +/- 30 handguns alone.
     
    OP
    IrishZebra

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #12
    To be fair I live in a country free of guns that has much,much lower crime rates than the US so in numbers terms no guns in safer.
     

    X Æ A-12

    Senior Member
    Contributor
    Sep 4, 2006
    86,576
    #15
    To be fair I live in a country free of guns that has much,much lower crime rates than the US so in numbers terms no guns in safer.
    But is that because of guns being legal or because America is in general a more violent place? I'm sure that if guns were completely illegal here and you could whatever you wanted in Ireland we would still have a much higher crime problem in the states.

    California has some of the strictest laws on gun control in the country but still has major problems with street and gang violence. And in switzerland, a country where every household owns at least one rifle the crime rate is extremely low.

    Violence and violent crime are problems caused by something rotten in society and the cultural surroundings, availability of guns is irrelevant. Blaming cime on guns is just a cop out in place of looking at deeper rooted social problems.
     
    OP
    IrishZebra

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #16
    You're right of course, but guns worsen violence do they not. Would the crime rate not drop if people had less guns and had to kill people 'barehanded' more often?

    A violent society doesn't need more efficient means of murder
     

    X Æ A-12

    Senior Member
    Contributor
    Sep 4, 2006
    86,576
    #17
    Making guns illegal only takes them out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals who would use them for sinister means are criminals so why would they follow gun restricting laws?
     
    OP
    IrishZebra

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #18
    Making guns illegal only takes them out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals who would use them for sinister means are criminals so why would they follow gun restricting laws?
    Simple, murder anybody with an illegal firearm.

    And all the PETA members.
     

    X Æ A-12

    Senior Member
    Contributor
    Sep 4, 2006
    86,576
    #19
    Simple, murder anybody with an illegal firearm.

    And all the PETA members.
    I think we can both agree on that :D

    But that is just an insane policy, executing anybody with an illegal firearm would definitely count as cruel and unusual punishment as it is a sentence that is just not right for the crime, not to mention I am against the death penalty in general.

    My dad owns two guns that are illegal by current California law. He has owned them both since the 70's back before they were illegal, technically he could get up to 15 years in prison for owning them even though charges are not pressed in situations like his in which the owner has had them registered since before the ban.

    He is basically in legal grey area and IMO executing my dad in this situation seems harsh.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)