Intruder shot, killed after kicking in door, charging occupant with a knife

[hndog609]

I've already answered those questions. (I have no idea what type of weapon she used)
I'm okay with a person having a permit to carry a hand gun outside of their home.

I actually acknowledged you answering the first question. (note the "thorough" comment)
Acknowledge you have stated permit carry is ok with you outside the home. (still leading up to the one with the meat on it)

Without invoking complete and utter feces I have not seen you make a cogent argument defending mandated government largess being required for, say, this woman to carry a perfectly normal self-defense weapon. In short try answering this

So you believe people should be able to carry a gun for self defense without a permit? If not then that's exactly what you said

Without bringing completely useless weapons outside the argument into play as you do here.

I do not. Nor do I believe they should be allowed to carry anthrax, a grenade, a mini nuke or a samurai sword for self defense.

If you just want to come right out and own up to something like "Self-defense with even the most acceptable class of common weapons should still be subject to government largess in public." then ok, that's your take.

 

[luthervol]

Why should she need a permit to exercise a constitutional right and be able to defend herself ANYWHERE?

So we can all enjoy the even greater right of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[LouderVol]

nuke-tipped

Depleted uranium would be a more apropos term.

 

[hUTch2002]

She should’ve called LeBron first.

Yeah but really shouldn’t we all with every decision?

 

[hUTch2002]

God you can't make this stuff up. On his way to an anger management course, stops for a side of domestic violence and gets capped. And of course, it all takes place in Florida.

I’m right there with your thinking sister! I mean WHERE ARE the masks!?

 

[luthervol]

Did you just accuse a poster on a message board of butting in on your conversation?

I redirected him after his attempt to tell me to discuss within his parameters are move to another thread.

 

[Y9 Vol]

Congrats to Luth on a successful hijack of this thread.
Come on guys, don’t feed the troll.

 

[luthervol]

which of these is more like a nuke? 1) sw 15-22 (first pic) or 2) glock 21

View attachment 366476

In some ways A and in some ways B - I'll call it a virtual tie.

 

[volinbham]

In some ways A and in some ways B - I'll call it a virtual tie.

is one okay to carry and the other not? do you know what the key differences are between these guns?

 

[LouderVol]

But it's the same concept. You say you are against nukes and would like to see them eliminated. Are you against the existence of all bombs? If not, what is the destructive power you find acceptable? If so, then what is the most destructive weapon of war that should exists?

The point is clear (at least to me) Even though there is no clear cut line that can be drawn that appeals to all, I line must be drawn nonetheless.
At some point, the potential harm to society so grossly outweighs any perceived benefit, that a rational and reasonable society will draw that line.

For me the difference is the radiation. I am completely fine with a bomb with the same output, it's just the fallout that's the issue for me. There is almost zero way to control who will wander into that area afterwards.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

I have a claw hammer (a couple), sledge hammer, ball peen, brass, rubber mallet, and probably a few more. I have a couple regular brooms and a couple push brooms. Luckily I don’t need permission from the government or morons to decide on what I should own or how many.

They are coming after dead blow hammers.

 

[DEFENDTHISHOUSE]

Should have gone straight to his anger management class instead of stopping here on the way.

Good riddance.

 

[C-south]

So we can all enjoy the even greater right of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[C-south]

They are coming after dead blow hammers.

“Assault hammers”

 

[luthervol]

I actually acknowledged you answering the first question. (note the "thorough" comment)
Acknowledge you have stated permit carry is ok with you outside the home. (still leading up to the one with the meat on it)

Without invoking complete and utter feces I have not seen you make a cogent argument defending mandated government largess being required for, say, this woman to carry a perfectly normal self-defense weapon. In short try answering this



Without bringing completely useless weapons outside the argument into play as you do here.



If you just want to come right out and own up to something like "Self-defense with even the most acceptable class of common weapons should still be subject to government largess in public." then ok, that's your take.

Sure it's my take. It's been my take all along. I've never waivered from that take. Just as I find it completely rational and reasonable to require drivers to be licensed and insured and vehicles to be registered.
It's no big deal, helps society function more smoothly, and is really no sweat off of any law abiding citizen's back.

 

[Grand Vol]

which of these is more like a nuke? 1) sw 15-22 (first pic) or 2) glock 21

View attachment 366476

Obviously, anything chambered in .45 ACP is going to be as close to the Tsar Bomba as you can legally buy.

 

[508mikey]

Say his name

 

[C-south]

Obviously, anything chambered in .45 ACP is going to be as close to the Tsar Bomba as you can legally buy.

But it doesn’t look as scary as the .22 plinker.

 

[luthervol]

Congrats to Luth on a successful hijack of this thread.
Come on guys, don’t feed the troll.

lol.....and all it took was for me to say I was happy that the woman was armed and able to defend herself.

 

[C-south]

lol.....and all it took was for me to say I was happy that the woman was armed and able to defend herself.

Just as long as she was home.

 

[McDad]

lol.....and all it took was for me to say I was happy that the woman was armed and able to defend herself.

disingenuous, revisionist, incorrect.

this is what got the rabble roused:

If she had a permit to carry, she could defend herself in a Kroger parking lot as well.

 

[luthervol]

is one okay to carry and the other not? do you know what the key differences are between these guns?

If it's okay to carry all handguns but not other guns, then yes it would be okay to carry one but not the other.

I have no idea what the differences in the two are other that the obvious....looks.
I would assume the smaller is more powerful and deadly.

 

[volinbham]

If it's okay to carry all handguns but not other guns, then yes it would be okay to carry one but not the other.

I have no idea what the differences in the two are other that the obvious....looks.
I would assume the smaller is more powerful and deadly.

you are correct, the smaller one is more powerful and deadly but perfectly acceptable for carry. the larger one needs to be banned because it looks scary but is considerably less powerful

it gets to your "have to draw the line somewhere" - presumably said line drawing would be based on lethality rather than scary looks.

neither is anything like a nuke

 

[volinbham]

Obviously, anything chambered in .45 ACP is going to be as close to the Tsar Bomba as you can legally buy.

but it doesn't look as scary as the .22

 

[luthervol]

For me the difference is the radiation. I am completely fine with a bomb with the same output, it's just the fallout that's the issue for me. There is almost zero way to control who will wander into that area afterwards.

That's an interesting twist.