Sotomayor's views on guns prompt questions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Liebling, I said "probably", it does not mean you really want to make it illegal. I said no such thing, I just said "probably". But you answered it so I now know. Thanks. :)

Yes, I know claws are not machine but natural. It's not what I mean. You know a cat's claws are used for it's 'surviving tool' to cut prices of food and self-defense from enemies, right? And without their claws, how would cats able to defend themselves or to tear a price of food? I was not talked about your cats. I used it as an example. That was what I settled an example.

Cheri, I don't know why you think I made a silly comment, just cos I "incorrectly thought" on what I stated my POV. No, I already stated my reasons: #61, #76, and I said it once.

Now I say it again: "I do think the gun restriction is less effective, and the gun regulation is more effective. Stricter gun laws do not make any better. I stand on that."

I can't believe you suggest me to trust "call 911" option over "gun" option. =/ I wonder, why is that?
 
Cheri said:
Who is to say only a gun is a good mean of self defense. My chance of surviving would not be slim if I don't own a gun, I do have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving with a weapon of my choice.

You would also have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving even if you shoot them first before they shoot you. ;)
Click to expand...

Good point...
 
Cheri said:
Who is to say only a gun is a good mean of self defense. My chance of surviving would not be slim if I don't own a gun, I do have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving with a weapon of my choice.

You would also have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving even if you shoot them first before they shoot you. ;)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure where you get these numbers from. Your odds of survival in any given situation depends on a number of factors on both sides, including weapons, physical size, strength, training, and a number of other factors. A gun is about the worst thing to go up against and the best thing to have on your side. A knife is certainly a good weapon, but you know what they say about bringing a knife to a gun fight. I'd say that lower on that list comes physical characteristics and martial arts training (although good martial arts training will teach one that the martial arts are limited and a gun is really the best way to defend oneself).
 
I tend to support guns for personal security reasons. I think that it makes criminals think twice before attacking someone with a gun (or even the possiblility of owning one).

In England the criminal element has more rights then the civilian one. Which is why I'm ok about people having guns.
 
Cheri said:
Who is to say only a gun is a good mean of self defense. My chance of surviving would not be slim if I don't own a gun, I do have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving with a weapon of my choice.

You would also have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving even if you shoot them first before they shoot you. ;)
Click to expand...

um, can you hit a 90mph fastball?
bullets travel at thousands of feet per second (fps link) which is faster than the speed of sound.

to use a bat on an intruder, you must be within 3 to 6 feet of the intruder. which is the length of the bat and swingers arm length. very poor odds. if that intruder has a gun, even worse odds

firearms put more distance between the defender and intruder. which gives better odds on survival. if the defender is a good shot even better odds. if dogs are keeping the intruder busy while the defender aims, even better odds
 
picture it, a hospital room where severely beat man robbery suspect is questioned by police officers:

Police: Did he use a gun?
Robbery Suspect: no

Police: Did he use a bat?
Robbery Suspect: no

Police: Did he use martial arts?
Robbery Suspect: not really

Police: the home owner did use his fists, correct?
Robbery Suspect: no

Police: what did the home own use to beat you to a pulp?
Robbery Suspect: he pulverized me with his big floppy man boobs :tears:


yep! not everyone needs a weapon for home defense :P
 
KarissaMann05 said:
I can't believe you suggest me to trust "call 911" option over "gun" option. =/ I wonder, why is that?
Click to expand...

:confused: I didn't say that. You've said my chance of surviving will be slim if I don't own a gun, and that's not true.

And CCSinned--Only a minority of owners actually use their guns for self-protection. Many home-owners nowadays have a burglar alarm system, that's their self-home protection.

And shooting a robber does not necessarily means saving the life of a victim because a victim could get shot too if a robber has a gun and that victim will just going to be a dead gun owner, You cannot just shoot a robber just a moment he/she walks in your home, you have to be the first to be attacked in order to use guns for self-defense. Guns are always supposed to be used as a last resort. You have other options of self-defense tools to use in a self-defense situation, such as pepper spray, stun guns, taser, mace spray, guard dogs, nunchucks, knives, self-defense classes and many more. Everyone has a 50/50 percent of a chance of surviving with a weapon of their choice, not just those who own a gun. :)
 
Cheri said:
...Only a minority of owners actually use their guns for self-protection. Many home-owners nowadays have a burglar alarm system, that's their self-home protection.
Click to expand...
Alarms don't physically stop burglars.

And shooting a robber does not necessarily means saving the life of a victim because a victim could get shot too if a robber has a gun and that victim will just going to be a dead gun owner...
Click to expand...
If the robber has a gun and you don't, how will you stop him from shooting you?

You cannot just shoot a robber just a moment he/she walks in your home, you have to be the first to be attacked in order to use guns for self-defense.
Click to expand...
That's not true in all states. The law does not say that you have to be actually attacked in your home. Just the threat of attack is enough to legally justify self defense. It's called the "castle law."

Guns are always supposed to be used as a last resort.
Click to expand...
When an armed intruder confronts you in your house, that is the last resort.

You have other options of self-defense tools to use in a self-defense situation, such as pepper spray, stun guns, taser, mace spray, guard dogs, nunchucks, knives, self-defense classes and many more.
Click to expand...
Do you really think that you can successfully use those methods to stop an armed intruder in your home?

[/quote]Everyone has a 50/50 percent of a chance of surviving with a weapon of their choice, not just those who own a gun. :)[/QUOTE]
I don't know where you get the 50/50 percent from; I've never seen that statistic. Even if that's a true number, it's not very good odds. I want better than a 50/50 chance of survival!
 
Reba said:
That's not true in all states. The law does not say that you have to be actually attacked in your home. Just the threat of attack is enough to legally justify self defense. It's called the "castle law."
Click to expand...
Then explain why those who had shoot in self-defense ends up doing time for first-degree murder?

Ever heard of this story about a pharmacist had two young men that came into his store and one of them had a weapon to rob the store, the pharmacist pulled out his gun and had shoot one of them and then goes after the second guy who was trying to run out of the store and shot him 5 times, so you think people have the right to own guns and can use them anytime in a self-defense case, so you cannot just shot someone more than 5 times in a self-defense case just because he was in fear for his life, once should have been enough.

Do you really think that you can successfully use those methods to stop an armed intruder in your home?
Click to expand...
Anything is possible, nothing is impossible. :)

I don't know where you get the 50/50 percent from; I've never seen that statistic. Even if that's a true number, it's not very good odds. I want better than a 50/50 chance of survival!
Click to expand...
You can expected to be a hero, well I don't, things in my home can be replace, but my life cannot be replace. Just because someone enters your property, it doesn't give you the right to shoot them. Your life has to be threatened or if you are being attacked first. I would rather to enjoy freedom than being charge with first-degree murder if something ends up in the wrong direction. :)
 
Reba said:
Alarms don't physically stop burglars.


If the robber has a gun and you don't, how will you stop him from shooting you?


That's not true in all states. The law does not say that you have to be actually attacked in your home. Just the threat of attack is enough to legally justify self defense. It's called the "castle law."


When an armed intruder confronts you in your house, that is the last resort.


Do you really think that you can successfully use those methods to stop an armed intruder in your home?

Everyone has a 50/50 percent of a chance of surviving with a weapon of their choice, not just those who own a gun. :)
I don't know where you get the 50/50 percent from; I've never seen that statistic. Even if that's a true number, it's not very good odds. I want better than a 50/50 chance of survival!
Click to expand...

Yup, I remember about that, in some states, you could charge in murder if you shoot at robber since other states aren't but you just have prove that you are self-defense.

For gun rights, I'm side with Reba.
 
Cheri said:
Then explain why those who had shoot in self-defense ends up doing time for first-degree murder?

Ever heard of this story about a pharmacist had two young men that came into his store and one of them had a weapon to rob the store, the pharmacist pulled out his gun and had shoot one of them and then goes after the second guy who was trying to run out of the store and shot him 5 times, so you think people have the right to own guns and can use them anytime in a self-defense case, so you cannot just shot someone more than 5 times in a self-defense case just because he was in fear for his life, once should have been enough.
Click to expand...
You answered your own question.

The reason some people get prosecuted for shooting is because they go beyond the level of self defense.

Here's another example:

[/quote]A pharmacist who shot and killed a robber last month has been cleared of any wrongdoing.

On Wednesday morning, District Attorney Nola Foulston's office released a report detailing what happened...

Investigators say Alexander Mies pulled a gun on a worker at Salyer Pharmacy at 21st and Broadway on Saturday, August 25. Mies entered the store with a bandage over part of his face, exposing just one eye. He asked to pick up a prescription under an alias name. Mies then pulled out a handgun and pointed at a pharmacist.

Another pharmacist, Tom Lundberg, reached for a shotgun behind the counter. Police say he ordered Mies to drop the gun, but when Mies didn't, Lundberg fired once, hitting the robber in the head.

No customers were inside at the time - just three employees. A delivery worker arrived in the middle of the holdup.

Investigators ruled the shooting as a simple case of self-defense.[/quote]
Pharmacist Cleared in Self-Defense Shooting

[/quote]


Anything is possible, nothing is impossible. :)
Click to expand...
That's true but is it reasonable?


You can expected to be a hero, well I don't, things in my home can be replace, but my life cannot be replace.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't expect or want to be a hero. Yes, things can be replaced but life cannot be. So, if an intruder comes into your home with a gun, and says, "I'm going to kill you," you wouldn't be willing to shoot him?

Just because someone enters your property, it doesn't give you the right to shoot them. Your life has to be threatened or if you are being attacked first. I would rather to enjoy freedom than being charge with first-degree murder if something ends up in the wrong direction. :)
Click to expand...
If someone enters your property in a threatening manner then you do have the legal right to defend yourself.

I would rather enjoy freedom too, but I prefer to be alive to enjoy it.

If you wait until someone actually attacks you, then it's too late. If he gets the first shot off to your head or heart, what will you do?
 
Reba already said what I was going to reply with. Alarms do work and scare off intruders. alarms should be in peoples home defense plan. I've always believed in layers of defense.
Alarms, motion dectors and lights in the plan. the outter layer.
deadbolts and dogs the next layer
the last and final layer is a gun.

so now, just going to share an article from www.saami.org the article is called 'Close to Home'
 
911 system is great. But by the time they arrive. A lot of damage can be done. Especially if you live in a rural area.
 
Babyblue said:
911 system is great. But by the time they arrive. A lot of damage can be done. Especially if you live in a rural area.
Click to expand...
that is why a good home defense plan is so important.

unless a home owner has a real panic room or safe room hiding in a closet and dialing 911 isn't going to giving the home owner much a chance to survive.

first.:try to scare the intruders off with alarms, motion detector lights. intruders don't like the attention alarms and light. they prefer the element of surprise under the cover of darkness.

second: make getting into the home as difficult as possible. deadbolts, locks shatter proof windows, etc etc and dogs.

third: have a plan for each family member to be safe while the home is being defened from intruder. even have escaped plan. be sure each family member knows it and practice. not just know how to use weapon of choice, master it.
 
C.C.Sinned said:
that is why a good home defense plan is so important.

unless a home owner has a real panic room or safe room hiding in a closet and dialing 911 isn't going to giving the home owner much a chance to survive.

first.:try to scare the intruders off with alarms, motion detector lights. intruders don't like the attention alarms and light. they prefer the element of surprise under the cover of darkness.

second: make getting into the home as difficult as possible. deadbolts, locks shatter proof windows, etc etc and dogs.

third: have a plan for each family member to be safe while the home is being defened from intruder. even have escaped plan. be sure each family member knows it and practice. not just know how to use weapon of choice, master it.
Click to expand...


Of course.

I had a home alarm system before. once the alarm went off. It took them 45 minutes to get to my rural home. House was cleaned out. I arrived home from work. The alarm was still tripping. waited 15 more minuted added to when the alarm was set. Door was busted.




My home was robbed. I was devastated! Just thinking..... if I was home with the kids that day. Either way. The results would have not been good. I believe in shooting first, and asking questions later to an unwanted stranger in my home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top