Three burglars enter home, son shoots them all dead with AR-15 assault rifle

[smilesammich 10,727]

12 minutes ago, SRVT said:

Thanks. Is there any doubt libs sympathize with criminals? Those poor armed robbers.. those poor illegal immigrants.. those poor rapefugees.. disturbed people.

 

oh boy. so glad you're back. tbone has been running quite a tight ship round these parts, i hope you've got your member card at the ready.

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

could you list for us a few of your many different outcomes. 

Sure:

1. The outcome that happened

2. The criminals sneak in, steal stuff and leave without the homeowners noticing/no contact made

3. The criminals sneak in, try to steal stuff, get caught by a homeowner with a gun, threats are made, the criminals give up and get arrested

4. The criminals sneak in, try to steal stuff, get caught by homeowner with a gun, threats are made, criminals are shot at and are injured by not killed, they get arrested

5. Same as above except they are shot at, missed, they escape but are caught later

6. Same as above except they are shot at, missed, they escape and are never caught

 

I could think of more but will stop there.

 

Of those I think the best outcome would be 3 or 4. The homeowner protects themselves, the criminals either give in or they resist and are shot at BUT not killed

 

Again as I've said before I'm not saying that the shooter should have done ANYTHING differently. In the situation he acted appropriately and he protected himself and his family. However, I will say that I would have preferred the criminals get shot but not killed.

 

I'm not even bringing up the issue of whether defending the home with a semiautomatic pistol rather than an assault rifle would have been more likely to produce the "better" outcome (capture but not death), but that is an additional layer to consider. 

 

Again I COMPLETELY agree that what happened is far better than other possible outcomes. However I think it is somewhere in the middle. Great that the home was protected and no one innocent was hurt. Not that great that in the end people died. I feel like that is being quite reasonable about the situation. Quite "middle of the road" as you like to put it.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

Sure:

1. The outcome that happened

2. The criminals sneak in, steal stuff and leave without the homeowners noticing/no contact made

3. The criminals sneak in, try to steal stuff, get caught by a homeowner with a gun, threats are made, the criminals give up and get arrested

4. The criminals sneak in, try to steal stuff, get caught by homeowner with a gun, threats are made, criminals are shot at and are injured by not killed, they get arrested

5. Same as above except they are shot at, missed, they escape but are caught later

6. Same as above except they are shot at, missed, they escape and are never caught

 

I could think of more but will stop there.

 

Of those I think the best outcome would be 3 or 4. The homeowner protects themselves, the criminals either give in or they resist and are shot at BUT not killed

 

Again as I've said before I'm not saying that the shooter should have done ANYTHING differently. In the situation he acted appropriately and he protected himself and his family. However, I will say that I would have preferred the criminals get shot but not killed.

 

I'm not even bringing up the issue of whether defending the home with a semiautomatic pistol rather than an assault rifle would have been more likely to produce the "better" outcome (capture but not death), but that is an additional layer to consider. 

 

Again I COMPLETELY agree that what happened is far better than other possible outcomes. However I think it is somewhere in the middle. Great that the home was protected and no one innocent was hurt. Not that great that in the end people died. I feel like that is being quite reasonable about the situation. Quite "middle of the road" as you like to put it.

Oh my aching butt Really ?

 

Shot but miss, Shoot to wound. Sneak in and no one notices 

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, SRVT said:

If only the victim would have apprehended all 3 of them. 

 

Anyways, saves the taxpayers money not having to try and jail these 3 pieces of . Had they been tried in court they would have been tried as an adult anyways, rather than innocent little teenagers.

They were "teenagers" or "young adults" making a very very stupid decision to commit a crime. They also brought weapons, which was a very stupid decision. However neither one of us know what the outcome would be if they were caught, went to prison and served time. They would not have served life. Neither one of us knows what would have happened and I'm just admitting that there is a possibility that they would have recognized how stupid of a decision it was, and lead productive lives in the future.

 

Teenagers/young adults do stupid things. Some don't learn from that, but some do. We don't know that they were ever going to follow through with actual violence. The weapons may have been for intimidation. Even if they did commit a violent crime even then they should have been given the opportunity (if our justice system thought it was reasonable) to rehabilitate. 

 

There are those here who are trying to treat this situation as very black and white. That is overly simplistic in my opinion. I'm sorry you can't see the complexities. 

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

Oh my aching butt Really ?

 

Shot but miss, Shoot to wound. Sneak in and no one notices 

You asked for alternative outcomes. Those are all possibilties.

 

There are many cases of people "defending" their homes without the invaders ending up dead. I would have prefered that. I of course prefer the outcome that we have to an outcome with their victims were killed.

 

Invaders get caught and go to jail > Invaders get shot and killed > Invaders kill Homeowners

 

Seems fairly simple to me. Once again, very "middle of the road".

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

They were "teenagers" or "young adults" making a very very stupid decision to commit a crime. They also brought weapons, which was a very stupid decision. However neither one of us know what the outcome would be if they were caught, went to prison and served time. They would not have served life. Neither one of us knows what would have happened and I'm just admitting that there is a possibility that they would have recognized how stupid of a decision it was, and lead productive lives in the future.

 

Teenagers/young adults do stupid things. Some don't learn from that, but some do. We don't know that they were ever going to follow through with actual violence. The weapons may have been for intimidation. Even if they did commit a violent crime even then they should have been given the opportunity (if our justice system thought it was reasonable) to rehabilitate. 

 

There are those here who are trying to treat this situation as very black and white. That is overly simplistic in my opinion. I'm sorry you can't see the complexities. 

i think you're missing the point. the bad guys lost, the good guys won. there are bountiful reasons to celebrate the dead kids dying!

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

They were "teenagers" or "young adults" making a very very stupid decision to commit a crime. They also brought weapons, which was a very stupid decision. However neither one of us know what the outcome would be if they were caught, went to prison and served time. They would not have served life. Neither one of us knows what would have happened and I'm just admitting that there is a possibility that they would have recognized how stupid of a decision it was, and lead productive lives in the future.

 

Teenagers/young adults do stupid things. Some don't learn from that, but some do. We don't know that they were ever going to follow through with actual violence. The weapons may have been for intimidation. Even if they did commit a violent crime even then they should have been given the opportunity (if our justice system thought it was reasonable) to rehabilitate. 

 

There are those here who are trying to treat this situation as very black and white. That is overly simplistic in my opinion. I'm sorry you can't see the complexities. 

It's not much a complexity. Any complexity conjured up here is from liberals and their proverbial Stockholm syndrome that derives from having sympathy for the worst of people.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, SRVT said:

It's not much a complexity. Any complexity conjured up here is from liberals and their proverbial Stockholm syndrome that derives from having sympathy for the worst of people.

that's funny. from the beginning i've mostly been thinking of the parents of the dead kids. and also the kid who killed the three. i know comprehending his struggle in this is way outside of your grasp but you're right, empathy and basic respect for human life is in fact a 'liberal' thing.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, SRVT said:

It's not much a complexity. Any complexity conjured up here is from liberals and their proverbial Stockholm syndrome that derives from having sympathy for the worst of people.

Just because you can't grasp the complexity doesn't mean it isn't there. We have reached a clear impasse based on the limits of our ability to converse on the topic. Any more discussion would be circular. 

[IAMX 3,055]

Just now, bcking said:

Just because you can't grasp the complexity doesn't mean it isn't there. We have reached a clear impasse based on the limits of our ability to converse on the topic. Any more discussion would be circular. 

When it comes to life and death people don't have the time to ponder complexities. You'll have to forgive me for being realistic. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

5 minutes ago, SRVT said:

It's not much a complexity. Any complexity conjured up here is from liberals and their proverbial Stockholm syndrome that derives from having sympathy for the worst of people.

Only someone with poor decision making skills could possibly think, that shooting to miss, when confronted with deadly attack is a brilliant idea 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

22 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

 

oh boy. so glad you're back. tbone has been running quite a tight ship round these parts, i hope you've got your member card at the ready.

well it is nice to have another middle of the road person here 

[smilesammich 10,727]

3 minutes ago, SRVT said:

When it comes to life and death people don't have the time to ponder complexities. You'll have to forgive me for being realistic. 

 

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Only someone with poor decision making skills could possibly think, that shooting to miss, when confronted with deadly attack is a brilliant idea 

maybe nows the time for you two to look up why teenage brains lack foresight..

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

well it is nice to have another middle of the road person here 

Just wait for another white cop situation to watch where that middle of the road scenario goes.

[IAMX 3,055]

2 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

 

maybe nows the time for you two to look up why teenage brains lack foresight..

Like Dionne Warwick foresight? Teach me, senpai. It must be science.

Edited March 28, 2017 by SRVT