Good guy with an AK47 ...

[bilby]

A dwelling being occupied is what distinguishes a burglary from a home invasion.

Nope, burglary is of an occupied, or likely to bd occupied, dwelling. When it's likely to be unoccupied, it's housebreaking.

"Home invasion" is tabloid media propaganda, instigated because "burglary" didn't sound scary enough.

 

[bilby]

there have been many cases of home invaders going into strangers' homes with the intention to harm the occupants.

How many? What proportion of break-ins do they represent?

 

[bilby]

There has been many a death penalty case in this country

Yes, I am fully aware that your country is horrific and utterly uncivilised.

 

[bilby]

It has a basis in reality. It may not be very common, but it does happen.

People get killed by meteorite strikes.

It's not sane to give a moment of thought to this risk, though. Only paranoia can explain a person who is worried about such rare events.

 

[bilby]

Oh, and you still advocate for paying "protection money" to burglars and robbers, right?

I have never advocated for that.

 

[Elixir]

First of all, military rifles are heavily regulated. And semi-auto rifles that resemble military rifles are used in a small minority of gun crime. Most gun crime is committed using regular handguns. And the Virginia Tech shooter has shown that high body counts at mass shootings are quite feasible using handguns only.

Semi-automatic rifles were featured in four of the five deadliest mass shootings, being used in the Orlando nightclub massacre, Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and Texas First Baptist Church massacre, not to mention Parkland and the Las Vegas bloodbath..
I couldn't find stats on the percentage of mass shooting deaths attributable to AR-style semi auto rifles. Almost as if nobody wants to talk about that. But I'm quite sure that Derec would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an AR-15 from the local gun shop and a military issue .223 assault rifle. Also sure he has never handled either, and so doesn't know why they are under such scrutiny. He has also never worked in EMS or any other field where he might have to actually see what those rifles do to human flesh. He considers those weapons "maligned" from his place of blissful ignorance, an opinion that can be safely ignored.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My issue has always been about how "good guys" are solely being defined by their lack of a criminal record. I can't think of any bad guy who didn't start with a clean criminal record. Gun reform (since clearly, we can't get rid of them) should only be about good guys (law-abiding citizens selling guns) not arming bad guys (those with no criminal record obviously buying one for a criminal act). How we can do so is something I'm not sure of but we don't seem o be having that talk.

If your record is clean at 21 it's very unlikely you'll go bad later.

Domestic violence aside of course.

 

[Elixir]

My issue has always been about how "good guys" are solely being defined by their lack of a criminal record. I can't think of any bad guy who didn't start with a clean criminal record. Gun reform (since clearly, we can't get rid of them) should only be about good guys (law-abiding citizens selling guns) not arming bad guys (those with no criminal record obviously buying one for a criminal act). How we can do so is something I'm not sure of but we don't seem o be having that talk.

If your record is clean at 21 it's very unlikely you'll go bad later.

Domestic violence aside of course

And white collar crime...

 

[Patooka]

But I'm quite sure that Derec would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an AR-15 from the local gun shop and a military issue .223 assault rifle.

I'm pretty certain the AR-15 shares 95% of its parts with the XM-177, M-16, M-16A1, M-16A2 and M-4. There's also the added wrinkle that Eugene Stoner never thought such a weapon should be readily available for civilian use.

 

[prideandfall]

3. vastly reform home insurance (or, ideally, just nationalize it) so that high value personal items are replaceable and you don't feel the need to *murder another human being* over your television.

1. Self-defense is not murder.
2. Home invaders often want to harm or even murder occupants, not just steal their stuff. You can't take that chance.

1. Murdering someone for picking up a television is not self-defense.
2. You pulled that completely out of your ass without any justification or evidence and as such it is so pathetically weak as an argument it shall be summarily dismissed entirely.

 

[atrib]

ECSO seeking 2 home invasion suspects; investigating if 3rd was shot in head by homeowner

Escambia County deputies are investigating an armed home invasion where it is believed an intruder suffered a non-fatal gunshot wound to the head from the homeowner.
[...]
One of the three intruders picked up the gun, but the homeowner was able to run to a backroom and retrieve an "AK-47-style gun," Simmons said.
"He started shooting for his own protection, to get them out of his house and to protect himself," the sheriff said.
The men fled the residence, but investigators were able to identify two of the suspects as Antonio DeWayne Dean Jr., 18, and Da'Torrance Leanders Hackworth, 20. Arrest warrants related to the home invasion have been issued for both men.
[...]
Simmons added, "We get a report of a third individual that had a wound to the head not long after (the home invasion). The stories he's giving us as to how he got shot in the head are inconsistent at best. In short, we don't believe him.

In another home invasion self-defense story, a 93 year old man was defending himself from an intruder on the other side of the country.

93-year-old man shoots home intruder, fends off others near Los Angeles

A 93-year-old suburban Los Angeles homeowner, who a relative said was frustrated over being the victim of numerous home break-ins, shot and critically wounded a burglar and scared off the would-be thief's accomplices, according to authorities.
[...]
"I approached them to put them under citizen's arrest. They wouldn't adhere to that and then one of them came at me with a fishing pole," Teague told reporters outside his home Thursday.
He said the suspects, who entered his home after kicking open his door, began throwing things at him as he tried to hold them at gunpoint.
[...]
The wounded suspect, identified as Joseph A. Ortega, 33, of Moreno Valley, was hospitalized in critical condition, according to the sheriff's department.

Well done!

What happens when a 7.62 FMJ round from an AK47 rifle traveling at 2,300 ft/sec penetrates the wall of your house and the wall of your neighbor and kills his 3-year old?

 

[laughing dog]

ECSO seeking 2 home invasion suspects; investigating if 3rd was shot in head by homeowner

Escambia County deputies are investigating an armed home invasion where it is believed an intruder suffered a non-fatal gunshot wound to the head from the homeowner.
[...]
One of the three intruders picked up the gun, but the homeowner was able to run to a backroom and retrieve an "AK-47-style gun," Simmons said.
"He started shooting for his own protection, to get them out of his house and to protect himself," the sheriff said.
The men fled the residence, but investigators were able to identify two of the suspects as Antonio DeWayne Dean Jr., 18, and Da'Torrance Leanders Hackworth, 20. Arrest warrants related to the home invasion have been issued for both men.
[...]
Simmons added, "We get a report of a third individual that had a wound to the head not long after (the home invasion). The stories he's giving us as to how he got shot in the head are inconsistent at best. In short, we don't believe him.

In another home invasion self-defense story, a 93 year old man was defending himself from an intruder on the other side of the country.

93-year-old man shoots home intruder, fends off others near Los Angeles

A 93-year-old suburban Los Angeles homeowner, who a relative said was frustrated over being the victim of numerous home break-ins, shot and critically wounded a burglar and scared off the would-be thief's accomplices, according to authorities.
[...]
"I approached them to put them under citizen's arrest. They wouldn't adhere to that and then one of them came at me with a fishing pole," Teague told reporters outside his home Thursday.
He said the suspects, who entered his home after kicking open his door, began throwing things at him as he tried to hold them at gunpoint.
[...]
The wounded suspect, identified as Joseph A. Ortega, 33, of Moreno Valley, was hospitalized in critical condition, according to the sheriff's department.

Well done!

What happens when a 7.62 FMJ round from an AK47 rifle traveling at 2,300 ft/sec penetrates the wall of your house and the wall of your neighbor and kills his 3-year old?

For some reason, that question does not vex people like Derec. They assign the responsibility and legal blame on the original target (the housebreaker) and absolve the actual shooter of any responsibility for their action. Apparently, they feel that the cry of "self defense" allows just about reaction.

 

[atrib]

The position is that people have a right to use whatever force is necessary to stop home invaders. If the bad guys end up dead so be it.

What about people who steals millions from pension funds? Is it ok to kill them too?

 

[atrib]

So, if Der's point is that assault rifles are good for home defense, then consider the point refuted.

It wasn't. It was just to offer an "after all this a happy ending" type of story about the much maligned weapon type.
If there is a home invasion, or a carjacking, or street mugging, and the robber is the only one harmed, that's always a good outcome.

I agree about what you said about drawbacks of rifles and advantages of shotguns for home defense.

Then why are you holding up the actions of the homeowners' as some kind of example of things going right? Why the fuck would any sane person discharge a high-powered rifle in a residential neighborhood, knowing fully well that a shotgun would be just as effective at detering or even bringing down a home invader without putting the lives of your neighbors at significant risk?

 

[atrib]

1. Murdering someone for picking up a television is not self-defense.

In some states it is, if that person is inside your home.

 

[Gospel]

The position is that people have a right to use whatever force is necessary to stop home invaders. If the bad guys end up dead so be it.

What about people who steals millions from pension funds? Is it ok to kill them too?

That's considered a non violent crime even though the people relying on those funds experience the damage and sometimes die as a result of lost disability benefits.

 

[bilby]

1. Murdering someone for picking up a television is not self-defense.

In some states it is, if that person is inside your home.

It really isn't.

If the Florida or Texas state legislature passes a law saying that black is white, it doesn't make it so; It just illustrates the insanity of the people voting in those legislatures.

 

[atrib]

The position is that people have a right to use whatever force is necessary to stop home invaders. If the bad guys end up dead so be it.

What about people who steals millions from pension funds? Is it ok to kill them too?

That's considered a non violent crime even though the people relying on those funds experience the damage and sometimes die as a result of lost disability benefits.

You are allowed to kill someone who breaks into your home to steal a $500 tv. But you can't shoot the assholes who made your life savings vanish? Life is not fair.

 

[atrib]

1. Murdering someone for picking up a television is not self-defense.

In some states it is, if that person is inside your home.

It really isn't.

If the Florida or Texas state legislature passes a law saying that black is white, it doesn't make it so; It just illustrates the insanity of the people voting in those legislatures.

I agree with you that it is insane for the law to allow the use of lethal force against people who do not pose a threat to your life or the lives of others in the house. But that is how the law is written.

 

[prideandfall]

1. Murdering someone for picking up a television is not self-defense.

In some states it is, if that person is inside your home.

I thought it rather obvious in the context that this was speaking philosophically, but I guess not.

Yes, it's defined legally as self-defense in terms of the application of law.
It cannot be defined as such in any meaningful moral or ethical way.