GUNS DON'T KILL

You know, there's a bunch of silly people making arguments leading this topic to where it has degraded. Let's keep our eye on the ball.

I want to make it as hard as possible for whoever in whatever condition who feels the need to kick in my front door to do so while carrying an assault rifle rigged up with a HCM and dressed in body armor. That's not really a lot to ask. That's also why an assembled assault rifle and other "enahncements" should never leave the confines of the owner's property.

And, while we're at it, let's get people trained enough to do someting other than shoot first and ask questions later - even if it is in their own home. And, yes, there's a way to do it if you know how. That doesn't mean that we should change the laws regarding self defense, but it does mean that we, as a society, need to face up to the fact that someone could die whenever any gun is purchased and that some who may die may not have necessarily been up to no good. Training, training, training.

I know this flies in the face of Teawipe policy, but when did thorough knowledge become a bad thing? Once upon a time, even the NRA thought it was smart.

Don't be led down the rabbit hole by the anecdotal tales of rare occurrences. It's about making it hard.

It may just seem that way, but its really not the case.

Did you ever find "Clarksville"? Those folks lived in real houses.

But have a Merry Christmas and an even better New Year. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I knew that you were not "about 130 years old?"

I knew all along that you are not a day over 105!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you, as well! FA LA LA LAAA, LA LA LA LA!

I knew all along that you are not a day over 105!
Originally Posted by bigtex

I expect that someone from a former TRAILER PARK would think so,...
... but you?

Have a Special New Year!

I know this flies in the face of Teawipe policy,..... Originally Posted by Randy4Candy

It also "FLIES IN THE FACE OF" ....

2ND AMENDMENT
4TH AMENDMENT
14TH AMENDMENT

and that "un-enumerated" amendment that your liberal justices put in place ....

... a "right of privacy" and the "right of the sanctity of one's home" .....

That's not "Teawhipe policy" ...

....... IT is the Policy of the United States of America.

As far as I am concerned, and by far the majority of the jurisprudence in this country, when someone crashes into my home, naked or wearing body armour, during the day or during the night, he or she just waived any Constitutionally protected rights to continuing to do so .... or any other so called "privilege" to break into my home.

Rather than waste your time trying to "correct" or train homeowners (the REAL VICTIMS), I highly recommend that you expend your energy attempting to re-educate the assholes (the REAL CRIMINALS) who for some unknown reason believe they have some "privilege" to enter our homes without permission and have their way with our belongings, us, and/or our loved ones.

In the meantime, ....

..I recommend you whine to someone who really gives a rat's ass.

The irony about your way of thinking is ....

... if your door-kicker comes into my house and steals my shit or worse, and I find out who it is and go over to his house and take my shit back and kick his ass or worse ....

...I get arrested and charged with burglary for breaking into his HOME and kicking his ass ... or criminal mischief for breaking his door ... or criminal trespass for entering his home without permission.

You remind me of the assholes who do 80 down the toll road and run up my ass while I am doing 65, then swerve 5 feet in front of me without using any turn indicator, while giving me the finger and that "look".... I guess they have a CHL and their "duty" weapon on board with all that training?

Unfortunately, to ignorant people from TRAILER PARK roots, it may sound like "rambling"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Grew up in Westchester County, historically one of the most affluent counties in the nation, in the suburbs of NYC. Graduated from Syracuse U. and went on the get an MBA. Moved to NW Austin in 1992 and purchased a 4,000 SF home with a 16x32 inground pool and a hot tub. Son graduated from Rice with a 3.45 GPA with a major in political science and daughter graduated from Baylor with a 3.82 GPA with a double major in communiations and public relations. Dear old mom and dad paid every dime so that they did not owe a penny upon graduation.

I have worked for the same company for close to 45 years. Let's just say I am well set up financially for retirement. My wife has traveled to over 100 countries in the world on 6 of the 7 continents and every state in the union. I have traveled not as much, probably only 30 or so countries and half the states. Heading to Turkey and Greece next summer.

And, believe it or not, I've been able to accomplish all that with never owning a gun!!!

FWIW, my wife is a home-grown Texan from Houston and shares the same viewpoints on guns that a I do.

So much for your IGNORANT Trailer Park statements.

I'm sure Budman will tell you that was an absolute waste of your time. Originally Posted by Doove

Doove, if we've learned one thing from this discussion it's that LL is an absolute waste of time. Facts are facts and opinions are opinions. LL believes his opinions are facts.

Doove, if we've learned one thing from this discussion it's that LL is an absolute waste of time. Facts are facts and opinions are opinions. LL believes his opinions are facts. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

What do you expect from an individual who is 130 errrrrr, not a day over 105 years old?

Have you ever heard of the old saying, "you can't teach an old dog, new tricks?" They were referring to LL!

Won't do any good the NRA has led these idiots around like pull toys .

But as you seem to be trying to point out...the question then becomes was it a mistake deserving of death? Originally Posted by Doove

Doove, there's a concept that you seem not to understand.

In the situation under discussion, you potentially have only a VERY short window of time in which to make your shooot/don't shoot decision.

In the "guy kicking in your door" scenario, you do not know whether the guy is drunk or sober. You do not know if he is at the wrong house, or at the house whose door he intended to kick in. You do not know if he is there to murder, rape, rob, or just find a place to sleep it off. You do not know if he is armed, or with what. You do not know if he is alone, or he brought a few like-minded friends with him.

What you do know is this: You have only a few moments to plan. Once that door opens, you may have only seconds in which to act, only one chance to defend yourself. You may not have that.

And you know one other thing: in the worst-case scenario, if you make the wrong decision, you're dead.

Doove, it may be that you consider that unknown person's life as being unquestionably worth more than your own. It may be that you consider his right to rob you, unmolested, as being unquestionably worth more than your right to defend yourself and your home. It may be that you feel that, if he's there to kill someone, because he feels like it, then your moral duty is to volunteer to be his next victim.

It must feel really horrible for you to discover that these beliefs are not shared by the rest of us.

Clearly justified.

I will add one element to that scenario for you "Monday-morning-quarterbackers" who like to dissect facts AFTER THE EVENT ... if what the intruder pointed at the homeowner even looked like "a gun" the homeowner is justified in shooting the intruder EVEN IF THE THING THAT LOOKED LIKE "A GUN" TURNED OUT TO BE A WATER PISTOL.

So next time you start flashing your water pistol around at people, ...

.... you might want to consider that you are risking not getting another one next birthday. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I'm not "Monday morning quartrbacking" shit. It's those of you who are making the claim that the drunk was not a threat and should not have been shot. The homeowner had no idea this was a drunk at the wrong house. What he did know was his home was being invaded in the middle of the night. Any reasonable person would assume that he was in danger.

You know this drunk was a menace. I have never kicked in a door even after fighting with my wife or girlfriend. That is not something a normal well adjusted individual does. Who knows what he might have done if he had the correct house. Beat the crap out of his girlfriend? Kill her? All of you defending the drunk act like he was just this happy drunk. He kicked in the door. Who the fuck does that?

Moved to NW Austin in 1992. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Then you wouldn't know the "roots" of Cedar Park.

The rest is YOU rambling.

Welcome to Texas.

He kicked in the door. Who the fuck does that? Originally Posted by Budman

A person so drunk he doesn't know what house he just entered, can just as likely mistake my SO for HIS GF/wife and me for some "other guy" who is doing his GF/wife. The SHIT is ON.

That's who HE IS.

And you know one other thing: in the worst-case scenario, if you make the wrong decision, you're dead. Originally Posted by Sidewinder

Yup. And the other worst case scenario is that if you make the wrong decision, someone else is dead.

I get the scenario. And if it were as simple as "everyone who bangs in your door at 2AM is going to kill you if you don't kill them first", there'd be no issue whatsoever. Unfortunately, life ain't that simple.

Though for some people, it apparently is. Simple.

A person so drunk he doesn't know what house he just entered, can just as likely mistake my SO for HIS GF/wife and me for some "other guy" who is doing his GF/wife. The SHIT is ON.

That's who HE IS. Originally Posted by LexusLover

LL, budman is trying to agree with you on this. So just shut up already.