Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Old Guard, your interpretation of AlaskaErik is a misrepresentation of what this person wrote.
*He was in a motel room. It was 4:30AM. He was in bed.
*Two “thugs” (miscreants, brigands, criminals, lawbreakers, felons, bandits, your pick.) were attempting to gain unlawful entry to an occupied dwelling. That is a serious felony in any jurisdiction.
*AlaskaErik had a pistol next to him. He confronted the two bad people, who fled upon seeing an armed victim and not a defenseless person.
“How do you know they were criminals? Please be specific.”
Ans. Burglarizing an occupied dwelling at night is a felony.
“YES! That is what they are there for. I am not sure why you would show them you had a gun? So they can come back later and take it? That seems pretty ignorant to me.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was a transient in that motel. There was no coming back risk involved.
“So call the police and leave through another door. Take the firearm with you and if they pursued then you could have defended yourself.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was in bed. If he wished he can clarify his attire at the moment. I suspect it would have been skimpy.
“After you brandished your firearm at them what were you going to do if they kept coming in? Shoot them?”
Ans. Yes.
“Even if you were acquitted you exposed yourself to a lot of liability by not trying to escape in the way of non-criminal lawsuits. This could have cost you much more than anything they could have taken in 5 minutes before the police got there.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was not the initial aggressor, he was the victim. Avoiding the use of deadly physical force is always a good idea, if it can be done without jeopardizing one’s own safety, as was done by AlaskaErik in this situation.
“And let me understand the logistics of this. Two "thugs" were "about" to "breach" your slider and you just happened to be there with your gun? You just carry your gun around inside your house? Is this because you are scared of this thing happening or of your wife? This is FEAR.”
Ans. That is what AlaskaErik wrote, that two men were attempting to gain entry into his occupied room and he, fortunately for AlaskaErik, had his firearm available. He was not “carrying” a firearm, it was lying nearby. It turned out to be a prudent precaution to take.
“Talk about ignorance. Most people do not die from violent crimes. This is your FEAR speaking. I actually think you endangered yourself more by letting them know you were a good place to pick up a gun.”
Ans. Again, this was inside a motel room. It was a transient location.
“I am not sure I understand this. They saw the gun through the locked door. Interesting.“
Ans. Sliders are made of glass, a material through which a person can see.
“You sound very ignorant. There you use a .22 with a silencer to take out the dog and then take out the people.”
Ans. I don’t understand this comment.
Old Guard, your interpretation of AlaskaErik is a misrepresentation of what this person wrote.
*He was in a motel room. It was 4:30AM. He was in bed.
*Two “thugs” (miscreants, brigands, criminals, lawbreakers, felons, bandits, your pick.) were attempting to gain unlawful entry to an occupied dwelling. That is a serious felony in any jurisdiction.
Attempting to gain entry is a a felony?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
*AlaskaErik had a pistol next to him. He confronted the two bad people, who fled upon seeing an armed victim and not a defenseless person.
How did they see him through the door? I am not sure I have ever seen a motel room with a window?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“How do you know they were criminals? Please be specific.”
Ans. Burglarizing an occupied dwelling at night is a felony.
Did they burglarize an occupied dwelling? I wonder if they were just drunks who mistook it for their room and did what drunks do?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“YES! That is what they are there for. I am not sure why you would show them you had a gun? So they can come back later and take it? That seems pretty ignorant to me.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was a transient in that motel. There was no coming back risk involved.
This may be true. But only if he were staying one night and only if they did not follow him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“So call the police and leave through another door. Take the firearm with you and if they pursued then you could have defended yourself.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was in bed. If he wished he can clarify his attire at the moment. I suspect it would have been skimpy.
He could have gone into the bathroom and locked the door and still had the gun to protect himself. He seemed to take a lot of liability for very little gain. If someone dies there will be an investigation and the family or families may also launch a wrongful death suit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“After you brandished your firearm at them what were you going to do if they kept coming in? Shoot them?”
Ans. Yes.
We can all say that but you never know until you are in the situation. And if he would have shot him without making a reasonable attempt to evade he could have lost more than what was in the room.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“Even if you were acquitted you exposed yourself to a lot of liability by not trying to escape in the way of non-criminal lawsuits. This could have cost you much more than anything they could have taken in 5 minutes before the police got there.”
Ans. AlaskaErik was not the initial aggressor, he was the victim. Avoiding the use of deadly physical force is always a good idea, if it can be done without jeopardizing one’s own safety, as was done by AlaskaErik in this situation.
I do not think so. He and his wife could have locked themselves in the bathroom. In that case if he had to shoot the attackers would have had to go through two locked doors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“And let me understand the logistics of this. Two "thugs" were "about" to "breach" your slider and you just happened to be there with your gun? You just carry your gun around inside your house? Is this because you are scared of this thing happening or of your wife? This is FEAR.”
Ans. That is what AlaskaErik wrote, that two men were attempting to gain entry into his occupied room and he, fortunately for AlaskaErik, had his firearm available. He was not “carrying” a firearm, it was lying nearby. It turned out to be a prudent precaution to take.
“Talk about ignorance. Most people do not die from violent crimes. This is your FEAR speaking. I actually think you endangered yourself more by letting them know you were a good place to pick up a gun.”
Ans. Again, this was inside a motel room. It was a transient location.
I am not sure this makes it better. This actually sounds worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“I am not sure I understand this. They saw the gun through the locked door. Interesting.“
Ans. Sliders are made of glass, a material through which a person can see.
Thank you. I had no idea what he was talking about. If this is the case I wonder if the door was on the other side and they could have safely left?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCapeCod
“You sound very ignorant. There you use a .22 with a silencer to take out the dog and then take out the people.”
Ans. I don’t understand this comment.
Some military use silenced .22's to kill guard dogs.
so you would rather rely on calling 911, when the police do not even have to show up for your call.
now that is asinine.
better to be armed and rely on yourself, then to be unarmed and have to rely on someone else.
I prefer having the option of doing both.
I have personally been in the "please don't kill me" position, and the mugger pulled the trigger...but his gun jammed. I don't intend to be so optionless again.
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,953,657 times
Reputation: 16466
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein
Just fyi... when you buy a gun, you become far, far, far more likely to die from a gun than if you never owned one.
So if you want to buy one for protection, then so be it. But just let it be known that is a pretty asinine reason to do so.
What a downright uninformed (aka ignorant) statement. If you are where a gun is needed and don't have one you are far more likely to die.
I would hazzard a guess that I have been shot at and returned fire more than most here. I can absolutely guaranty that I would not be here without guns.
Ask the folks who got herded into the cooler at the restaurant and killed. Ask the Rawandans. Ask the jews.
Location: When you take flak it means you are on target
7,646 posts, read 9,953,657 times
Reputation: 16466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Guard
Firearm access is a consideration in risk of suicide.
Of course. That is one purpose of a gun. A way out when the time has come. You want to die a slow, miserable death, go right ahead. Someone else may not, and since our keepers have decided we as free people are not adult enough to have drugs a gun is the only answer for many people. Who are you to stop them?
Wow, this turned into a full scale riot. It wasn't mean to be yet it did. Well, hope this argument doesn't close this thread. But alot of v good info & advice here, thanks to everyone thus far. I've sat back & listened learning alot.
Just a quick comment tonight re guns & suicide. Yes, they make it "easier" access in some regards to take one's own life however, so do meds, pills, knives, razors, cars, etc. If one is hell-bent on hurting oneself -- NO ONE nor ANYTHING will succeed to stop them -- if the will is there. I've had friends take their own lives & it often had zero to do w/ legality or not of a weapon. Sure, it can raise the odds but this is NOT sage reasons to give up your rights to defend yourself.
Anything can happen in a car too, but how many here that argue vs gun ownership, have no issue w/ driving in a car daily? It too can fail or fall apart etc., thus as huge safety risk traveling at high rates of speed. Also, deaths by medication (legal or not) constitute alot more too. Should we again, here comes ridiculous argument folks use, also ban knives, forks, baseball bats, cars, owning dogs, shaving razors, scissors, (heck even a pen or a person's fist, foot, headbutts), etc.
Ok sorry to sound flippant but let's try to keep on topic not evolve into should or should you not own a gun. That decision is yours, & it is still a RIGHT granted by the Constitution -- & not really subject to debate -- unless we're still ruled by Britain?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
