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.

Too much awesome in that article.

My buddy James just bought an AK. Hopefully soon he'll decide to send some rounds downrange with it. Should be fun.

Frazzled wrote:I guess I should calrify here. The intent was less about the shooting, more about an 8 month's pregrant woman with a shotgun. Any of us who've a pregant gal about that time knows a P woman 8 months down with a shotgun-yea someone's gonna die...

The dude could have been just like: "What a nice car you have here, is it a ninet-- OH GOD SHE HAS A SHOTTY"

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:
QFT.

Remerber kids:


America: Land of Opportunity,

Spoiler:

Boobs,

and Violence.

Scratch that, we have some issues in that department...

ugh... when will us tiny brained stupid americans understand. we cant defend our property or our lives with firearms...

i mean come on, the criminal is a person to... and he has every right to make a living stealing cars, selling drugs, ect ect.


wait what?

I take it you would shoot to death someone who pinches a rosebud out of your front garden.

Kilkrazy wrote:I take it you would shoot to death someone who pinches a rosebud out of your front garden.

My mom stole some flowers out of Al Capone's sister's garden once.

Fateweaver, I find your disregard for human life sickening.

Frazzled wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I take it you would shoot to death someone who pinches a rosebud out of your front garden.

My mom stole some flowers out of Al Capone's sister's garden once.

Presumably she was careful to do it when Miss Capone wasn't pregnant.

You betcha.

But seriously, what about the insurance?

My brother is moving to the USA. He's buying a new Prius. I have a feeling children are being considered.

Will he lose out if his wife shoots someone trying to steal the car?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:You betcha.

Kilkrazy wrote:But seriously, what about the insurance?

My brother is moving to the USA. He's buying a new Prius. I have a feeling children are being considered.

Will he lose out if his wife shoots someone trying to steal the car?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:You betcha.

Are you asking if his insurance will be higher-sorry your query intent is not coming through.

A prius? Seriously? He still has manly bits right?

I find your opinion of my totally supposed lack of regard for human life (because apparently it's cool to let strangers steal your stuff and break into your house) sickening.

Trust me, I'm not pro-murder or anything like that but honestly LL (and others who don't like my pro-defense stance) you see a thread with a title obviously pertaining to guns and gun violence then don't come in here and post your views on how it's wrong Americans believe in self-defense and then get all up in arms and disturbed when the people who applaud the defendant in question post their appraisal of the situation.

I have a strong regard for human life. Mine just happens to come first. The dude was ONLY attempting to steal a car but would you still spew the same anti-gun rhetoric if the dude had been trying to break into her apartment and being 8mo's pregnant with a infant that could be killed with a good solid punch to the abdomen?

If I had no regard for human life I would have killed a lot of people in my time for stupid gak such as cutting me off in traffic and what not. Don't judge me LL until you know me and I know for a fact you don't know me. Don't like my stance on how filth like that man should be treated, put me on ignore or don't post in threads where you think/know I'll respond. It will save Frazz the trouble of having to separate us.

Ya dig or should I draw it out in crayon?

He likes the MPG. They'll mainly use it for rolling around town anyway.

My question about the insurance is whether the company is likely to refuse the claim on the grounds that the owner wilfully damaged the vehicle by shooting at it.

I like colored chalk myself



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:He likes the MPG. They'll mainly use it for rolling around town anyway.

My question about the insurance is whether the company is likely to refuse the claim on the grounds that the owner wilfully damaged the vehicle by shooting at it.

Um, good point. i'd imagine they treat as any other willful accident: ie get out of it if they could.

That said, who remembers the fashion for pre-shotgunned jeans?

Maybe a pre-shotgunned car will be a status symbol

Yeah, even when the insurance company KNOWS they have to pay up it's normally a fight to get compensation. I pay more per year in insurance than my car is worth but if I got into an accident that I wasn't at fault for it'd take weeks to get the money even though the IC is coming out ahead.

Crooked sums o bitches.

If I were her I'd say I fired a warning shot but "the wind took it".

Fateweaver wrote:
I have a strong regard for human life. Mine just happens to come first. The dude was ONLY attempting to steal a car but would you still spew the same anti-gun rhetoric if the dude had been trying to break into her apartment and being 8mo's pregnant with a infant that could be killed with a good solid punch to the abdomen?

In this case, he wasn't, didn't, and probably had absolutely no intent to do anything of that nature.

This homogenization of criminals, does slightly disturb me. The difference between a child killer, and a car thief? I mean seriously though, those two things bear such vague connections, it is ridiculous. I know you were making a point, but c'mon.

Ya dig or should I draw it out in crayon?

Use this muffin.

Necros wrote:If I were her I'd say I fired a warning shot but "the wind took it".

Not in Texas. Thatw ould set you up for liability. Here's the preferred method

BLAM!
"Stop or I will be forced to shoot you again!"
BLAM!

Because Zombieland Rule #7 states-doubletap.

If it was her apartment then I would say she had a right to defend herself

It isnt self defence when someone's trying to break into a car.

Fateweaver wrote:how it's wrong Americans believe

Did I mention Americans at all? No, I would say its wrong for anyone to shoot a someone who's trying to burglar your car.

Wrexasaur wrote:

This homogenization of criminals, does slightly disturb me. The difference between a child killer, and a car thief? I mean seriously though, those two things bear such vague connections, it is ridiculous. I know you were making a point, but c'mon.

Your average child killer is a creepy old guy. Much slower. Fateweaver's .22 scenario works better here.
Car thief. Good chance they are hopped up and can sprint quickly like a bird. hence a shotgun with a good choke pattern.

Oh wait, you meant morally different, I'm sorry...

To call her a murderer though is just as disturbing. Disregarding the jokes about a pregnant woman she acted in defense. I'm sure she didn't call the guy up, say "hey, come try to steal my car" and then when he got there she blew him away.

It's been nearly 2 months since the John Hopkins incident and he hasn't been convicted of a crime and odds are at this point he won't be.

Some dude tries to steal my ride it's on. He better hope I'm feeling nice that night and let the cops handle him.

I cannot see how this has anything to do with self defense.

Yelling at the guy, and then having him run towards you, with no firearm, while you were at least a story above him... that is not even close to self defense.

This lady shot at a guy, that was stealing her property, and killed him; no more, and no less.

Fateweaver wrote:To call her a murderer though is just as disturbing. Disregarding the jokes about a pregnant woman she acted in defense.

She acted in defense of her property, not her life, or her childs life. You can cut pie, and add ice cream, then call it cake; but I am still going to look at you funny for calling pie, with ice cream, cake. This woman, is now officially a murderer. Soldiers murder, Police murder, you can call it whatever you like, but it is still fething murder. Splitting hairs in a hair factory, next to a workshop full of elves, that manufacture split hair products; at a much lower cost, and a much higher profit margin because of it.

Some dude tries to steal my ride it's on. He better hope I'm feeling nice that night and let the cops handle him.

I feel that the only thing that people are defending in a situation like that, is their pride.

If you shoot at a person next to your car, and manage to bust a dozen holes in your engine and what have you... what did you accomplish? Well... if the person you shot at is dead... you are now officially a killer (because murderer has much to much of a realistic connotation. Killer... well.. Batman kills, Charles Manson murders.

Lord-Loss wrote:

If it was her apartment then I would say she had a right to defend herself

It isnt self defence when someone's trying to break into a car.

Fateweaver wrote:how it's wrong Americans believe

Did I mention Americans at all? No, I would say its wrong for anyone to shoot a someone who's trying to burglar your car.

LL, its not a self defense issue. Different statutory item. This is the thou shalt not with my stuff at night statute portion.

Hence I said "defense", not "self-defense". Two different meanings by the very definition of the statutes in the state of Tx and state of Mn.

I have the right to defend my property.

In the case of the MG-42 I'd wait until the car thief was away from my car. Wouldn't want any stray rounds to impact my car.

Fateweaver wrote:I would have chosen a .22 pistol, emptied an entire clip and let him bleed out that way.

Why couldnt you just shoot him in the leg, then call the police?

Lord-Loss wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:I would have chosen a .22 pistol, emptied an entire clip and let him bleed out that way.

Why, couldnt you just shoot him in the leg, then call the police?

Same thing. When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

If you're going to shoot someone you shoot to hit the torso. It's basic. The shooting to wound is in the movies, that's all.

I'm a good shot but if I have the chance to shoot him center mass thereby giving me a target that is approximately 18" wide and 24" tall or a target that is 36" tall but only 6" wide I think I'll aim center mass, especially with a .22.

Would you give a damn if you killed a guy who was trying to break in your car?

I drive a '69 Plymouth Roadrunner so of course I'd feel bad for all of 3 seconds for wasting ammo and for him bleeding on my car if he happened to fall against it.