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

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • 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
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!