65 y/o man kills teen mugger, wounds another


Recommended Posts

we'll start treating teachers like professions when they start acting like it. Right now they won't handle our kids, particularly our boys, without ritalin and their ability to educate and inspire just blows. I consider them to be nothing but overpaid, over glorified babysitters. Most everything of importance I've ever learned has been from debating and arguing on line with people like you either from the facts/research you come up with or the facts/research I come up with. Compulsory education was out done by my curiosity online.

If teachers in South Dakota are paid an average of $36,374/yr then you shouldn't realistically expect much more than babysitting. Is education really so unimportant that you'd have just about anybody do it? In Ontario, if you get only average marks in university then you can pretty much forget about being accepted into a BofE program. They get thousands of applicants for only a hundred or so positions at each university. Even then you have to compete with other graduates to get on a ready-to-hire list. The result? Very, very few "bad" teachers slip into the system. Usually the expectations are so high that any that do slip through the cracks are bounced out again within the first 5 years. The high attrition rate means that up to a third of teachers don't make stay in education more than 5 years. It's a lot of work during the school year and although it is balanced by generous vacation time, there is a lot of stress for a significant portion of the year. Not everyone can handle those demands and they find that out pretty quickly.

it's a lot easier when you are a small island nation with largely secured borders.

I'm from Soviet Canuckistan rather than Old Blighty. While we only share a land border with the US of A, we do take in a higher percentage of refugees and (legal) immigrants per capita.

The senior left the house carrying a gun so clearly he was prepared to do violence. Investment is society needs to be done far in advance of a violent crime. You need to prevent the apathy, hopelessness, anger and frustration with society from taking grip. You need to give people other options.

Don't you see? Luckily he did have a weapon. It's not like having a weapon caused the teens to attack him.

There will always be a tiny minority that will have their own reasons to commit crimes so it isn't realistic to think that all crime can be completely eliminated no matter how hard your try or how much money you invest but that shouldn't be an excuse to not to bother trying at all. It is still cheaper at this point to prevent than it is to punish.

People shouldn't have to walk around being scared. They shouldn't have to hide in gated communities. Grandma shouldn't have to stand toe-to-toe with criminals and let the best shooter win. These are not badges of merit for society.

You can preach utopia all you want. It doesn't change the uncalled for assault by teens like these. And like I already said, when it does happen, we here do have the right to protect ourselves.

I hate to do their job for them but those statistics may include suicides

Comparing "homicide" rates is always risky because not all countries report them the same way. In the US it includes suicides (55% of the total), justifiable (by law enforcement action, civilian self defense, execution and assisted suicide where legal), and non-justifiable (criminal acts.)

The suicide component is largely by gun where available, but historical data shows that when guns aren't availble other means are used and the total rate is unaffected. A very large proportion of the non-justifiable group is gang-on-gang in the inner cities, and they don't pay any mind to gun laws including CCW/CPL licensing.

That is NOT a fact, nor is it safe to assume that.

You (and others who suggest shooting to wound) watch WAY too much TV and movies.

No, I just think gun owners who hold a view of shoot to kill as the only option are idiots.

No, I just think gun owners who hold a view of shoot to kill as the only option are idiots.

And that is an opinion not based on real world facts.

The facts are taught by the certified firearms instructors who train both the police and civilians seeking a carry permit. The vast majority of these are long service cops, former cops or ex-military and all have extensive tactical training. They teach a state regulated curriculum that says to never use wounding or warning shots for the reasons noted several times upthread.

Those espousing wounding and/or warning shots would not qualify to get bottled water for those guys & gals.

Are those all gun-related homicides?

You can kill people in more ways than just a gun.

I just verified that the gun related homicide rate is actually 2.97 per 100,000 for the US in 2010 of which is the latest year stats were available:

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Gun_violence

There any many European countries that have higher rates. Mexico is 3.66.

Thank you. The usual idiots here look at "homicide" rates in the US and fail to realize that those also include things such as vehicular homicide (and guess what, the US has a much higher number of cars per capita than most other countries).

Personal insults to prove a point. Righto tough guy, get the video.

No, I just think gun owners who hold a view of shoot to kill as the only option are idiots.

Personal insults not to your liking? Perhaps you could refrain from doing the same.

The events happened so swiftly you do not have time to consider shoot to kill, you are simply wanting to protect/defend yourself, to survive. It is my belief and of most people posting in this thread (yes there are those saying he got what he deserved, good riddance, etc), that an unfortunate and sad death occured.

  • Like 1

I'm not questioning his rights. I'm not questioning what he did.

I don't care if the instructors teach it, to me, your American instructors are no better IMO.

Real world or whatever, I don't care. The fact that everyone thinks shoot to kill is alright is scary, very scary. But I guess that comes down to some of the most ridiculous gun laws in the western world. But that's another argument.

Unfortunate? Of course. Sad? Yes, for his family. Justifiable? Most certainly - he brought it on himself by his own actions. I feel no more sorry for him than for the drunk driver who pulls in front of an oncoming train.

Whoa, maybe I'm misunderstanding you or you me, I was not defending or pitying the young man, his criminal actions resulted in another person defending themself (and rightly so). I certainly believe a person has the right to defend themself with lethal force when justified as it was in this case.

By the way I checked on Nebraska "Castle Doctrine" and our law is vague, but there is legislation pending that would strengthen/enhance the law. People can defend themselves but may not be immune to litigation. Hopefully the new law will be passed.

  • Like 1

I'm not questioning his rights. I'm not questioning what he did.

I don't care if the instructors teach it, to me, your American instructors are no better IMO.

Real world or whatever, I don't care. The fact that everyone thinks shoot to kill is alright is scary, very scary. But I guess that comes down to some of the most ridiculous gun laws in the western world. But that's another argument.

Want to save lives?

Ban cigarettes in the UK. The death rate for males from cigarettes is 49.0 per 100,000 in England. That is much worse than the 2.97 per 100,000 for gun deaths in the "Evil" US.

http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/mortality/uk-lung-cancer-mortality-statistics

When I have visited Europe, one thing I could not stand is how much you "civilized" Europeans love to smoke cigarettes. Yuck!

  • Like 1

Nashy: You should know better than to try and have a reasoned argument with Americans over gun issues.

This entire thread hasn't been saturated with enough facts and objectivity for your liking? Or is the outcome of this discussion just not to your liking and thus dismissed by you?

The original poster has guns in his sig FFS!

THE HORROR! :laugh:

Want to save lives?

Ban cigarettes in the UK. The death rate for males from cigarettes is 49.0 per 100,000 in England. That is much worse than the 2.97 per 100,000 for gun deaths in the "Evil" US.

http://info.cancerre...lity-statistics

When I have visited Europe, one thing I could not stand is how much you "civilized" Europeans love to smoke cigarettes. Yuck!

I'm Australian.

And just while we're on it, don't Americans complain about their ciggies costing a whopping $5 a packet? Try $20 a packet.

I'm Australian.

And just while we're on it, don't Americans complain about their ciggies costing a whopping $5 a packet? Try $20 a packet.

Cigarettes might be $5 a pack in the united states but it varies across america from average of $10 CAD in Canada to $2.50 US in Brazil

Point proven. People like you should not have a gun. I couldn't care less if you hve reasons of protecting your family. Your shoot to kill mentality is over the top and scary.

Oh right. So we'll just put a bullet in them, no worries.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

Nope, not kidding deadly serious.

Targets aren't the only thing worth shooting.

post-74610-0-26042100-1329710659.jpg

Point proven. People like you should not have a gun. I couldn't care less if you hve reasons of protecting your family. Your shoot to kill mentality is over the top and scary.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

No, I just think gun owners who hold a view of shoot to kill as the only option are idiots.

Have you ever fired a gun before? Have you ever taken a training or safety course on guns before?

When you draw a gun, you are doing so for one reason, and one reason only: You intend to destroy something. You don't pull a gun to play Ring Around The Rosies.

Second, it's a *HELL* of a lot harder to hit to hit a target below the waist, and nearly impossible to hit a knee or leg. When you shoot at a threatening target you are instructed to aim for the body. It's a larger area and harder to miss. Also, if the attacker has a weapon, then going for the knees does nothing at all to stop him from shooting/attacking back at you, as a banged up knee isn't going to stop the use of the upper body, most importantly, the aggressor's arms.

As for a warning shot, in the out and open as this was, do you REALLY want to fire a shot that could go anywhere?

Thirdly, the minute you decide to be an aggressor, whether by breaking into an occupied residence, or assaulting a man on a biking trail, you have sold your soul away to the devil. As soon as you enter my house, or threaten my life, all bets on your life are off.

Thirdly, the minute you decide to be an aggressor, whether by breaking into an occupied residence, or assaulting a man on a biking trail, you have sold your soul away to the devil. As soon as you enter my house, or threaten my life, all bets on your life are off.

It's this point that I've been trying to make. What is so hard to understand about these causes and effects?

Nashy: You should know better than to try and have a reasoned argument with Americans over gun issues.

The original poster has guns in his sig FFS!

It seems the unreasonable ones in this thread are those citing things they've seen on TV (warning shots, shooting to wound/disable) as real, viable alternatives in a real world situation. They constantly ignore the fact that shooting to disable is nearly impossible (even for trained police), and warning shots are inherently dangerous to innocent bystanders, and even to people miles away in certain cases. These same people go on to try to disprove (or simply ignore) the fact that as more and more states have enacted Castle Doctrine laws over the last decade or two, home invasions and other types of violent crime have actually been on the decline, in spite of the fact that police forces across the country have had fewer and fewer officers due to budget cuts.

An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a victim.

A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface.

Gun control is not about guns; it?s about control.

If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

Free men do not ask permission to bear

arms.

If you don?t know your rights you don?t have any.

Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Opinion. All you did was blame Democrats for everything. You offered nothing but a hit piece to support your pro Trump, anti union right wing ideology.
    • Excuse me for having an opinion, fella'... (Why am I not surprised?...) Congrats on your very informative post however...
    • By the sounds of that wall of Fox News propaganda gibberish attacking the Democratic Party you've already had plenty of "juices" flowing this morning. You've ruined what could have been a productive comment thread.
    • (Topic to get the juices flowing this Sunday morning!...) Actually, the situation has almost nothing to do with "lack of skills", especially since assembly-line skills can be taught to anyone, including Americans, certainly. Rather, the inadequacy-to-impossibility of large-scale tech manufacturing in America today, and the reasons why America finds tech manufacturing completely onerous in the 21st century, has to do with politically driven laws amid a plethora of non-scientific, utterly politicized "science-fact" that is patently false, punitive business taxation at every turn, an array of judicial fines of unimaginable scope and complexity, and, last but not least, American unionization strictures that serve to actually slay job creation and hobble all such manufacturing endeavors in America before they can get off the ground. Globalism emerged, they tell us, as the needed answer to American hubris and an unholy American drive to excel. Unless one is buried under mounds of political propaganda, it's easy to see the absurdity of labeling the employees of SpaceX, for instance, as "unskilled labor"... Etc. ad infinitum. At one time in the recent past, American manufacturing prowess was the envy of the world in a wide variety of technical fields! The current federal and state government roadblocks against America becoming competitive globally in tech manufacturing are considerable, it's true, as anyone with a working brain knows. But remarkably, that is only half the story! The other half of the story is, of course, the corporations themselves... Chinese tech manufacturing is simply unassailable in terms of profits, because the Chinese government wants to see its tech manufacturing second-to-none globally so that no companies/nations can compete in terms of ROI, and China has completely succeeded in that goal. Let's tic-off a few things: *Chinese tariff policies are set according to what is considered best for Chinese business, Chinese employees, and the Chinese people. Huge difference with how things are done with tariffs in the US--as the US government (SCOTUS in this case, Congress in others) plainly feels that tariffs are "unfair" for the limited number of citizens who may pay them, whereas nothing is "unfair" when Congress considers the Personal Income Tax rates to be infinitely hike-able, along with infinitely enlarging annual budget deficits. *The Chinese government boldly subsidizes Chinese companies to artificially amplify their profits. *The Chinese government deliberately refuses to avidly demonize Chinese businesses and does not consider Chinese businesses "the enemy", so very unlike American (D)s these days. *Chinese labor laws and businesses are allowed to set their own labor policies according to what Chinese companies consider is best for companies and their employees... Simply put, American workers in tech manufacturing are not allowed to set their own labor policies! * One additional problem corporations have that I also do not sympathize with is they don't want to pay to train their American employees. They could easily do so, but would rather not have to pay for it. I find that pathetic, actually. It is the height of hypocrisy for Americans to decry working conditions in China while simultaneously ensuring that American products are manufactured in China, not in the US, simply to maximize profits. There is nothing wrong with making a profit, of course, absolutely nothing. But there is plenty wrong with attempts to normalize hypocrisy of this kind! But rank hypocrisy and the (D) party in the US are longtime bedfellows... The current government in Washington is working overtime to see if it can toss out the horribly poor, failed economic policies of the past, while the (D)s still in Washington work very hard to bring back the stupidity whenever possible. With the right policies in place, America can be an infinitely competitive manufacturer.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      508
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      73
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      62
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!