• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The real reason the anti gun crowd has a problem with armed self defense with a gun!

a gang raids a store. I believe the store keeper should be able to shoot the looters. Its not shoplifting-it's looting. You should know that using force to stop looting is not the same as a sentence or a verdict. Assault is not a capital offense nor is rape but in both cases, if someone violently assaults you or tries to rape you you can shoot them and if they die. them's the breaks

A gang robbing a store is not looting

What if the gang numbered just 5, or 3 ?
What if the average age was 15, or 12 ?
What if the "gang" was just "looting" some food because they were hungry

A shopkeeper has the right to shoot them dead ?

Just what is your criteria for allowing lethal force ?
 
Last edited:
Mass shooter Killings. Saw the other day a Teen shot his mom cause she didn't want him doing pot in the house. How did he get the firearm ? Mom ? Duh !!!!! Still more are killed every year by Drivers on Cell phones a Decade.

 
Last edited:
Mass shooter Killings. Saw the other day a Teen shot his mom cause she didn't want him doing pot in the house. How did he get the firearm ? Mom ? Duh !!!!! Still more are killed every year by Drivers on Cell phones a Decade.


Statistically insignificant.
 
Only to you tell the parents of the dead teen drivers that. And read the statistics of each states deaths by driving when on a Cell phone. Think its from 250 a year in the highest state down. 1000's a year and how many are just innocent drivers going about their daily routines till the Gal / or guy on the Cell kills em, and on a really nice day too ! I guess the " it's a good time to die applies ! "
"and you don't live forever so give it up applies also"

Imagine the "Teens or Pre teens" are most dangerous predators out there. Just ask Vietnam Vets about kids. "
 
Last edited:
Driving and Cell phone use is a huge killer on the highways. Their even falling to their death from high places taking selfies. I had an adult step out in front of my vehicle at an intersection while on his, I had attention locked on to him before I got there by his head pointed down walking along before he stepped out. Thankfully I didn't crush him. Kids walking home from school, to school Busses absorbed in games on their cell phones all not with their surrounding at all !
 
Last edited:
Driving and Cell phone use is a huge killer on the highways. Their even falling to their death from high places taking selfies. I had an adult step out in front of my vehicle at an intersection while on his, I had attention locked on to him before I got there by his head pointed down walking along before he stepped out. Thankfully I didn't crush him. Kids walking home from school, to school Busses absorbed in games on their cell phones all not with their surrounding at all !

*They are = "they're"

I agree with you, cell phones should be illegal to use when driving.
 
Saw today a video of an Electronic Pedal Pub Car crash in Atlanta, Ga, most likely all were on there Cell phones at the time.
 
Saw today a video of an Electronic Pedal Pub Car crash in Atlanta, Ga, most likely all were on there Cell phones at the time.

Possessive plural = "their"

And yes, driving while using a cell phone is dangerous. Indeed one study showed it was more dangerous than drunk driving (not that drunk driving is safe by any means).
 
Possessive plural = "their"

And yes, driving while using a cell phone is dangerous. Indeed one study showed it was more dangerous than drunk driving (not that drunk driving is safe by any means).

Some of that could be attributed to what can legally be "drunk driving", can factually be "hardly impaired."

It should just be zero tolerance if they're serious, and **** off with this are you or aren't you nonsense.
 
Cell Phones should automatically shut off whenever they are in motion. There should be an easy update to do that. Their developers do not care how many they kill, maim, fall off buildings, cliffs or Water falls taking Selfies. They are doing what ever they can do to sell more Cells and developers do not care. They are self importance types most likely. Rich wants a job ! (y)There should be a Class action law suit to put a stop to the Mayhem Cell phones create most everywhere they are on the move. Even at 40 mph a car will travel about 100' if the driver looks down to his cell phone or to the screen on the dash to answer a text.
 
Last edited:
Cell Phones should automatically shut off whenever they are in motion. There should be an easy update to do that. Their developers do not care how many they kill, maim, fall off buildings, cliffs or Water falls taking Selfies. They are doing what ever they can do to sell more Cells and developers do not care. They are self importance types most likely. Rich wants a job ! (y)There should be a Class action law suit to put a stop to the Mayhem Cell phones create most everywhere they are on the move. Even at 40 mph a car will travel about 100' if the driver looks down to his cell phone or to the screen on the dash to answer a text.

Yeah but that would mean passengers in motor vehicles (or trains) couldn't make phone calls.
 
Yeah but that would mean passengers in motor vehicles (or trains) couldn't make phone calls.
Or on boats. Or do you think boats are okay to use a cell phone while driving? How about aircraft?
 
A gang robbing a store is not looting

What if the gang numbered just 5, or 3 ?
What if the average age was 15, or 12 ?
What if the "gang" was just "looting" some food because they were hungry

A shopkeeper has the right to shoot them dead ?

Just what is your criteria for allowing lethal force ?
what a stupid comment. a gang robbing a store should justify the store owner wasting all of them Period

a gang doing almost anything illegal is a clear and present danger
 
what a stupid comment. a gang robbing a store should justify the store owner wasting all of them Period

Now that's a stupid comment
A store owner "wasting" a gang of juveniles robbing his store ??

I think he'd have a hard time persuading the jury that his life was in danger.

a gang doing almost anything illegal is a clear and present danger

A gang of half a dozen 10 year olds breaking into your car ?
 
Now that's a stupid comment
A store owner "wasting" a gang of juveniles robbing his store ??

I think he'd have a hard time persuading the jury that his life was in danger.



A gang of half a dozen 10 year olds breaking into your car ?
I am not saying what the law currently is-I support shop keepers shooting a gang of looters.
 
I am not saying what the law currently is-I support shop keepers shooting a gang of looters.

Who mentioned looting ?

If a shopkeeper surprised a gang of say 4-6 ten year olds stealing food from his store, and kills shoots them dead, he can expect to spend a long time in jail.
 
Who mentioned looting ?

If a shopkeeper surprised a gang of say 4-6 ten year olds stealing food from his store, and kills shoots them dead, he can expect to spend a long time in jail.
He could probably beat the living crap out of all of them.

but if 10 or so 17-19 year olds smash into a shop and start stealing stuff, they should be fair game for an armed shopkeeper. P
 
He could probably beat the living crap out of all of them.

A meaningless phrase - does that include inflicting injuries upon them ?
Does it include inflicting injuries from which they can't recover from, like broken teeth ?

but if 10 or so 17-19 year olds smash into a shop and start stealing stuff, they should be fair game for an armed shopkeeper. P

18 and 19 year olds are adults...so yes a gang of adults raiding your store is a different proposition
But I think you're missing the point here
What is the shopkeeper's goal ? To inflict injury ? The goal is to make the gang members leave, not to punish them by inflicting injury or even death.
 
A meaningless phrase - does that include inflicting injuries upon them ?
Does it include inflicting injuries from which they can't recover from, like broken teeth ?



18 and 19 year olds are adults...so yes a gang of adults raiding your store is a different proposition
But I think you're missing the point here
What is the shopkeeper's goal ? To inflict injury ? The goal is to make the gang members leave, not to punish them by inflicting injury or even death.
I think the main purpose is to stop them from looting. If they die, them's the breaks. I am tired of people making excuses for such criminals
 
I think the main purpose is to stop them from looting.

No, the main purpose is to make them leave

If you catch a burglar in your house, are you just content to leave him in your living room so long as he doesn't steal anything ?
I think not.

If they die, them's the breaks. I am tired of people making excuses for such criminals

For some reason, I don't think an active shooter, in a school, could use that as a defense.
 
Back
Top Bottom