Hostage situation in Aurora Colorado. 4 dead.

[Svifnymr]

An AK47 isn't made for hunting.

The Saiga is named after the (ugly as sin) antelope that they hunt with it.

---------- Post added 2013-01-06 at 04:10 PM ----------

It just baffles me that people seem to feel safer around some wood stock long gun then they are around any other gun. Its a fucking gun people, it doesn't matter how long it is, or if its made out of metal wood or plastic. While I personally am generally against the antigun platform, I'm just tired of getting stupid arguments that are based on such misinformation that the argument is ridiculous.


You know what it sounds like? It sounds like every time of our leaders opens their mouth in regards to any new laws involving new technology. You know what I'm talking about. 'The internet is a series of tubes'? THAT guy.

I can understand folks being anti-gun, though I do not agree with them. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and all that.

The lack of knowledge about the subject is what irks me. I don't work there anymore, but I worked at a gun store for years. I spent my time educating folks and helping them make an informed decision. Oh well.

That all being beside the fact that there's a multi-huindred thread already about gun control, and this article was linked in there already, so spilling over into a new thread so folks can throw the same arguments into it is just bewildering to me.

[Wikiy]

If someone died while bungie jumping, I wouldn't be surprised.

Neither would i. Nor would i assume it's not their own fault. Doesn't mean there isn't something wrong with the bungee cord and that it's someone else's fault as well.

If someone dies after forcing their way into a home, it is their life they risked.

Sure, and if they die, yes, it's their fault. Doesn't justify the actions of the killer though if they didn't need to do it.

Big guy with a crowbar comes on you, if you want to take the time to ask him nicely to not beat you to death, that's your risk to take.

That's a completely different situation because such a guy would actually be a threat and there would be no doubt about it.

Well they should care. I don't care for the tiny chance a burglar is actually going to get killed. The fact is most people who break into other peoples houses don't die and I don't want to motivate more by removing that deterrent for the 0.X% that are going to get themselves killed.

Except with that specific post i wasn't arguing about gun rights, i was arguing about the case where a woman shot an unarmed burglar in the face 5 times immediately after he opened the closet where she had been hiding.

I should also add that it's my opinion that deterrents should have absolutely no place in law.

[Svifnymr]

That's a completely different situation because such a guy would actually be a threat and there would be no doubt about it.
.

He beat his way in with a crowbar, not sure if he had it with him or not.

Either way, the police response time seems to leave something to be desired. Even the sound of sirens probably would have driven the guy off before he reached their hiding spot.

I was actually going from:
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/m...unshots/nTnGR/
which was posted in the other thread. Didn't notice this thread had a different link. The other one doesn't mention the crowbar, it does mention the 3 story house but not that they were hiding in the attic office rather than a random bedroom closet.

[Kaiser499]

First Sandy Hook, now Aurora, both names in the Dark Knight Rises. Not a coincedence people.

[Sicarus]

An AK47 isn't made for hunting.

Have you ever hunted Feral Hogs?

[Deleted]

First Sandy Hook, now Aurora, both names in the Dark Knight Rises. Not a coincedence people.

Pretty sure it is.

[Sicarus]

Except with that specific post i wasn't arguing about gun rights, i was arguing about the case where a woman shot an unarmed burglar in the face 5 times immediately after he opened the closet where she had been hiding.

I should also add that it's my opinion that deterrents should have absolutely no place in law.

I have a perfect example for this, however, I expect to be called out on it, since the "SITCHUASHUN ES FICTUAL NEVAR HAPPENS"



You're right, it's fiction, however, if someone is on some heavy drugs, they're not going to go down as easy. Like the Philippines, we switched from .38 to .45 because of how high they were, they didn't feel the shots.

[Halicia]

I should also add that it's my opinion that deterrents should have absolutely no place in law.

Law is as much about deterrence as it is about punishment and reformation.

[Deleted]

I have a perfect example for this, however, I expect to be called out on it, since the "SITCHUASHUN ES FICTUAL NEVAR HAPPENS"



You're right, it's fiction, however, if someone is on some heavy drugs, they're not going to go down as easy. Like the Philippines, we switched from .38 to .45 because of how high they were, they didn't feel the shots.

Shot placement is much more important than caliber.

[Bryntrollian]

People love to talk about banning guns outright but that wouldn't solve anything, the gun the man used was illegal anyway.

[Sicarus]

Shot placement is much more important than caliber.

So you're telling me in the middle of a war, on the frontlines, you're going to take the time to place your shots just right?

[Deleted]

So you're telling me in the middle of a war, on the frontlines, you're going to take the time to place your shots just right?

Yes actually, always aim for center mass. You may not hit it, but you always aim for it.

[Sicarus]

Yes actually, always aim for center mass. You may not hit it, but you always aim for it.

Brings me back to them being on drugs, they didn't feel it.

[Schattenlied]

We live in the 21st century. There are such things as markets and pig/chicken farms.

Also, the idea of going out into the wilderness to kill wildlife and then eat it seems pretty crazy to me. As far as i know, in my country, all wildlife that anyone would get the idea of eating is forbidden from being hunted and bears (pun intended) a prison penalty. That sounds like a good principle to me.

Hunting for your own food is very cost effective, spend $.70 on a 30-06, .308 or $.45 on a 30-30 bullet (and less, if you want to hunt with a 7.62x39, which is the AK47/SKS cartridge and a perfectly effective hunting round) and you get an amount of meat (in weight) that would cost well over $100 at any store. Depending on where you are and what the deer are grazing on, venison can be very good.

In an economy like this one, saving that much on food is a good thing.

[loganroth51]

Except with that specific post i wasn't arguing about gun rights, i was arguing about the case where a woman shot an unarmed burglar in the face 5 times immediately after he opened the closet where she had been hiding.

I should also add that it's my opinion that deterrents should have absolutely no place in law.

I think you are underestimating the lengths a mother will go to protect her children. The child being in the closet with her changes things, as she really has no way of knowing that the person in her house is there to burglarize, and not something more sinister.

Obviously the situation didn't end ideally, but it could have been a very different news headline had the person been there for reasons other then burglary.

[krunksmash]

the start of the push for gun control just so happens to have started just befor the shootings started ... I see a connection

[Wikiy]

Law is as much about deterrence as it is about punishment and reformation.

Yes, it is, doesn't mean I'm pleased though. Now that you mention punishment, I'm against it having anything to do with law as well. In my opinion, law should be only about protecting the society (through restraining dangerous individuals) and rehabilitation.

---------- Post added 2013-01-07 at 03:02 AM ----------

I think you are underestimating the lengths a mother will go to protect her children. The child being in the closet with her changes things, as she really has no way of knowing that the person in her house is there to burglarize, and not something more sinister.

Obviously the situation didn't end ideally, but it could have been a very different news headline had the person been there for reasons other then burglary.

The thing is, though, that I think the chances of an intruder wanting to do something other than steal stuff are not even worth considering, let alone basing your actions upon (such as killing said intruder).

[Sicarus]

The thing is, though, that I think the chances of an intruder wanting to do something other than steal stuff are not even worth considering, let alone basing your actions upon (such as killing said intruder).

If a guy enters my house, whether or not it's to steal something or anything else, whether or not he wants a cup of sugar, if he broke in, his ass is going down.
He's breaking the sanctuary of my home, interupting my life, and is quite possibly out to harm me or my family. He deserves what's coming for his criminal actions.

[Deleted]

If a guy enters my house, whether or not it's to steal something or anything else, whether or not he wants a cup of sugar, if he broke in, his ass is going down.
He's breaking the sanctuary of my home, interupting my life, and is quite possibly out to harm me or my family. He deserves what's coming for his criminal actions.

Why not take him prisoner?

[Sicarus]

Why not take him prisoner?

Why should I have to? This isn't war, I'm not a cop, I'm not a judge. The dude breaks into my house with bad intentions, he's lost his rights.