Pro gun rights but would never own a gun...agree?

[Xarkan]

No, I'm not going to flee and abandon my spouse and 3 small children. Denmark policy is a load of crap if that's how it works. He's going to either leave my house willingly, be forced out, or be killed. I'm so glad I'm not in a country where I'd go to prison for that, because to me, fleeing isn't even a choice.

I never said you should not warn your family, that part is entirely made up by you. It is not 'kill or abandon everyone to inevitable doom.'

Your choices will include 'flee and abandon your family to their deaths' which fails to be illegal but should be
Your choices will include 'blow up the house with dynamite'
Your choices will include 'try to win a shoot out in the living room'
Your choices will include 'try to get the family to safety while also trying to gain a position where if conflict becomes inevitable you have the upper hand'
Your choices in such a situation also includes running up to the burglar screaming some aztec curses wielding a spear

The choice that is legal is of course 'try to get the family to safety' etc. Happens to be the choice with the best chance for survival for your family of.. 5 as well

Edit:
The key here is that in any situation if deaths are not unavoidable they should be avoided. Killing people just because you are offended you might loose a lamp is such a waste, lamps can be replaced.. even if they are designed by PH

Having fleeing not a choice is btw a horrible attitude that may in some theoretic situations get your kids murdered. You may want to reconsider limiting your choices even in a country where gunning people down left and right is an option. By the time the burglars have killed you they are as i understand it in some states guilty of first degree murder since they committed the killing in the process of a crime. That in itself escalates the situation

[Jaxi]

The choice that is legal is of course 'try to get the family to safety' etc. Happens to be the choice with the best chance for survival for your family of.. 5 as well
The key here is that in any situation if deaths are not unavoidable they should be avoided. Killing people just because you are offended you might loose a lamp is such a waste, lamps can be replaced.. even if they are designed by PH

You're making some unsafe assumptions here:
-They are only their for your property and would rather try avoiding conflict. While this may statistically be true, it is also statistically true that you will probably survive a single round of russian roulette, but you would more than likely never risk playing it.
-That you can get your divided family safely out of their rooms, and out of the house while someone is rummaging about.

I am not saying go looking for a fight with the burglar, but if the son of a bitch is invading your house and you make an assumption that they aren't there to hurt you, then you are an incredibly irresponsible parent. You do not, I repeat, you do not take chances with your family's safety.

[Seegtease]

I never said you should not warn your family, that part is entirely made up by you. It is not 'kill or abandon everyone to inevitable doom.'

Your choices will include 'flee and abandon your family to their deaths' which fails to be illegal but should be
Your choices will include 'blow up the house with dynamite'
Your choices will include 'try to win a shoot out in the living room'
Your choices will include 'try to get the family to safety while also trying to gain a position where if conflict becomes inevitable you have the upper hand'
Your choices in such a situation also includes running up to the burglar screaming some aztec curses wielding a spear

The choice that is legal is of course 'try to get the family to safety' etc. Happens to be the choice with the best chance for survival for your family of.. 5 as well

No, it's not the best chance for survival. You're flat out wrong, plain and simple. Having to go to the kids bedroom, which involves passing through the living room, then running my kids through the living room out the door (with children that would need to be carried), even though the burglar is in that room. I guess they're just going to stand there and watch me run.

No, those are not "choices". Those are unreasonable risks. My best chance for my family's safety is to kill the invader. You're delusional if you think there are better choices. Watching out for myself is one thing, but watching out for others changes all that, especially those who cannot defend themselves, or even rationally handle such a situation.

[Jackmoves]

A burglerer will not attack you, thats the reality we live in here, you are not risking your life from a burglerer, thats just cold facts for countries such as mine and our neighbouring country Denmark, there is just not much of a risk. I mean sure it might happen once in a decade or something but you would have to be the most unlucky motherfucker to ever walk the earth to be killed by burglerer. You don't even need to flee, because they will leg it if they find someone at home.

[DraconusIX]

15,241 murders in the US in 2009, 648 in England
9,146 murders in the US by gun, 39 by gun in England

Yes, tell me that our firearm advocacy is keeping us safe. Compare that to other western european nations and its even worse

We have closer to 50 murders per million.

[Xarkan]

You're making some unsafe assumptions here:

You are making the unsafe assumption that there is only one person and the other one wont shoot you and then gun down everyone else in a psychopathic blood bath..

A burglerer will not attack you, thats the reality we live in here, you are not risking your life from a burglerer, thats just cold facts for countries such as mine and our neighbouring country Denmark, there is just not much of a risk. I mean sure it might happen once in a decade or something but you would have to be the most unlucky motherfucker to ever walk the earth to be killed by burglerer. You don't even need to flee, because they will leg it if they find someone at home.

Actually it is likely that is the reality they live in as well. They just prefer gunning down the burglar :P

[Seegtease]

A burglerer will not attack you

I see you've delved into the psyche of every burglar possible. Thanks for the insight!

[Deleted]

I own several guns. including small arms. All legal.

I live in Denmark.

[Jaxi]

You are making the unsafe assumption that there is only one person and the other one wont shoot you and then gun down everyone else in a psychopathic blood bath..

What are you talking about? I never made any assumption. Never. Not once. I distinctly remember typing that I don't think you should go looking for a fight.

[Seegtease]

You are making the unsafe assumption that there is only one person and the other one wont shoot you and then gun down everyone else in a psychopathic blood bath..

If they are, then by gathering and leading my family out, I'm basically ensuring our demise. I'll at least have a chance defending myself. Are you really so detached from reality. Do you even have a family with young children? Do you have any idea of how difficult it can be to get them all out while a burglar is IN the house? Do you know what it's like to know their lives rest in your hands? I don't need to really ask, because it's obvious that you don't. Remove the rose-tinted glasses before responding, please. They aren't going to stand and watch while I do this. My best chance for my family's safety is to fight until they die or leave. Period, end of story. Fact.

[Jackmoves]

I see you've delved into the psyche of every burglar possible. Thanks for the insight!

Are we not allowed to post our perspectiv on crime/risks in our own countries without you trying to redicule it?
The risks are minimal, thats facts, you can continue with your fear mongering all you want, doesn't really bother me nor does it change the way things work over here.

[Seegtease]

Are we not allowed to post our perspectiv on crime/risks in our own countries without you trying to redicule it?
The risks are minimal, thats facts, you can continue with your fear mongering all you want, doesn't really bother me nor does it change the way things work over here.

The risks aren't minimal, and I'm not willing to bet my life on those risks.

Again, this is all easily preventable. All one has to do is not break into my home. That's all. Simple, right? Yet somehow, when they do, which is a situation I never wanted to be put in, suddenly my defensive actions make ME the bad guy when all they had to do was not break in. I'm stuck making a decision on the best way to ensure my family is safe, and I'm supposed to just... assume that the person means me and my family no harm, as if they have some kind of credibility. I have to make a huge decision, all because they made one that they easily could have not made. I have to risk my and my family's life on an assumption that they won't hurt us.

No, I'm not doing that. The risk isn't as small as you believe it is, and it doesn't even matter how small it is. It's my house, I have no reason to take any risks. They assumed the danger was acceptable when they broke in. The burglar should be prepared to deal with the risk and consequences. They made a choice.

[IIamaKing]

A burglerer will not attack you, thats the reality we live in here, you are not risking your life from a burglerer, thats just cold facts for countries such as mine and our neighbouring country Denmark, there is just not much of a risk. I mean sure it might happen once in a decade or something but you would have to be the most unlucky motherfucker to ever walk the earth to be killed by burglerer. You don't even need to flee, because they will leg it if they find someone at home.

Yes we should all just let the burglar break into our homes steal our valuable things while we cower in our rooms and wait for the police to show up and never return our things to us. I mean that's what insurance is for right?

Sorry no, I will defend my self, my family and my property with any means available to me. Criminals should not be afforded more rights than a victim.

[xylophone]

Are we not allowed to post our perspectiv on crime/risks in our own countries without you trying to redicule it?
The risks are minimal, thats facts, you can continue with your fear mongering all you want, doesn't really bother me nor does it change the way things work over here.

Personally I think it is safer to assume the worst than to think a burglar has such innocent intentions and something happening to my family. That being said, I'm a "git off ma lawn" before shooting guy, I'm not gonna start unloading my 12ga in a guy first chance I get.

[Seegtease]

Personally I think it is safer to assume the worst than to think a burglar has such innocent intentions and something happening to my family. That being said, I'm a "git off ma lawn" before shooting guy, I'm not gonna start unloading my 12ga in a guy first chance I get.

Sure, me too. If I think it's safe for me to do so, I'll give them a chance to flee. I have no desire to kill another human. But I don't want to be scrutinized for defending my family. No one should be scrutinized for that. But so many people seem to live in happy fantasy land where they believe no criminal would dare hurt them, and would give them ample room to just walk out with their family while they rob the possessions. Because everyone can afford insurance, and the criminals have as many rights as the victims. They should be allowed to steal freely and not harmed so they can move on to the next house and do it again, all the while nobody is allowed to touch them, unless they go to prison.

I should go to one of those countries and just break into every house. Apparently, people just stand aside and let you. They aren't allowed to touch me, for fear of being arrested! I could make millions!

[Jaxi]

Are we not allowed to post our perspectiv on crime/risks in our own countries without you trying to redicule it?
The risks are minimal, thats facts, you can continue with your fear mongering all you want, doesn't really bother me nor does it change the way things work over here.

It doesn't matter if the risks are minimal or not, why in god's name would take that chance with your family's safety? I'm going to recycle my own analogy: that's like playing Russian roulette, even though the odds are in your favor, who the hell is crazy enough to take even the most remote chance? It baffels me, it really does. Perhaps 999,999 times out of 1,000,000 you are right, but I'll be damned if that 1 person that gets screwed over is me. Seegtease is simply stating that he will do whatever it takes to defend his family because he is going to take no risks.

[Luko]

It doesn't matter if the risks are minimal or not, why in god's name would take that chance with your family's safety? I'm going to recycle my own analogy: that's like playing Russian roulette, even though the odds are in your favor, who the hell is crazy enough to take even the most remote chance? It baffels me, it really does. Perhaps 999,999 times out of 1,000,000 you are right, but I'll be damned if that 1 person that gets screwed over is me. Seegtease is simply stating that he will do whatever it takes to defend his family because he is going to take no risks.

Amen. Seriously.

To find yourself in a position where you're not able to defend the ones you love when you had more than ample chance to prepare for this situation is pathetic. Even if it never happens, I would GLADLY be over prepared for something that never happened if it meant my family is safe.

[Ranulfe]

This reminds me of a conversation I recently had with my wife.

We live in Canada, where we are allowed to own many firearms, but are fairly heavily restricted on their use, transport and storage.

The question of whether or not I would carry a concealed weapon for the purpose of self-defense came up in conversation. I told her I would if I could and she vehemently disagreed, saying it was unnecessary and that the chance that I would ever need to use it was so slight, the inconvenience of carrying it wouldn't be worth the trouble. I asked her if she wore her seat belt when she drove her car, and she told me "that was different". I challenged her as I would every other person who is 'anti-gun' to explain the difference. The fact is that a gun used for self defense (usually a pistol, for all you pistol haters) and a seat belt are fundamentally the same thing: a device used to protect yourself from harm.

Not everyone wants to own a gun, and frankly I really don't care if you do or don't own one or want to. All I ask is the same consideration.

[Jackmoves]

The risks aren't minimal, and I'm not willing to bet my life on those risks.

Again, this is all easily preventable. All one has to do is not break into my home. That's all. Simple, right? Yet somehow, when they do, which is a situation I never wanted to be put in, suddenly my defensive actions make ME the bad guy when all they had to do was not break in. I'm stuck making a decision on the best way to ensure my family is safe, and I'm supposed to just... assume that the person means me and my family no harm, as if they have some kind of credibility. I have to make a huge decision, all because they made one that they easily could have not made. I have to risk my and my family's life on an assumption that they won't hurt us.

No, I'm not doing that. The risk isn't as small as you believe it is, and it doesn't even matter how small it is. It's my house, I have no reason to take any risks. They assumed the danger was acceptable when they broke in. The burglar should be prepared to deal with the risk and consequences. They made a choice.

I'm not sure if you are unable to read your own native language because I specificly said "our own countries", that means not the US, that means different fucking circumstances, that means the risk is fucking minimal, and that is a fucking fact, supported by every god damn report that our justice department have released, you sir, need to realize that things are different once you stick your head out and have a look around.

If you don't want the oppinions of others there is a thread on the first page specificly made for people that A.support the laws that are currently in place in the US and B. doesn't have people from other nations posting in it.

Yes we should all just let the burglar break into our homes steal our valuable things while we cower in our rooms and wait for the police to show up and never return our things to us. I mean that's what insurance is for right?

Sorry no, I will defend my self, my family and my property with any means available to me. Criminals should not be afforded more rights than a victim.

Yes because thats what I wrote, are you illiterate or just ignorant?

Personally I think it is safer to assume the worst than to think a burglar has such innocent intentions and something happening to my family. That being said, I'm a "git off ma lawn" before shooting guy, I'm not gonna start unloading my 12ga in a guy first chance I get.

As I said, that post was about my own country and Denmark, it's hard to get my point across when people refuse to read(not on about you, but some other posters). Our countries, Norway etc are not accustomed to the same risks as others it seems, because the risk is minimal, heck our ministers(swedens), the absolute top level politicians went without any kind of security up untill 2004, you could meet the foreign minister in your local shopping mall without her having a single bodyguard, we've been accustomed to live in very "open" sociaties where risk of severe violant crime isn't that much of a risk, hell our former financial minister(went on to become cultural minster afterwards) used to drop by at a club/bar that I worked at one summer, just checking what we youngsters was about at the time, cool dude, would just sit at the bar and have a beer.

Now a fight here and there on Saturday night ... yeah it happens quite often, but most murders is often connected to organized crime, it's not your average joe that get shot/murderer by strangers, as I wrote in an earlier post, almost 80% of the murders/manslaughters in sweden is done by someone who knows the victim(for example, husband killing wife, ex bf killing former gf etc), very, very few of the reminaing murders(talking about maybe 20 murders now) is commited in a strangers home. So the risk is minimal.

[xylophone]

snippity snip

Ya, I get that, but even if the chances are 1/1000000 that the intruder has violent intentions I would err on the side of caution when the stakes are potentially so high. Like I said before as well, the crime issue here in the U.S. is a cultural factor much more than it is a guns/capita issue.