Would you kill to defend your property?

[vampireuk]

Consider Tony Martin (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/3104563.stm) a old man who has been burgled dozens of times and the police have never done a thing. One night two more burglars come waltzing up to his house. Martin took no chances and shot them both with a pump action shotgun. The 16 year old burglar died and the other got away with leg injuries. Since then he has been locked away for around 3 years and has imo quite rightly refused to apologise for defending himself. The guy should not have been jailed in the first place and it just goes to show you that criminals now have more rights and protection than us in the British court system. Oh and the guy he shot in the leg is also suing for £10,000, bit of a shame Tony didn't aim about 3 feet higher.

What would you guys do in that situation? Somebody is on your property about to do god knows what, you have no idea if you will be safe. Would you let the criminals (who by then have placed their lives into your hands by been on your property illegally) do what they wish. Or would you give them hell:rw:

Personally I saw anyone who comes into my house at night will meet my crossbow up close:super:

[Dark Jedi]

Yup... I sure as hell would.

[intercede007]

Property? Hell no.

If you have a gun, I'll hand over the keys to my Jetta with a coke and a smile. I can always buy another car, another TV or a stereo. That's what insurance is for.

Now, if I feel the safety of my family is in jeopardy, thats what I have these bad boys for.....


http://members.cox.net/intercede007/glocks.jpg

[vampireuk]

Perhaps I should rephrase to if you were forced it, the its me or him situation.

And damn you with this his and hers pistols!:p

[intercede007]

Originally posted by vampireuk
Perhaps I should rephrase to if you were forced it, the its me or him situation.

And damn you with this his and hers pistols!:p

lol!!! Man..they are becoming hers and hers..she's diggin' the feel of the .45 now. Ahh well, Glock came out with the G29, which is 10mm. I might need to trade up.

But concerning your change of point, in a Him Vs. Me situation I won't hesitate.

[Dark Jedi]

Nice sidearms... remind me never to get on your wrong side. ;)

[bknblk]

If the burglar is in the house it is pretty easy to convince a jury that you were in fear of severe bodily injury. It is still a homocide, but ruled justifiable homocide(self-defense). Now, if they flee upon seeing you or you shoot them in the back you will be convicted of manslaughter minimum. Rule of thumb: confront them face to face annd get off 2 shots to the thorax.

[Kain]

This is like Israel vs. Palestine.

Palestinians fight to defend their "property" yet people call them terrorists?

[de><ta]

Intercede have you considered the uzi conversion for the glocks??? Only 17 more parts and u get one hell of a pepper sprayer.:firedevil

Personally the only time i would resort to using a gun was when my life was threatned. Apart from that nah... using a gun for trivial purposes is foolish.

There are alternates to using a firearm, personally good old fashioned use of the brain to outsmart an opponent is seldom considered by today's fool hardy people.

[vampireuk]

Originally posted by Kain
This is like Israel vs. Palestine.

Palestinians fight to defend their "property" yet people call them terrorists?

Kain leave politics out of this

[Sickness]

Originally posted by Kain
This is like Israel vs. Palestine.

Palestinians fight to defend their "property" yet people call them terrorists?

The Palestinian terrorists do not recognize that Israel is a state that has a right to exist. Sense Israelis are not going to be leaving any time soon as a result of the terrorist acts then these are futile terror generating attacks. Terrorist seems fitting for people who are brainwashed into blowing themselves up for a useless cause.

[bknblk]

Originally posted by Kain
This is like Israel vs. Palestine.

Palestinians fight to defend their "property" yet people call them terrorists?

What property do the Palestinians have that the Israelis want? They are already returning real estate.

A little info. (http://members.cox.net/fastrig/Israel.htm)

Lets not compare contibutions to society, unless you consider wrapping one's self in explosives and killing people on a bus a contribution to society or self defense.

[intercede007]

Originally posted by vampireuk
....leave politics out of this


What he said.

[UDawg]

If someone breaks into my house then I would put them down. I have no idea what their intentions are. So to be safe I would rather take out the offender, especialy since I have a child.

[ricercar]

It would be fairly easty for me to fire a weapon at someone who threatened myself, my spouse or my child. Anyone who initiates violence, especially when tresspassing, has abdicated any theoretical 'right' to live.

Yes, "Initiating violence" includes pointing a loaded weapon with unknown intention. I expect would have finite remorse for killing an officer of the law who pointed a weapon at me without proeprly identifying him/herself.

Yet if I saw a person running away with my property, I likely would not fire a weapon. As was so aptly stated before, that's what insurance is for.

[1stFlight]

In this case, take no chances..

If they're already inside your house, take them out. They've already made their intentions clear.

[Smokey]

Its the kind of question that I cant answer, I dont know how I would react under those circumstances. I would like to say that I would seriously hurt someone without killing them, but you just dont know what might happen!!

I think its wrong that the idiot that got shot thinks he has the right to sue, I think that law exists in Australia also, where the buglar has more rights than the people that are getting robbed!!

[The Baron]

If it was just property, meh, it's not worth it.

If it was me, my friends, or my family, I always was curious as to whether or not FPS games made you a better shot in real life.

[ricercar]

If they're already inside your house, take them out. They've already made their intentions clear.Once I had a roommate return unexpectedly on leave from the US Army. If I had possesed a handgun at that point, I would have shot the unexpected 6' 4" intruder. My combat knife was out and ready, but he moved into the light ...

That incident made me re-evaluate my instincts honed by martial arts and paranoia. With other persons in the home, especially children, identiifcation of the intruder becomes more paramount than speed of active defense. One can no longer simply attack anything that moves after dark with a family. :)

I got cats so I no longer have to react to things that go bump in the night.

[Filburt]

I wouldn't kill the person, but I would certainly disable 'em.

[vampireuk]

Well the guy he killed was inside his house at first then as he was running away he fired. I personally see no problem with this since the guy is a old man and saw fit to defend himself even if the guy was running. Anyway one less bit of scum hanging around Britain. Aim higher damnit Martin!:p

[PsychoSy]

I'm sorry but this is one of those cases where I'm staunchly Conservative/Republican on. Some asshat wants to hee-haw around my area for anything risks getting shot and survivors risk getting shot again.

The way I see it, I've got the right to protect my family and my possessions and no burglar will be getting anything of mine unless they can take me out. If they want an entertainment center, an X-Box, or a computer, I've got three words for 'em - GET A JOB!!! If you think you're gonna take mine, you are risking an apendage, maybe some digits, possibly even your life.

Screw 'em!

My buddy John has a permit to carry a concealed weapon an this baby is on his hip everywhere he goes. :D

http://www.fyremoon.net/~psychosy/images/Misc/DSC00003.JPG

[bknblk]

I happen to know a guy that was caught up in a home invasion robbery in his house. They tied him to a chair, shocked him with stun guns and beat hin for about a half an hour. They left him tied up in another room while they ransacked his house. He got free, grabbed his shotgun and shot one of the guys dead in the house. But then he proceded to chase the other down the street and shot him dead with a load in the back. Because of the extenuating circumstances of the prolonged torture he got manslaughter on the one he chased down, but only served a year.

[PsychoSy]

See, I disagree with that - my view is the moment anyone infringes on another person's rights, they should cease to have rights of their own and face whatever consequences for their actions. I'd have given the guy a medal! :p

[ricercar]

the moment anyone infringes on another person's rights, they should cease to have rights of their own and face whatever consequences for their actions

That argument is notable for the lack of the word "appropriate" to define consequences. Yet IMO there's a significant moral difference between invasion of property and threat of personal harm.

Psy, you don't appear to make this disctinction? If you're tied to a chair without torture while your car is hijacked or your house ransacked, can you ethically and morally respond with killing force? What happens when you're interrupted in public speaking? May you shoot the perp and remain a moral person?

I know I sound flippant, but I am asking a real question. How many rights must be infringed before it is moral to respond with killing force? In many ways my whole life has been asking the questions: What is the dividing line?, and Who decides?