Taft HS on lock down (Turkey: good schools, living, law)

[TexasRedneck]

Ummmm....someone breaking into your home = Target. Age doesn't matter. As a practical matter, however, you're right - the young punks usually do *just* enough to stay out of REALLY serious trouble until they're older. What's such a crying shame is to see the potential of a productive adult life ruined because the adults that are SUPPOSED to be in their lives, teaching them the *right* way to live, are either absent, don't care, or don't have a clue.

[Merovee]

Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs

shoot 'em in the head when they break in to a home (which I will do if I have to!)

*shakes head* the people who live in most fear of society seem to be the most dangerous.



SICKENING. The devaluing of life. Unfortunately some sickos with this mentality live among us.

The Castle Doctrine is a good law but when using self defense the object is to stop someone, not kill them. It is also best to aim for center mass and not aim for anyone's head.

[sapphire]

Hogwash, Merovee. Your way of thinking is a big part of the problem.

[Mom2Feebs]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

Ummmm....someone breaking into your home = Target. Age doesn't matter. As a practical matter, however, you're right - the young punks usually do *just* enough to stay out of REALLY serious trouble until they're older. What's such a crying shame is to see the potential of a productive adult life ruined because the adults that are SUPPOSED to be in their lives, teaching them the *right* way to live, are either absent, don't care, or don't have a clue.

That's exactly what I meant. I didn't say it as clearly though!

[Merovee]

Originally Posted by sapphire

Hogwash, Merovee. Your way of thinking is a big part of the problem.

When the topic is two kids at school allegedly with a gun and it turns into someone advocating shooting someone in the head, or worse shooting minors over property offenses, legal or not, yes, there is a problem, one that can perhaps be solved with a bit of counseling.

In either case I hope no one is that irresponsible to take the example of head shots, not only might one miss in the heat of the moment, a stray bullet might find someone across the street who was not even involved, center mass folks. Be responsible if you are going to own a firearm and that includes the comments one makes.

Also if an incident ever does occur, god forbid, a lawyer can easily use comments made online to indicate one did not have stopping a threat in mind but murder. That might be a problem too but not a problem for most us.

[TexasRedneck]

Originally Posted by Merovee

When the topic is two kids at school allegedly with a gun and it turns into someone advocating shooting someone in the head, or worse shooting minors over property offenses, legal or not, yes, there is a problem, one that can perhaps be solved with a bit of counseling.

Counseling for the person defending their property? How about jail time for the perp??? Seriously - allow a bit of poetic license here.....MOST gun owners take their responsibilities serious, and when an off-the-cuff comment is made about a "head shot", it's not taken seriously. Training is ALWAYS for center-mass, unless that aim point isn't available.

Originally Posted by Merovee

In either case I hope no one is that irresponsible to take the example of head shots, not only might one miss in the heat of the moment, a stray bullet might find someone across the street who was not even involved, center mass folks. Be responsible if you are going to own a firearm and that includes the comments one makes.

Last time I looked, "freedom of speech" is available for everyone, my friend. I didn't take the "head shot" comment as being intended to be taken literally, but rather as a statement that deadly force would be used if needed.

Originally Posted by Merovee

Also if an incident ever does occur, god forbid, a lawyer can easily use comments made online to indicate one did not have stopping a threat in mind but murder. That might be a problem too but not a problem for most us.

Actually, it would have a hard time being admitted as evidence, since the legal hassles of proving that it was actually written by the person in question could be more trouble that it was worth. And if you are legally justified in the use of deadly force, it's a given that the intent is to kill (not murder). "Shooting to wound" is actually the worst thing you can do, because it proves that you were NOT in fear of the deadly conduct of another, and that therefore such force was a malicious act on your part. Technically speaking, the use of deadly force is actually "force necessary to stop the act of another", without the *intent* to maim. I've carried for many, many years - having had to use deadly force, I can assure you that it's a life-changing event - but I would do it again were the same circumstances to arise.

[Merovee]

Nothing is off-the-cuff when it comes to firearms. That one would defend such irresponsible comments is beyond me. You might know better, some amateur who just has a handgun but no training might actually take such a comment to heart. Not an example one should set or allow to be set without being challenged.

Also as much as I frown on baggy pants that sag, totally unfashionable, it is likely most who do wear such type of pants are from one demographic, the fact a comment was made earlier that one wishes one of these type of people would enter their house illegally, presumably to use lethal force, does not sit well when the person making such a comment is likely from another demographic.

I understand the Culture War is ongoing but last time I checked murder or intent to kill was not on the agenda. Some of these comments are taking things a bit too far. I wonder if some are being provocative on purpose or if this is actually the way some think, to devalue life, especially when not part of your own demographic.

[HillCountryHotRodMan]

Originally Posted by Merovee

it turns into someone advocating shooting someone in the head, or worse shooting minors over property offenses

I can't speak for the other posters, but I personally said nothing about a gun.

[Merovee]

Insinuating a death penalty for 'selling dope' or 'tagging cars' where one acts alone as judge, jury, and executioner is duly noted. Just have to 'wait until they work their way to your street and try to break into your house....."

This is also a general audience! Very public, very much on record. My advice to all is to think before offering or condoning more irresponsible comments especially when it comes to firearms. This is as much for your safety and well-being as much as anyone else's.

/thread abandoned

[HillCountryHotRodMan]

Originally Posted by Merovee

Insinuating a death penalty for 'selling dope' or 'tagging cars' where one acts alone as judge, jury, and executioner is duly noted.

Nor did I say that. But a good beatin' would be in order. Once again, you put words in my mouth.

Tell you what - you come live over here and deal with the BS and see how you feel...