Outrageous.

[Liam]

Simply owning a gun is not enough.

Without adequate training in its use I guarantee that 95% of people with a common 9mm semi automatic pistol would miss a man sized target at a range of 10 yards. Its not a matter of point and shoot with any weapon, unless you have an automatic and can go for a bit of a spray.

Unless you are trained in how to use ANY weapon, any potential attacker worth a pinch of shit will have it out of your hands and at your throat/pointed at your face before you can even blink. Criminals have been sensationalised to a ridiculous extreme and its VERY unlikely that anyone is going to walk into your home and randomly shoot you. Criminals enter homes to make a quick dollar and faced with being caught, 99% of them will opt to flee. Its when you threaten them that things get ugly. If someone is there with the purpose of hurting you, owning a weapon isnt going to help you unless you are trained.

I'm on the fence. I support licensed firearms but I can't find any reason for keeping one in the home for self defense. I have some training in using rifles and pistols and I wouldnt keep one in my house.

[mongoose]

Well waht exactly do you mean by training ? Is it just that you shoot a few times at a target or at some cans or do you mean professional training at a gun training-place, where you have a trainer.
I personally had a hunting gun in my hand and shoot some cans on the field, and it wasn't that hard for me to have precision. But it was only some practiceing and I think it's not that hard to handle a gun.

[mongoose]

I personally I wouldn't use a pistol or a gun against a burglar. A baseball bat would be more safer and more efficient if he is at close range and you would wait him in the right place.

[Foeni]

Whether you would use a gun or not is, I think irrelevant, I think you should be allowed to do so if neccesary. I'm not sure how I'd react in a such situation, but I would want to have the choice. This is what I think it's all about. Pete, you keep saying people are naive if they think they can play superman, but that's not the important thing - different people react differently. What's important is that you have the right to defend yourself in a matter you find appropriate. I reckon most people would go for the lesser violent solution, very few want to have a human life on their conscience.

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Flightfreak

Yeah okay, but even that I don't support.

Imagine everyone having guns in their home's to protect their property.
Why would a thief or anyone with bad intentions wait till you have a gun pointed at him? He'd just make sure he's the first one to hold the gun in to your face. They'd arm them self better and robberies would become more brutal.
Besides I would not like to be killed with the gun I bought to protect my self with in the first place.

And really I’m not going to shoot a person in the back because he just stole my 2000 dollars plasma TV that is insured anyway. I’ll do everything I can to make sure he gets caught and justice has been done and I’ll rather spent money on more taxes for better police work than in a magnum under my pillow.

I'm "fine" with hobbyists having registered arms for use in a professional club but I’ll never support the idea that it is our right to protect our property with arms.

That's all well and good in theory, but the fact remains that property crimes are usually lower in areas that have higher rates of gun ownership. And, for all of the wailing about guns causing a "Wild West" mentality, those crime rates were extremely low out west in the 1800s. Why? Simple...crooks knew they risked their lives every time they climbed through someone's window. It wasn't worth the risk.
The problem with just letting them get away with the plasma because it's insured and paying taxes for better police work is that pretty soon, no one can afford insurance and the police are so overwhelmed, they can't respond to every call. The criminals become emboldened because there is no tangible consequence to their actions.
I'll give you an example. Some years ago, a few high speed chases in Tampa led to some deaths, and the TPD adopted a no chase policy. Basically, the police couldn't chase a stolen car. If they were behind a car they knew to be stolen and hit their lights, if the car took off, they weren't allowed to chase it. Guess what happened. Car theft went up over 50% in a few short months. Kids would pull up next to police cars and hold up signs that said "This Car is Stolen" and then speed away, knowing that all the police could do was radio it in. In a span of about six months, we had four cars abandoned in the parking lot of our old business location. One of our vans was stolen and wound up across town. Two other times, theives did hundreds of dollars in damage attempting to steal them.
Theives knew they could run from the police and dump the car with very little, if any, chance of being caught. Once the city realized that they had made a mistake, the chase ban was lifted. And, as one might imagine, car theft rates plummeted.
By and large, criminals are criminals because it's an easy way to get money. They choose targets based on how easy they think it will be to get in and out with the least risk to their personal well being. They move past well lit homes. They avoid large, barking dogs and alarms, and move toward those houses that don't look as risky.
There's a good reason that pretty much everyone in jail for breaking and entering says the same thing...the greatest deterrent to them is the sound a twelve gauge, pump action shotgun makes when it's cocked. They know that sound, and they don't want to be on the business end of it.

[seventhson]

Way off-topic from the right to have/use weapons...forgive me.

The up-side of my poverty is that I do not have a lot of possessions that most thieves would be interested in stealing. If anyone wants an old cassette tape player/recorder or a 20" color TV they are free to walk into my home and I will give it to them. It's only stuff. Stuff can be replaced. I will cook you a meal if you are hungry. No need to steal anything from me, I will give it to you for free.

(-: Peace :-)

[Foeni]

Originally Posted by Flightfreak

Who keeps you from going to a official weapon dealer to buy your self a gun, pistol or other arms? No one.

I never stated that it should be possible to just walk in some weapons store and buy whatever you want. Permits should be required. Besides, I've never said I was a big supporter of guns in our society, I merely said that you should be allowed to defend yourself with the means neccesary. And if you have a gun, then you should be allowed to use it if neccesary. Of course, if you don't have a permit, you should be charged with illegal possesion of a firearm.

Originally Posted by Flightfreak

Serious, would you shoot a burglar death for a 2000 dollar plasma tv? I hope not and if you would than I think you’re a danger for our society.
Would you shoot a burglar that threats you with your life? I hope you do and not end up shot by your self. But like said: it should stay in hand of a court to assess whether your actions were out of legal self defence or not.

No, I would not shoot a burglar to defend a TV or anything else for that matter. I think you know me well enough to know that. I've never argued for the right to use violence to defend your property, only your life or the lives of other. You may not believe it, but I fully agree that it should be up to a court of law to decide whether or not it was self-defence. I never questioned that. And that, my friend, is what makes it different from the 'wild wild west'. I do however believe that you shouldn't question the method used to stop your attacker. If it's self-defence, then it's self-defence and the fucker had it coming.

Originally Posted by Flightfreak

Sorry Hasselbrad but how do you think it has been here the past 50 years? Compared to your country the murder and crime rates here are peanuts and I can’t complain about the insurance price either. It seems that taxes and no guns under everyone’s pillow does seem to work.

In the US it may be the only affordable way to protect your home but to be honest that says more about your country than mine.

Comparing the US with a western European country is irrelevant. Our societies are on some points very different. In the US you don't have the same kind of security that the society will look after you if you lose everything. In Europe we do. If you wanted to compare you'd have to compare two western European countries, say The Netherlands and Denmark (if we hypothetically allowed hand guns and the right to defend yourself). That would be much better grounds to compare on. Comparing two US states would probably work, too.

Originally Posted by Flightfreak

The case Foeni brought up are rare cases that get a lot of attention by the media because it’s good sensation and challenging for the jurisdiction in our countries.

It gives us an opportunity to discuss. But of course it's a good story, no doubt about that.

[Foeni]

I think we're arguing on the right to own and use guns to defend yourself. Which I support and you're against. And we disagree what effect it would have on our society.

[Foeni]

So you support legalising handguns? And not just for the elite that has been trained.

[seventhson]

Rural Texas, unincorporated area outside city jurisdiction, large steel gate across drive entrance posted "No Trespassing" & "Guard Dog". 90lb German shepherd announces any vehicle coming up the drive toward the house. If you know Rosco & call him by name, he may not maul you when/if you step out of the truck. Bubba keeps a loaded double barrell 12-gage shotgun by the door. Good thing his kids are away at school, he doesn't use trigger locks. Wonder if Bubba's been drinking or had a fight with the ol'lady this evening.
I've known Bubba since 1976 & we're almost always happy to see each other, but I make sure to call him before I drive out to his house 'cause he'll put Rosco up & I've seen the damage that half a bottle of Jim Beam, a bad day at work & unloading both of those barrels with one pull of the triggers by Bubba can do. Doesn't even need to be able to see strait to take out a 6 foot wide swath of destruction. Hope he doesn't feel threatend when a stranger comes calling, unannounced. Who am I to question his constitutional rights to defend himself, do you want to? I have his number on voice-dial on my cell phone & I never show up unannounced. Sit Rosco, sit.

[Foeni]

In Denmark you can be convicted even if it was self-defence. You'd get convicted for using unneccesary force.

[Foeni]

It shouldn't be neccesary to have to have some deep thoughts about whether or not to shoot or attack in other way. If you really are in danger, then the method you use to avoid should be legal.

[Mandy]

Yay! Let's mug Pieter! He won't fight back! Let me know when you get an iPhone.

Seriously, get some balls. If someone stabbed you just for your mp3, how do you know they won't kill you for it? Do you really wanna just take it, in case you MIGHT get charged for ANYTHING? Self-defense is legal in America. Europe is heaps fucked up. How is it not legal if someone has a knife in your back?

[Mandy]

Yeah, the crime rate IS a lot higher than in Europe. But for those of us who aren't criminals, how are we supposed to do anything about that except defend ourselves?

And first of all, any fucking idiot who buys a gun without learning how to use it SHOULD be shot.

[Foeni]

A court should asses whether or not we're talking self defence. But if the court decides it is in fact self defence, then I couldn't care two shits about the punk that decided to put your life in danger. If he's killed or just wounded is the same to me. I would feel no pity. Except of course, if he's killed, he won't do it again. Of course that sounds cruel, but remember who the victim is. If you shoot someone puts your life in danger, then you are the victim. Not the one you've just shot!

[Mandy]

Like I said, you should learn how to use a gun before buying one.

And wtf, putting your gun in a drawer is so cliche and stupid.

[Mandy]

Do you think I'd be saying "you should learn to use it if you have one" if I had one and didn't know how to use it?

Also, when you argue your points with mocking, it makes you look like a child.

[Mandy]

Guess that makes us both children!

[Foeni]

It's the immediate assumption, I'm pointing out. He shot someone that held a gun to his face, then he must he attempting murder. I'd say call it self defence until proven differently. He's in jail right now during the investigation, because he shot two robbers the world's better off without.

[hasselbrad]

Any of you ever had a gun pointed at you? I have. I was robbed at gunpoint when I was living in Atlanta. Handed over $60 and walked away unharmed. Funny thing is, I wish I'd had a gun and had shot and killed the guy. Why? Because apparently my action, or lack thereof, helped to embolden him. He was subsequently responsible for a string of robberies and rapes across the north part of Atlanta. Eventually, he wound up shooting one of his victims.

I agree with Pieter that there needs to be some sort of official inquiry. People can't use "self defense" as carte blanche for murder. However, those who kill in self defense should be given the benefit of the doubt when faced with a weapon, even if that weapon turns out to be a toy. That jeweler had no idea that they weren't going to kill him. To my way of thinking, if you brandish a weapon in the course of a robbery, you have declared to your victim that if you don't get what you want, you are willing to injure and/or kill. I don't give a rat's ass or a flying fuck what your "true intentions" are. Has a criminal ever taken the stand and said that, "yes...I intended to kill the gas station attendant"? No. Everyone hides behind the "things went wrong...I didn't mean to kill anyone" defense.