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.

I hear they ration health care in thunderdome.

Yeah yeah yeah. Kill, maim, burn. Blood for the blood God.

I am a gun owner who will happily blow away anybody that is threatening me and mine, but I will not hunt down people that are leaving. That's the job of the law, and it's not my place to kill somebody for breaking into a freaking house if they are on the way out and not a threat anymore.

The amount of crap some people on here are willing to kill for is pretty sad...

And like I said. Standing in the drive way holding people at gun point is more of a risk to me and mine than letting them leave.

 d-usa wrote:


The amount of crap some people on here are willing to kill for is pretty sad...

You have no idea.

d-usa wrote:Yeah yeah yeah. Kill, maim, burn. Blood for the blood God.

I am a gun owner who will happily blow away anybody that is threatening me and mine, but I will not hunt down people that are leaving. That's the job of the law, and it's not my place to kill somebody for breaking into a freaking house if they are on the way out and not a threat anymore.

The amount of crap some people on here are willing to kill for is pretty sad...

And like I said. Standing in the drive way holding people at gun point is more of a risk to me and mine than letting them leave.

I agree that holding someone at gun point is more of a risk. If only there were a way to ensure that risk was neutralized...

All joking aside, I don't mean to be advocating senseless violence. But I'm a big fan of deterrence; and I would hope that the next person thinking of repeating the offense would have heard the message.

 AustonT wrote:
I hear they ration health care in thunderdome.

But they ration with care in the thunderdome.

 Lordhat wrote:

“I gave him a chance…Had he said he had bad intentions before that, he wouldn’t have got his second chance. That’s a different ballgame. You threaten me and my family, that’s a different ballgame,” Gerow added.

So, Gerow didn't feel sufficiently threatened to shoot immediately, instead choosing to converse with the alleged burglar, but Lord help him if that conversation didn't go the way he wanted it to?

Sounds like a mixture of wishful thinking and posturing to me.

 AustonT wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I'm a pro gun person, but I will put myself in the "if he was leaving don't pull a gun and hold him at gun-point" camp.

If you feel the situation is dire enough to pull the gun on somebody then pull the trigger, other than that its just playing vigilante and dangerous.

Texas is one of the few states in which you can shoot someone in defense of property. Its not vigilantism to detain a criminal and call the cops, but I get there isn't an easy word for it.

Citizen's arrest?

I think it is very public spirited to get criminals off the streets by interrupting them in the commission of an offence and holding them for the police to deal with.

Anyone breaks into my house(should they be so terminally unwise) will meet either a 2.5lb lump hammer of 2ft of heavy industrial chain attached to a very displeased and psychiotic me coming the other way.
My old maths teacher was an ex-military gun nut and he said that an intruder would meet the wrong end of his remington coming the other way......

But seriously if anyone breaks in then i will face them. And if the just happens to be fleeing-more fool them. Quite frankly intruders should be glad i am yet to get my crossbow

I woke up at 3 a.m. the other night with a burglary scare. I went down in my PJs thinking if I meet someone I will slip on the stairs and fall on them and that will do it.

 d-usa wrote:
I'm a pro gun person, but I will put myself in the "if he was leaving don't pull a gun and hold him at gun-point" camp.

If you feel the situation is dire enough to pull the gun on somebody then pull the trigger, other than that its just playing vigilante and dangerous.

If you can legally shoot hi, you can legally hold him for the Po Po too. It occassionally happens.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AustonT wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
I'm a pro gun person, but I will put myself in the "if he was leaving don't pull a gun and hold him at gun-point" camp.

If you feel the situation is dire enough to pull the gun on somebody then pull the trigger, other than that its just playing vigilante and dangerous.

Texas is one of the few states in which you can shoot someone in defense of property. Its not vigilantism to detain a criminal and call the cops, but I get there isn't an easy word for it.

He was making a citizen's arrest. Whats the problem?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Blah Blah Blah, The Criminal has rights. Guns should be outlawed Rabble Rabble Rabble. Thats what people expect me to say.
But i have a question, it is clear the house was broken into from the man, that is clear. But should you be able to shoot someone who is fleeing?

The robber ran out the door. I ran out to get his direction to tell the police. I saw he was in a vehicle. He pointed something at me. I was terrified. I fired.

Case dismissed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I woke up at 3 a.m. the other night with a burglary scare. I went down in my PJs thinking if I meet someone I will slip on the stairs and fall on them and that will do it.

Thats what the Rooskies did to the Nazis in WWII.