Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'm glad I have the Dakka OT to remind me of how ignorant and naive some people can be.

Dont confuse ignorance with someone of a different belief.

Belief in something doesn't validate it. Particularly here.

 daedalus wrote:
Apparently the latter, because victimization is the new 'hip' in the US.

This moment of self-actualization might have ACTUALLY forced this child into realizing she's capable of influencing the world around her. God forbid.

Ugggh

this sums up the state of new york so well right now.

The state cares more about the criminal than it does about the victim.

When a cop tells you the best 3 defenses for a young woman are running, a cell phone and a whistle, it's a pretty fahkin pathetic.

And your congressman's response to the difficult access to getting a gun, taser or pepper spray is "New York law makers have the interest in the safety of the victims and criminals" says a lot.

Small update:

http://kfor.com/2012/10/21/charges-filed-against-burglar-shot-by-child/

Didn't read the 5 pages.
But rather then blaming the 12 year old to shoot a gun,
all can be avoided if the criminal wasn't doing any criminal activities.

Why give them so much power?

Who would win in a fight, this girl or the cop who tazed a blind guy?

 Valkyrie wrote:
If this was in the UK, the intruder would be able to sue for injuries, psychological damage, as well as compensation for being unable to return to his line of work. The girl's parents would be kept under supervision for leaving a gun in a way it can be used by a child, the child herself possibly being taken away and put into care.

/political rant.

Thats why you shoot them until the magazine is empty, then you hide while reloading. Didn't your mother teach you nuttin?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Good for the girl!

Intruder in my house would be dead.... 'jus saying.

IN the Frazzled household, the intruder is supper. Tbone be hungry!!!


In other news Rodney and Rusty surprised a deer this morning. When a wiener dog takes after a deer, even God stops to see what the hell just happened.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
And you are making assumptions right there aswell. As far as we know, he was there just to rob the house.
And we dont know, from the sound of it, if she had enough tim to get the gun, and hide in the closet, she may have had enough time to get out of the house.

Don't have kids I take it. I don't generally want them running around. They can run into the bad guy. I want them hiding with the police coming.

Same to same for the Wife.
The Boy would just beat him to death for interfering with his internet time.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Argh, Im not arguing that, Im arguing not letting kids near dangerous weapons.

Normally I agree, except in this circumstance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Um, Couldnt the dog thing be more that dogs are more common in a household then a gun? I mean i know plenty of people that have dogs bu no guns.

Thats because you don't live in Texas.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Hotsauce. You never know till you go through the experience and have the same options as the mom did. Its easy to trouble shoot and 2nd guess the mom after the incident and relate to what you would do in the same time frame.

Well hopefully I will never have to, Nor this family ever have to again or anyone i know.
Now Im off to study for a test on geology, YAY ROCKS.

Geology rocks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vulcan wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Argh, Im not arguing that, Im arguing not letting kids near dangerous weapons.

No, you're arguing it's better to leave the kid unprotected near dangerous PEOPLE.

Respectfully, he's arguing that the course of action would be for the girl to get out. Thats not a bad thing. It depends utterly and completely, on the situation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rubiksnoob wrote:
Who would win in a fight, this girl or the cop who tazed a blind guy?

The girl of course. No British copper can stand against the might of a little Southern girl. They don't need guns, they'll just beat you to death with a pot. We raise 'em tough here.

Here's a brief interview with aforementioned 12 year old.

http://kfor.com/2012/10/18/preteen-shoots-intruder-in-home/

Kendra earns my BAMF of the week award if I haven't mentioned that before. Also shot in the shoulder, so I rescind my earlier comments about not shooting center of mass. That's pretty good for through a door.

Alright not to sound like a whack but she would have been raped. SHe's going to beak necks when she gets older

Even a miss would be enough. A bullet through a door would be a good surprise for a bad guy and result in fleeing.

Getting a hit at all is just bonus.

 Jihadin wrote:
Alright not to sound like a whack but she would have been raped. SHe's going to beak necks when she gets older

Life taker and a heart breaker, sounds like a southern girl to me.

I bet NO ONE screws with her at school any more eh?

"No man, don't screw with Kendra, she shot a guy!"

"Wait what!? Dang..."

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'm glad I have the Dakka OT to remind me of how ignorant and naive some people can be.

Dont confuse ignorance with someone of a different belief.

You're advocating ignorance. You're like the people who oppose sex education based on the erroneous belief that an uninformed child will know to avoid hazardous behaviours.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'm glad I have the Dakka OT to remind me of how ignorant and naive some people can be.

Dont confuse ignorance with someone of a different belief.

You're advocating ignorance. You're like the people who oppose sex education based on the erroneous belief that an uninformed child will know to avoid hazardous behaviours.

Not necessarily.

I can imagine that there are people who support training a child in the safe use of guns and taking children to the gun range, but who also believe in keeping the gun non-accessible to children in the house.

Just like believing in sex education doesn't mean that you have to keep bowls of condoms in your house for your kids to have access to.

I doubt that the child has ready access to the gun, as previously noted. But assuming that she was properly trained, and fearing for her child's life, why would the mother not tell her the code to give her access the the gun that may have saved her life?

 Jihadin wrote:
Alright not to sound like a whack but she would have been raped. SHe's going to beak necks when she gets older

It does sound like he was after her.
And from the look of the house, running wasn't an option, if i had a gun i may have told my daughter to get it as well if i lived in that area. But it also doesn't say whether she was trained or not.
But i live in the suburbs, where houses are feet away, and you can easily get around the back or front without someone seeing you.

 d-usa wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'm glad I have the Dakka OT to remind me of how ignorant and naive some people can be.

Dont confuse ignorance with someone of a different belief.

You're advocating ignorance. You're like the people who oppose sex education based on the erroneous belief that an uninformed child will know to avoid hazardous behaviours.

Not necessarily.

I can imagine that there are people who support training a child in the safe use of guns and taking children to the gun range, but who also believe in keeping the gun non-accessible to children in the house.

Just like believing in sex education doesn't mean that you have to keep bowls of condoms in your house for your kids to have access to.

It is a scary day when I agree with everything D-USa says. My bowels ar suddenly acting up, in a most peculiar fashion.

Just had to double down on those bean burrito's eh Frazz

 Frazzled wrote:

Intruder in my house would be dead.... 'jus saying.

IN the Frazzled household, the intruder is supper. Tbone be hungry!!!


In other news Rodney and Rusty surprised a deer this morning. When a wiener dog takes after a deer, even God stops to see what the hell just happened.

 Lordhat wrote:
Real gun control starts and ends with education.

The is the best thing I've seen on Dakka all day. Completely agree with it.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Intruder in my house would be dead.... 'jus saying.

IN the Frazzled household, the intruder is supper. Tbone be hungry!!!


In other news Rodney and Rusty surprised a deer this morning. When a wiener dog takes after a deer, even God stops to see what the hell just happened.

Frazzled, you dress your dogs in sweaters?
Also frazzle, you a nice respectful man, or dog, im not sure witch at this point, Respecting your opponents view point and intervening when someone insults them, you are like ghandi if he had wiener dogs.