Man arrested after shooting at home intruder

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

What is there for people who hate animals?

try this

link

Like what? I mean something effective, something that'll drop a man cold but not kill him. None of that tear gas "i'll make you cry" #######.

I remember reading about a woman in Chicago around Christmas, accidentally shot her 5 yr. old nephew when she woke to the sound of her Christmas Tree rustling. When she demanded the perpetrator to identify themselves and got no reply, she fired away into the darkness.

Dogs are great security guards - most know the difference between an intruder and a 5 yr. old relative, and they are effective in deterring someone trying to break in.

so much for making sure of one's target

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

LOL.

[Scott & Lai 12]

Like what? I mean something effective, something that'll drop a man cold but not kill him. None of that tear gas "i'll make you cry" #######.

I remember reading about a woman in Chicago around Christmas, accidentally shot her 5 yr. old nephew when she woke to the sound of her Christmas Tree rustling. When she demanded the perpetrator to identify themselves and got no reply, she fired away into the darkness.

Dogs are great security guards - most know the difference between an intruder and a 5 yr. old relative, and they are effective in deterring someone trying to break in.

I'm a strong believer in gun owners getting proper training in a self-defense context. If she had been shooting correctly, she would have shot well over the head of a 5 year-old. She also wouldn't have fired without identifying a target.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Like what? I mean something effective, something that'll drop a man cold but not kill him. None of that tear gas "i'll make you cry" #######.

I remember reading about a woman in Chicago around Christmas, accidentally shot her 5 yr. old nephew when she woke to the sound of her Christmas Tree rustling. When she demanded the perpetrator to identify themselves and got no reply, she fired away into the darkness.

Dogs are great security guards - most know the difference between an intruder and a 5 yr. old relative, and they are effective in deterring someone trying to break in.

I'm a strong believer in gun owners getting proper training in a self-defense context. If she had been shooting correctly, she would have shot well over the head of a 5 year-old. She also wouldn't have fired without identifying a target.

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The guy had 170lbs of marijuana in his house, and someone breaks in? Sounds like there was a bit more to it than that.

Even in the absence of that - this illustrates the problems involved in using firearms even in the context of home defence. What sort of legal complications might result from a person in a house over the way from being injured or killed by a stray bullet? Should a person be exempted because they were 'defending themselves at the time? Does the bystander get some sort of justice for their being shot - or is it written off as an accident?

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

no way!

[pedroh 21]

the way they explained it to me its kinda weird.. at least here in NC.. if someone is trying to enter your house by force, then you can kill that person or shoot or whatever.. but just in that moment of forcing.. if you see the intruder inside the house and you shoot him, then you get arrested.. it's weird.. but i know you just can't shoot someone just cuz he's inside your property

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

The guy had 170lbs of marijuana in his house, and someone breaks in? Sounds like there was a bit more to it than that.

Even in the absence of that - this illustrates the problems involved in using firearms even in the context of home defence. What sort of legal complications might result from a person in a house over the way from being injured or killed by a stray bullet? Should a person be exempted because they were 'defending themselves at the time? Does the bystander get some sort of justice for their being shot - or is it written off as an accident?

it's all in ammunition choice and caliber.....get stupid and this story is the result. a bit of research on the owner's part would prevent such.

[Scott & Lai 12]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

If it's a fallacy, then does that mean that if an armed intruder enters your home and starts shooting, you are just as safe if you are unarmed as if you are armed and can return fire?

the way they explained it to me its kinda weird.. at least here in NC.. if someone is trying to enter your house by force, then you can kill that person or shoot or whatever.. but just in that moment of forcing.. if you see the intruder inside the house and you shoot him, then you get arrested.. it's weird.. but i know you just can't shoot someone just cuz he's inside your property

Yes, it is weird, since it is unclear where the assailant was when the man shot out through his window. It sounds like the man was shooting at the window, without an intervening target. Which would mean the assailant was outside. So was he outside shooting in, or was he outside because he was fleeing? Two very different situations.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

If it's a fallacy, then does that mean that if an armed intruder enters your home and starts shooting, you are just as safe if you are unarmed as if you are armed and can return fire?

Well, since we're all talking about crime statistics and ratios...what's are the chances of an armed intruder with the intent to kill breaking into my home and killing me? Compare that to ...what are the chances of someone in my house accidentally being shot by my firearm? Pros and cons...period.

Edited July 20, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[Scott & Lai 12]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

If it's a fallacy, then does that mean that if an armed intruder enters your home and starts shooting, you are just as safe if you are unarmed as if you are armed and can return fire?

Well, since we're all talking about crime statistics and ratios...what's are the chances of an armed intruder with the intent to kill breaking into my home and killing me? Compare that to ...what are the chances of someone in my house accidentally being shot by my firearm? Pros and cons...period.

My gun stays in its case. If I take it out, unless I'm expecting to use it in a self-defence situation, the first thing I do ensure it is unloaded. Only then will I clean it, or allow someone else to handle it. The chances of being shot by an unloaded firearm (note, I've first demonstrated that it is in fact unloaded) are between zero and none. As for unauthorized handling of my gun, I wouldn't allow anyone in my home who doesn't have the sense not to handle someone else's firearm without their permission. If we are talking about visiting kids, then the gun would be made inaccessible before they came over.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The guy had 170lbs of marijuana in his house, and someone breaks in? Sounds like there was a bit more to it than that.

Even in the absence of that - this illustrates the problems involved in using firearms even in the context of home defence. What sort of legal complications might result from a person in a house over the way from being injured or killed by a stray bullet? Should a person be exempted because they were 'defending themselves at the time? Does the bystander get some sort of justice for their being shot - or is it written off as an accident?

it's all in ammunition choice and caliber.....get stupid and this story is the result. a bit of research on the owner's part would prevent such.

Surely its implies a lack of basic training too. I mean - if you panic and start firing all over the shop (including off your property) this sort of thing is bound to happen surely. Doesn't need to go through a window to be dangerous - just needs to leave your property.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

it's all in ammunition choice and caliber.....get stupid and this story is the result. a bit of research on the owner's part would prevent such.

Surely its implies a lack of basic training too. I mean - if you panic and start firing all over the shop (including off your property) this sort of thing is bound to happen surely. Doesn't need to go through a window to be dangerous - just needs to leave your property.

it's quite easy to leave the property. hell i can hit missouri from here and it's several miles away. in essence, be sure of the target and the backstop.

[archie07 0]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

If it's a fallacy, then does that mean that if an armed intruder enters your home and starts shooting, you are just as safe if you are unarmed as if you are armed and can return fire?

Well, since we're all talking about crime statistics and ratios...what's are the chances of an armed intruder with the intent to kill breaking into my home and killing me? Compare that to ...what are the chances of someone in my house accidentally being shot by my firearm? Pros and cons...period.

I don't know the crime statistics of your area but I've raised four children and never had a problem with my guns. As someone else stated I also kept my gun unloaded and inaccessable to the children. The clip was always hidden in another area than the gun. For that reason I had a dog that alerted me of someones presence in my yard. I believe anyone who wants to own a gun should be required to take a gun safety course unless they were in the armed forces or law enforcement.

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

I'm not against having a gun (I've thought of buying one), but the argument that having a gun in your home increases you and your loved one's safety is a fallacy. There are pros and cons to having a gun in your house...period.

If it's a fallacy, then does that mean that if an armed intruder enters your home and starts shooting, you are just as safe if you are unarmed as if you are armed and can return fire?

Well, since we're all talking about crime statistics and ratios...what's are the chances of an armed intruder with the intent to kill breaking into my home and killing me? Compare that to ...what are the chances of someone in my house accidentally being shot by my firearm? Pros and cons...period.

I don't know the crime statistics of your area but I've raised four children and never had a problem with my guns. As someone else stated I also kept my gun unloaded and inaccessable to the children. The clip was always hidden in another area than the gun. For that reason I had a dog that alerted me of someones presence in my yard. I believe anyone who wants to own a gun should be required to take a gun safety course unless they were in the armed forces or law enforcement.

i disagree. we already have enough regulations on gun ownership. taking a course is common sense, yes, yet if such was mandated by the state/federal government we'd have more red tape and i fear a slippery slope afterwards.