Owner shoots bad guys trying to steal 4Runner

That is because my entry into the discussion was prompted by what I thought were spurious arguments and incorrect Interpretations. On that, I have been very consistent.

Ok, so, are you for MORE LAWS or ENFORCEMENT of CURRENT LAWS? Most of the stuff that you said above are for the former...is that not your view?

You already know my view...no more new laws. ENFORCE the existing laws. As already noted by me in the past, we simply do NOT have the funding nor manpower to regulate new laws since we don't have neither of those currently for the existing laws. Simple. Straight to the point.
 
hold on comprehension hero... I have what apparently a lot of bleeding heart liberal US occupants dont and that is common sense.... if a child pockets a pack of gum of course he shouldnt be shot.... you car jack me, break into my house... take MY personal belongings.... you get shot... in my "CASTLE" or "DOMAIN" you either get that or you don't... I don't play semantics to appease you. Like I said roll the dice if you feel you can trample on my domain

He will most likely get shot...

Capeesh Hero?

Actually, with some teens these days, it wouldn't surprise me that a person will have to kill a teen to defend his life.
 
hold on comprehension hero... I have what apparently a lot of bleeding heart liberal US occupants dont and that is common sense.... if a child pockets a pack of gum of course he shouldnt be shot.... you car jack me, break into my house... take MY personal belongings.... you get shot... in my "CASTLE" or "DOMAIN" you either get that or you don't... I don't play semantics to appease you. Like I said roll the dice if you feel you can trample on my domain

Don't tell me I have trouble comprehending, that's not what you said. You said:

doesn't make a difference.... dont take sh1t that isnt yours and you wont get shot! plain and simple

Now you're backing off that position and trying to blame me for twisting your words? Moving your own goalposts is a form of intellectual dishonesty and bad form in a conversation like this. Thanks for letting me know what kind of debater you are... internet tough guy it is. :biggrin1:
 
Don't tell me I have trouble comprehending, that's not what you said. You said:



Now you're backing off that position and trying to blame me for twisting your words? Moving your own goalposts is a form of intellectual dishonesty and bad form in a conversation like this. Thanks for letting me know what kind of debater you are... internet tough guy it is. :biggrin1:

Sorry if I didn't provide my stance on the topic in stick figure drawings and potato head dialogue for your feeble mind to understand... I have found that those that say "internet tough guy" are usually typing form their mom's basement... but in Utah that could be any basement i guess
 
Last edited:
The fact that a dirt bag is dead for doing what dirt bags do....well, my give-a-crap meter is pegged at zero.

Personally, I would not draw on someone who is stealing my car if I do not at any point feel threatened. For the record, I would never shoot to kill...I would shoot to stop the threat. If I draw my weapon, I intend to shoot. There will be no warning shots or threats of shooting or standoffs. I will do my best to stop the threat immediately and in a safe manner.

However, since the victim in this case felt threatened by these dirt bags, I give this shoot 2 thumbs up approval.
 
TFor the record, I would never shoot to kill...I would shoot to stop the threat.

Eh, if you are using deadly force, it might as well be deadly. There will be no knee-cap popping here. If I truly felt threatened, I would not risk the injury not being enough to stop them, nor would I want the pleasure of the dirtbag suing me down the road...
 
So you're against a AWB and magazine capacity restrictions?

Yes.

I don't believe they would be significantly effective, if even effective at all. It certainly wouldn't do what gun control advocates want, other than be a feel good measure.

Having said that, States or municipalities could probably implement something akin to this and I see Scalia's Heller opinion as suggesting the court might not find it a violation of the 2nd (depending on the particulars).
 
Sorry if I didn't provide my stance on the topic in stick figure drawings and potato head dialogue for your feeble mind to understand... I have found that those that say "internet tough guy" are usually typing form their mom's basement... but in Utah that could be any basement i guess

Ad hominem now? A sure sign you've handed a guy his ass is when he has to resort to personal attacks to try and save face.

Well done, cowboy. :bravo:
 
Eh, if you are using deadly force, it might as well be deadly. There will be no knee-cap popping here. If I truly felt threatened, I would not risk the injury not being enough to stop them, nor would I want the pleasure of the dirtbag suing me down the road...

This, I agree with. Once your weapon is out, don't stop until the clip is empty, and don't screw around with trying to "wound" the guy. If he was scary enough to make you draw in the first place, make it count.
 
Last edited:
This, I agree with. Once your weapon is out, don't stop until the clip is empty, and don't screw around with trying to "wound" the guy. If he was scary enough to make you draw in the first place, make it count.

Just remember... it isn't a clip. :wink2:
 
Oh, it's like that, is it?

If you start calling it a clip, some people will start yelling zomg assault rifle and then you will soon be thrown into a dark cell alongside the rapist, murderers, and thieves you seek to defend yourself from. At least, that's where we are headed...
 
Just remember... it isn't a clip. :wink2:

tanker-rifle-300x127.jpg
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
278,317
Messages
3,554,129
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top