Support NeoGAF

[manfestival]

Maybe watching brazil clips on liveleak has screwed me up but the thought of letting a criminal do whatever while holding a gun makes me go crazy. I know I live in the US but now the thought of them killing me after they are doing whatever they need to will always remain in my mind. I think the latest clip was of two guys robbing some janitor and they shoot him in the head after he gives his wallet.

 

[zeemumu]

 

[harriet the spy]

i edited since i figured you would be offended...you just need to look up the laws

I am not offended, I just think your reply (the others below it are even worse) was dumb.
I don't care much about the law - in these debates (guns, abortion), the question is never about what the law is, but what you believe the law should be (I am not sure why you even thought I was interested in debating the minutia of the law in that matter)
I am not even against gun ownership. I do happen to think that if the law really did assign the blame on the home invaders, it's incredibly idiotic. At what point do you decide that the defenders were not careful enough and put the lives of third parties in danger? Or do you think that *any* defense (say, spray and pray from an automatic rifle) is appropriate in any situation? Should cops always be authorized to randomly shoot at criminals in busy areas?

The situation here is not a cop shooting randomly at criminals in a busy mall, but assuming you have a threshold for this, mine just happens to be lower.
I don't mind if my neighbor has a gun, but I don't want him to get a free pass to shoot at my house without any repercussion, no matter what the intent and situation was. And of course, the fact the neighbor got lucky doesn't change a thing.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Jesus H Christ. You let them into your house and take whatever they want then let the police deal with it, what in the heck must be wrong with you to start a gunfight with your children in the middle over some material possessions? This wasn't a life or death situation until they made it one.

#1 priority is ensuring the safety of your children, grabbing a loaded gun is anything but that. :/

The police haven't said this was random or not, but it does sound like the family was targeted if they wanted to get into the house.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Maybe watching brazil clips on liveleak has screwed me up but the thought of letting a criminal do whatever while holding a gun makes me go crazy. I know I live in the US but now the thought of them killing me after they are doing whatever they need to will always remain in my mind. I think the latest clip was of two guys robbing some janitor and they shoot him in the head after he gives his wallet.

The cab driver video got me. Dude just driving a normal fare on a normal day and gets popped for nothing. Dude just robs his corpse after.

There are evil people in this world and I'm not going to debate the moral ramifications of self defense when me and my family is in danger. A gun, a bat, rope, fists..etc all are fare game when your life is on the line. Being a good little victim puts all the choices in the criminals hands.

 

[CrankyJay]

I am not offended, I just think your reply (the others below it are even worse) was dumb.
I don't care much about the law - in these debates (guns, abortion), the question is never about what the law is, but what you believe the law should be (I am not sure why you even thought I was interested in debating the minutia of the law in that matter)
I am not even against gun ownership. I do happen to think that if the law really did assign the blame on the home invaders, it's incredibly idiotic. At what point do you decide that the defenders were not careful enough and put the lives of third parties in danger? Or do you think that *any* defense (say, spray and pray from an automatic rifle) is appropriate in any situation? Should cops always be authorized to randomly shoot at criminals in busy areas?

The situation here is not a cop shooting randomly at criminals in a busy mall, but assuming you have a threshold for this, mine just happens to be lower.
I don't mind if my neighbor has a gun, but I don't want him to get a free pass to shoot at my house without any repercussion, no matter what the intent and situation was. And of course, the fact the neighbor got lucky doesn't change a thing.

This is precisely why the robbers would get charged with the fallout.

 

[harriet the spy]

You suggestion that they be held liable for anything other than breaking the window was laughable, so he laughed out loud. Would you mind clarifying you position on what is a slap on the wrist?

It's most certainly not. You should stop acting like any dissenting opinion is laughable. You're free to have your opinion, but don't pretend the position is outlandish when there are millions of people with a stronger opinion (=guns should be illegal).

Sec guys I'm just going to call the OP fucking stupid and see how that goes

CrankyJay, I'm also wondering why you hate apple pie and MATH

I am sorry, but "lol" as an answer is genuinely fucking stupid. It contributes nothing.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

The situation here is not a cop shooting randomly at criminals in a busy mall, but assuming you have a threshold for this, mine just happens to be lower.
I don't mind if my neighbor has a gun, but I don't want him to get a free pass to shoot at my house without any repercussion, no matter what the intent and situation was. And of course, the fact the neighbor got lucky doesn't change a thing.

Absolutes are dumb.

It's most certainly not. You should stop acting like any dissenting opinion is laughable. You're free to have your opinion, but don't pretend the position is outlandish when there are millions of people with a stronger opinion (=guns should be illegal).



I am sorry, but "lol" as an answer is genuinely fucking stupid. It contributes nothing.

If only you were as outraged at people who would violently attack a family and attempt to hold someone's daughter hostage as you are at a broken window pane.....

Then perhaps you'd understand that the criminals would be liable for ANY shots fired from either party in that situation.

 

[TheRagnCajun]

That's exactly what it does...

I don't see the pros outweighing the cons here. We had a school shooting in Oregon just this week, but good thing this man was able to defend his family? It seems like what he did was risky, compared to how police would have likely handled the situation...firing on two armed men holding a hostage as a shield, like something out of an action movie by your own admission.

 

[harriet the spy]

This is precisely why the robbers would get charged with the fallout.

The logic behind me fails me.
Let me put a more extreme, imaginary situation:
robber steals item from shop, runs in mall. Cop pulls gun, shoots dozens of rounds aiming at robber, kills five. All blame is on the robber?
If not, at what point exactly does portion of the blame shifted to the cop/home defender? When does the response become reckless exactly?

 

[Mammoth Jones]

The logic behind me fails me.
Let me put a more extreme, imaginary situation:
robber steals item from shop, runs in mall. Cop pulls gun, shoots dozens of rounds aiming at robber, kills five. All blame is on the robber?
If not, at what point exactly does portion of the blame shifted to the cop/home defender? When does the response become reckless exactly?

Who created the situation where the cop ended up missing the shots? Who was breaking the law and sparks that entire chain of events?

This is why even when a robber gets killed by a storeclerk the OTHER robber get charged with his death. Not the clerk.

 

[Htown]

Jesus H Christ. You let them into your house and take whatever they want then let the police deal with it, what in the heck must be wrong with you to start a gunfight with your children in the middle over some material possessions? This wasn't a life or death situation until they made it one.

#1 priority is ensuring the safety of your children, grabbing a loaded gun is anything but that. :/

They already had a gun to their child's head, what are you talking about?

And plenty of home invasions end with rapes and/or murders; I don't know how you're going to assume that a person who is already pointing a gun at a 17 year old girl and has already forced their way into your home is magically otherwise nonviolent.

 

[jackie jormp-jomp]

The logic behind me fails me.
Let me put a more extreme, imaginary situation:
robber steals item from shop, runs in mall. Cop pulls gun, shoots dozens of rounds aiming at robber, kills five. All blame is on the robber?
If not, at what point exactly does portion of the blame shifted to the cop/home defender? When does the response become reckless exactly?

If you're running from the police in a High speed chase and the officer pursuing you dies you are charged with that, not the officer or the department. It's not an unheard of thing to be liable, he's already liable for his partner's death (which he did not directly cause)

 

[BronsonLee]

I am sorry, but "lol" as an answer is genuinely fucking stupid. It contributes nothing.

Yup, you're clearly sorry. I totally believe you.
There was nothing to contribute because what you posted was goddamn silly.

Double points for bitching at the OP for not contributing on his own thread, and insulting him for it. I wouldn't engage you on any conversational level if that's how you're gonna act. Pack it in.

 

[God Dayumm]

The logic behind me fails me.
Let me put a more extreme, imaginary situation:
robber steals item from shop, runs in mall. Cop pulls gun, shoots dozens of rounds aiming at robber, kills five. All blame is on the robber?
If not, at what point exactly does portion of the blame shifted to the cop/home defender? When does the response become reckless exactly?

Cops should not be firing someone for a petty theft. The point at which the blame is shifted to the criminal is when he puts the life of everyone around in danger.

 

[Kinyou]

Wow that family is lucky. Would a police officer have taken that risk?

I remember a case where the police man gunned down the criminal along with the hostage. :/
I guess some choices have to be made when you're life is in danger but that story really left a sour taste.

 

[TheOMan]

First thing that sprugn to mind.

Your move, creep.

On the one hand I thought the dad is a badass.

And on the other???

 

[CrankyJay]

I don't see the pros outweighing the cons here. We had a school shooting in Oregon just this week, but good thing this man was able to defend his family? It seems like what he did was risky, compared to how police would have likely handled the situation...firing on two armed men holding a hostage as a shield, like something out of an action movie by your own admission.

And then I made a subsequent post later in this thread thinking maybe he got the jump on them from a flanking position, instead of capping them in the head as we are imagining.

The article doesn't specify.

 

[harriet the spy]

Absolutes are dumb.



If only you were as outraged at people who would violently attack a family and attempt to hold someone's daughter hostage as you are at a broken window pane.....

Then perhaps you'd understand that the criminals would be liable for ANY shots fired from either party in that situation.

a) (Is this an absolute statement?). I think there are plenty of 'absolute' laws which people are perfectly happy with. Either way - in this particular context, I probably agree. My threshold is just lower. You believe in careful gun control, but oopsie. Shot through your house. And if your kids gets shot, well - I feel bad, but it was the fault of the robber, so no legal action for me.

And as for your straw man, yes, I am very 'outraged' as you say at the home invaders, but the outrage won't have much impact, given one of them is dead, and the second one, presumably under bars.

 

[Ikael]

Good news that everyone ended up safe, dad was a total baddass. I still think that the bad outweights the good when it comes to gun ownership, but like everything else in this world, it is not 100% downsides for what I see.

 

[Eighty Deuce]

Man I'm surprized nobody has posted any collateral gifs

 

[Hypemaster]

Don't ever let the mother shoot a gun again.

 

[harriet the spy]

Yup, you're clearly sorry. I totally believe you.
There was nothing to contribute because what you posted was goddamn silly.

Double points for bitching at the OP for not contributing on his own thread, and insulting him for it. I wouldn't engage you on any conversational level if that's how you're gonna act. Pack it in.

It was a figure of speech, I wasn't really sorry. "Lol" is a stupid contribution. I didn't bitch at the OP for not contributing in its own thread- I bitched at the OP for not mustering anything resembling a response. This being said, I am not particularly interested in engaging with you either, so I guess we are cool.

 

[twobear]

Crazy. I gotta say it's refreshing to see some humanity on behalf of the shooter. It must be a very difficult situation.

 

[lednerg]

So you think that... they aren't? I'm confused about what part of it you're contesting.

There are ways you're supposed to write news articles... and that's not one of them.

 

[BronsonLee]

It was a figure of speech, I wasn't really sorry. "Lol" is a stupid contribution. I didn't bitch at the OP for not contributing in its own thread- I bitched at the OP for not mustering anything resembling a response. This being said, I am not particularly interested in engaging with you either, so I guess we are cool.

You don't get to whine about someone's contributions when all you provided was a completely absurd tangent about how the family needs to get arrested for shooting the window, pretty much solidifying the fact that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about

You're clearly looking for a fight moreso than an actual discussion here.

 

[CrankyJay]

It was a figure of speech, I wasn't really sorry. "Lol" is a stupid contribution. I didn't bitch at the OP for not contributing in its own thread- I bitched at the OP for not mustering anything resembling a response. This being said, I am not particularly interested in engaging with you either, so I guess we are cool.

I edited my post before you even responded...you're just picking a fight.

 

[harriet the spy]

Cops should not be firing someone for a petty theft. The point at which the blame is shifted to the criminal is when he puts the life of everyone around in danger.

Well, I don't disagree with this, but say the robber had shot a clerk, runs away, cops repeatedly shoots at him from a distance, kills 5 (robber might or might not be included in it). Is the cop 100% in the clear? I am not saying he should be hanged, mind you.

Who created the situation where the cop ended up missing the shots? Who was breaking the law and sparks that entire chain of events?

This is why even when a robber gets killed by a storeclerk the OTHER robber get charged with his death. Not the clerk.

So you really think it's a total free pass if you're responding to a crime? I disagree. I have nothing against responsible gun ownership, but I don't think this is an appropriate response.

 

[CrankyJay]

Well, I don't disagree with this, but say the robber had shot a clerk, runs away, cops repeatedly shoots at him from a distance, kills 5 (robber might or might not be included in it). Is the cop 100% in the clear? I am not saying he should be hanged, mind you.

What a ridiculous example...

 

[Earthstrike]

I think when the article uses the term meat shield, people think body contact between victim and assailant movie style. What seems more likely in this case was that she had the gun held behind her and was forced to walk in front of them, thus making the prospect of successfully shooting the enemy more likely.

The guy shows sympathy and understands the graveness of the situation after the fact, and so, is likely a reasonable gun owner..

 

[Mammoth Jones]

a) (Is this an absolute statement?). I think there are plenty of 'absolute' laws which people are perfectly happy with. Either way - in this particular context, I probably agree. My threshold is just lower. You believe in careful gun control, but oopsie. Shot through your house. And if your kids gets shot, well - I feel bad, but it was the fault of the robber, so no legal action for me.

If the law was nothing but absolutes and didn't take extenuating circumstances into account we'd just have a computer program dish out sentences really fast.

Yes I believe in careful gun control but I'm not going to be outraged when a man defending his daughter from mortal danger hits a window. Obviously wasn't intentional or negligent. Obviously an extreme situation. He wasn't some bumpkin cleaning his gun and fucked up. If that were the case I'd agree with you. This is why absolutes are dumb.

Your threshold is so low it'd bar any use of firearms as too dangerous in any situation. By your rationale someone would have to be in the middle of a forrest or desert to use a gun in self defense...

And as for your straw man, yes, I am very 'outraged' as you say at the home invaders, but the outrage won't have much impact, given one of them is dead, and the second one, presumably under bars.

But outrage at the man whose daughter was in mortal danger, that's impactful...over a broken windows.

Other robber behind bars? Good. Now charge him with breaking a window.

Well, I don't disagree with this, but say the robber had shot a clerk, runs away, cops repeatedly shoots at him from a distance, kills 5 (robber might or might not be included in it). Is the cop 100% in the clear? I am not saying he should be hanged, mind you.

If "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas...

So you really think it's a total free pass if you're responding to a crime? I disagree. I have nothing against responsible gun ownership, but I don't think this is an appropriate response.

I think you have to look at each incident and really judge it on a case by case basis. Ideological absolutes are dumb.

 

[harriet the spy]

I edited my post before you even responded...you're just picking a fight.

There was no edit when I replied.. otherwise I would have replied to the edit instead. But there really isn't much you can say to 'lol'.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

You don't get to whine about someone's contributions when all you provided was a completely absurd tangent about how the family needs to get arrested for shooting the window, pretty much solidifying the fact that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about

You're clearly looking for a fight moreso than an actual discussion here.

This.

 

[CrankyJay]

There was no edit when I replied.. otherwise I would have replied to the edit instead. But there really isn't much you can say to 'lol'.

You have the power to edit, too. You could have gone back after I told you in my very next post to you I edited but you decided to ignore that and continue with your feigned rage that I dismissed your post with a single 'lol', multiple times I might add...

 

[Deadbeat]

No, I say that like the author has an obvious agenda with that leading sentence.

You mean how anti gun politicians use the death of children to push their agenda? You cant have it both ways.

 

[harriet the spy]

What a ridiculous example...

Oh, come on. Yes, it's a ridiculous example, it's my point. I am making exagerated (but let's not act like it's impossible for a stray bullet fired by a cop to hit someone) to establish the existence of a threshold at which you think a response was inappropriate. At that point I am only curious at where exactly you threshold lies. I am just saying: mine is lower.

 

[DedValve]

Ctrl+f liam neeson.

Huh, I'm genuinely surprised.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Ctrl+f liam neeson.

Huh, I'm genuinely surprised.

What? You missed my pic?

 

[xbhaskarx]

"What if you missed, dad?"

"We would have turned your old room into a home theater"

"..."

lol

 

[SolidChamp]

He also said he was sorry for what the families of the two suspects are going through, but he says he had no choice.

“My condolences goes out to all the families involved. I don’t know him. I wish it hadn’t happened. So like I said, to the moms, fathers, all the other people involved, I apologize,” he said.

Wow. That is a class act, right there. Not sure I would have been able to bring myself to say the same.

 

[CrankyJay]

Oh, come on. Yes, it's a ridiculous example, it's my point. I am making exagerated (but let's not act like it's impossible for a stray bullet fired by a cop to hit someone) to establish the existence of a threshold at which you think a response was inappropriate. At that point I am only curious at where exactly you threshold lies. I am just saying: mine is lower.

You don't think the police have training to not fire into a crowd of people, let alone a crowd large enough to kill 5 innocent bystanders? Why would you choose this example to make your point?

 

[Stinkles]

"What if you missed, dad?"

"We would have turned your old room into a home theater"

"..."

Whole thing sounds really safe. Like really responsible gun ownership. And I don't for a second suspect they targeted that home because they knew it contained large amounts of cash or contraband. Most home invasions are totally random and have nothing to do with drugs or money.

Ultimately this story contains no troubling details. Everything is fine.

You mean how anti gun politicians use the death of children to push their agenda? You cant have it both ways.

Politicians aren't journalists. And they have stated agendas that are available to the public, and are rarely fact based. You'd literally have been better off comparing journalists to Steven King.

 

[speculawyer]

This is the kind of Hollywood movie thing gun nuts will masturbate over.

But for every incident like this, there are tons more suicides, kids accidentally shooting themselves or friends, people shooting non threatening victims, etc.


Confirmation bias leads to bad decisions.

 

[kamorra]

You don't think the police have training to not fire into a crowd of people, let alone a crowd large enough to kill 5 innocent bystanders? Why would you choose this example to make your point?

I don't know where harriet the spy is from but I would have asked something similar. From my european perspective all these stories are scary as hell. In fact the US sounds like a super dangerous place to live.

 

[harriet the spy]

You have the power to edit, too. You could have gone back after I told you in my very next post to you I edited but you decided to ignore that and continue with your feigned rage that I dismissed your post with a single 'lol', multiple times I might add...

I don't understand why we are even talking about this. This is a derail of (what you probably see as) my derail. I just don't think editing is a very effective way to have a conversation.

a) You post something
b) I start typing a reply while you edit your post.
c) I see the edit.
d) I reply to the edit instead of editing my own replies. Or are we supposed to have a conversation entirely by subsequent edits?

And, sorry, I wasn't raging. I think 'lol' is a dumb, I said as much. No raging on either side. i don't think we need to continue to talk about this, unless you insist on apologies or want me banned for the words (in which case I'd suggest sending my post to a mod instead).

 

[lednerg]

You mean how anti gun politicians use the death of children to push their agenda? You cant have it both ways.

I have no problem with politicians pushing agendas - that's kind of their job.

I was under the (mistaken) impression that this was a legitimate news article. You see, a news article is supposed to be devoid of obvious agendas. But it turns out that the source was The Blaze (which I mentioned in my post).

 

[Mammoth Jones]

I don't know where harriet the spy is from but I would have asked something similar. From my european perspective all these stories are scary as hell. In fact the US sounds like a super dangerous place to live.

Your perception of a place/people should never be formed via Mass Media. Always biased.

 

[Roude Leiw]

the parents of a 17 year old are 33 and 31 years old? :O

 

[robotzombie]

This is the kind of Hollywood movie thing gun nuts will masturbate over.

But for every incident like this, there are tons more suicides, kids accidentally shooting themselves or friends, people shooting non threatening victims, etc.


Confirmation bias leads to bad decisions.

I found this slightly amusing

 

[StayDead]

Your perception of a place/people should never be formed via Mass Media. Always biased.

You can say that, but there's most likely more people in America with guns than those without.

Say what you want about criminals getting guns anyway, but criminals are less likely to be violent with guns and shoot someone if they know there's no risk of them being shot themselves. Most of the time these people who do robberies are desperate for money or heavily addicted to drugs, they've been failed by society and they have no other choice. I think it's a rather sad situation that 2 people dying is seen as the best possible outcome of this situation, I really do.