- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 29,957
- Reaction score
- 14,683
- Location
- Netherlands
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
It would be difficult to find a message on the forum this week I more disagree with.
An 14 year old rapist is a teaching moment for the parents? What the hell does that mean?
Interesting, I didn't know you could load bean bags into shotguns or rubber bullets into firearms as a first round. That sounds like a good idea, joko. I haven't read the criticisms...but...a firearm loaded with rubber bullets and "if left out, not correctly put away, or somehow got into the hands of younger kids" ...can still be lethal. I've seen the welts those rubber bullets produce and they ain't pretty and if one hit a child in the head it could easily kill them and if that didn't, the second more lethal round surely would. There really is no excuse for a leaving a loaded weapon easily accessible in a house with children present, whether it has rubber bullets in it or not.
Totally agree...except for the reason I mentioned above. If you're worried about not shooting a young kid trying to steal (which is not that uncommon) then why don't you get a security camera instead? That way you have the evidence and the kid isn't physically hurt or worse.
Even the castle doctrine mentions 'reasonable' and 'reasonable force' doesn't it?
I noticed that some of the Treyvon Martin supporters keep bringing up the fact he was a kid and I know some people think it does matter that an assailant was a minor.So I thought I would ask the following question- Is the age of a dead burglar,assailant,bank robber, attempted rapist/murder relevant? For example if a burglar is killed inside someone's home should the homeowner be in legal trouble if that burglar is a minor? If a bank robber is killed while trying to rob a bank and that bank robber is a minor should that concerned citizen or security guard be in legal trouble?
It depends I thnk. If the assailant is unarmed and has the physical stature of a child and appears obvious that there would be no way a physically fit adult coud be overpowered by the child, then I think excessive force would be suspected. However I don't see how that applies to Trayvon Martin.
A teens body grows a lot faster than their brain. So I'm inclined to agree.
Of course theres always the exceptions who grow up taking care of their parents and siblings and are more mature than most adults.
Yes.. Of course it does. If its like a kid, hell of course its relevant.
I disagree. The mental capabilities of a child are not equal to that of an adult.
But the result of the crime is the same.
I agree. He was the size of an adult and obviously in much better shape than George. George is kind of chunky.
Try telling yourself that when its YOUR house being robbed. The naivety of some people.....
That was a good post, joko and well said. It looks like you've given it a lot more thought than most and it does sound like a reasonable compromise. I like that you considered who a potential burgler or intruder might be in your home and depending on the area or neighborhood a lot of times it is just neighborhood kids growing up and testing their boundries. Anyway, the rubber bullet/bean bag really is a good idea, all else considered.A rubber bullet can be lethal, but rarely is. Bean bags are not.
A serious camera offers no physical safety protection. We have many security cameras and 3 independent systems for them. But that a different matter.
As much as firearms are secured, if there are accessible to be used in any quick way, there is a higher risk of a child or kids getting into it. There also is that inadvertent mental glitch where it is just set down and then there is some distraction etc.
But the other reason is that why the slogan is "don't point a gun at anything you don't intend to kill," I don't agree with that slogan. There is a huge middle ground of hesitation, of the mind trying to instantly figure out a situation - possibly still half asleep or totally startled. Do you shoot or not? If you don't and you are wrong, you may then be assaulted or killed. If you do and you are wrong, you have killed someone for which it was unnecessary.
There also is a curious psychology of the "criminal." Unlike Hollywood, most criminals won't stop, put their hands in the air or get down on the floor as commanded. 90+% of the time the person will FLEE or ATTACK. There are very REAL delay times between when a person sees something until the person can literally physically react to it.
In that context, my wife (who is extremely trained in firearms and even in situational live-fire training - plus already extreme in developed motor, speed and coordination skills). But she is small, petite, and female (higher assault attempt likelihood.) I'm average at best with a firearm, but (not to try to be macho) I'm quite tough and very experienced in that regards. Her and I both have exact opposite rules concerning shooting "when in doubt." When in doubt, she is to shoot - because she is highly dependent on her firearm for her defense of herself and our family. When in doubt, I wouldn't shoot because I am not dependent on a firearm generally for defense.
The rubber bullet/beanbag allows less risk in those grey areas. And dramatically reduces accidental gun deaths or shooting someone for which it truly wasn't necessary.
Finally, a rubber bullet as the first round can tell you if it really is necessary. The person, of course, would not know it is a rubber bullet. Someone shot with a rubber bullet knows they've been shot, nothing else, in that first Instant. If you shot someone with a rubber bullet - and that person comes at you, then you know it is kill or be killed. How long does it take to just keep pulling the trigger? Plus it would demonstrate to the police/judge/jury/court you had not choice with the 2nd then lethal round.
If GZ's first round had been a rubber bullet? At that range TM would have been repelled, certain he had been hit, the pain fantastic and TM likely then would have fled. It certainly would have startled TM for a second - enough for GZ to gather his wits too. GZ still would have had the remaining deadly rounds (actually, rubber bullets with then lethal rounds is only reliable in revolvers that do not rely on recoil for auto-loading).
The reason for rubber bullets/bean bags is because in every way possible we want to avoid anyone accidently or wrongly killed by one of our firearms, but we also absolutely want them for self defense. So that is how WE balance the dilemma and diametric opposite considerations.
Most guys on this forum tend to respond with a view that shooting someone with a rubber bullet is like shooting them with a plastic airsoft pellet. Actually, if close, it is like getting hit by someone hitting you as hard as they can with a hard rubber rounded end of a ballpeen hammer. But it 99% certain the person will live and fully recovery quickly.
I have always been in confusion on this topic..i mean i accept that the convict is minor but he/she can't get away with that..i would have been a law officer i would have never able to decide whether to punish that person or not.
A rubber bullet can be lethal, but rarely is. Bean bags are not.
A serious camera offers no physical safety protection. We have many security cameras and 3 independent systems for them. But that a different matter.
As much as firearms are secured, if there are accessible to be used in any quick way, there is a higher risk of a child or kids getting into it. There also is that inadvertent mental glitch where it is just set down and then there is some distraction etc.
But the other reason is that why the slogan is "don't point a gun at anything you don't intend to kill," I don't agree with that slogan. There is a huge middle ground of hesitation, of the mind trying to instantly figure out a situation - possibly still half asleep or totally startled. Do you shoot or not? If you don't and you are wrong, you may then be assaulted or killed. If you do and you are wrong, you have killed someone for which it was unnecessary.
There also is a curious psychology of the "criminal." Unlike Hollywood, most criminals won't stop, put their hands in the air or get down on the floor as commanded. 90+% of the time the person will FLEE or ATTACK. There are very REAL delay times between when a person sees something until the person can literally physically react to it.
In that context, my wife (who is extremely trained in firearms and even in situational live-fire training - plus already extreme in developed motor, speed and coordination skills). But she is small, petite, and female (higher assault attempt likelihood.) I'm average at best with a firearm, but (not to try to be macho) I'm quite tough and very experienced in that regards. Her and I both have exact opposite rules concerning shooting "when in doubt." When in doubt, she is to shoot - because she is highly dependent on her firearm for her defense of herself and our family. When in doubt, I wouldn't shoot because I am not dependent on a firearm generally for defense.
The rubber bullet/beanbag allows less risk in those grey areas. And dramatically reduces accidental gun deaths or shooting someone for which it truly wasn't necessary.
Finally, a rubber bullet as the first round can tell you if it really is necessary. The person, of course, would not know it is a rubber bullet. Someone shot with a rubber bullet knows they've been shot, nothing else, in that first Instant. If you shot someone with a rubber bullet - and that person comes at you, then you know it is kill or be killed. How long does it take to just keep pulling the trigger? Plus it would demonstrate to the police/judge/jury/court you had not choice with the 2nd then lethal round.
If GZ's first round had been a rubber bullet? At that range TM would have been repelled, certain he had been hit, the pain fantastic and TM likely then would have fled. It certainly would have startled TM for a second - enough for GZ to gather his wits too. GZ still would have had the remaining deadly rounds (actually, rubber bullets with then lethal rounds is only reliable in revolvers that do not rely on recoil for auto-loading).
The reason for rubber bullets/bean bags is because in every way possible we want to avoid anyone accidently or wrongly killed by one of our firearms, but we also absolutely want them for self defense. So that is how WE balance the dilemma and diametric opposite considerations.
Most guys on this forum tend to respond with a view that shooting someone with a rubber bullet is like shooting them with a plastic airsoft pellet. Actually, if close, it is like getting hit by someone hitting you as hard as they can with a hard rubber rounded end of a ballpeen hammer. But it 99% certain the person will live and fully recovery quickly.
Zimmerman BECAME kind of chunky for the trial. And he ditched the skinhead look.
I wouldn't personally characterize Martin as a burglar, assailant, murderer/rapist.
The guy that robbed our house was a kid who had run away from home and was living in his VW bus. His mother made a plea on TV for him to give himself up. I don't think he deserved to get shot or die for his crime, but I do think he needed a penalty that was equal to his crime along with some kind of counseling.
We didn't hear or see the kid breaking into our house because we were sound asleep. I only started asking questions when I couldn't find my purse.I'm sorry, but if someone is breaking and entering my house in the middle of the night, I'm shooting first and asking questions later.
Try telling yourself that when its YOUR house being robbed. The naivety of some people.....
Regardless, Martin was in better shape than Zimmerman, younger, probably more physically active and stronger. A 17 or 18 year old is going to have some physical advantages in a lot of instances over a 29 or 30 year old.
I'm not sure if I agree with that. In fact, I don't, unless the 29 year old is very out of shape. I was a 98 lb weakling at 17. I was very fit at 29.
As for the boys he recommends to stay away from weightlifting till the age of 18 and up to 5 kg weights till the age of 21. "It affects their posture, flexibility and growth," said Dr Fauzdar.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-23/gurgaon/32381572_1_gyms-weightlifting-age
WARNING
TeensHealth.org notes that bodybuilding, lifting heavy weights and powerlifting are not appropriate for teens and young boys because they put too much strain on developing muscles, joints and bones and carry a high risk of injury. According to MayoClinic.com, boys shouldn't do more than single sets of 12 to 15 repetitions of any weightlifting exercise, even with light weights.
What Age Can Boys Start Lifting Weights? | LIVESTRONG.COM
If its a 12 year old kid of course im gonna be pissed but i however believe that the sentence should be a hell of a lot lesser.
I'm not sure if I agree with that. In fact, I don't, unless the 29 year old is very out of shape. I was a 98 lb weakling at 17. I was very fit at 29.
As for the boys he recommends to stay away from weightlifting till the age of 18 and up to 5 kg weights till the age of 21. "It affects their posture, flexibility and growth," said Dr Fauzdar.
Doctors caution teens from taking to weightlifting - Times Of India
WARNING
TeensHealth.org notes that bodybuilding, lifting heavy weights and powerlifting are not appropriate for teens and young boys because they put too much strain on developing muscles, joints and bones and carry a high risk of injury. According to MayoClinic.com, boys shouldn't do more than single sets of 12 to 15 repetitions of any weightlifting exercise, even with light weights.
What Age Can Boys Start Lifting Weights? | LIVESTRONG.COM
We didn't hear or see the kid breaking into our house because we were sound asleep. I only started asking questions when I couldn't find my purse.
We didn't hear or see the kid breaking into our house because we were sound asleep. I only started asking questions when I couldn't find my purse.
That sounds like a reasonable plan to me. Good.I think I gave a bit of the wrong impression by saying shoot first and asking questions later. That's a bit extreme, and I suppose it depends, but I would definitely have a gun out and would attempt to either scare him off if he was trying to get in, or hold him there until the cops arrived if he has already broken in and entered.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?