What would you do? (Scenario)

[Pace]

imported post

If you read my previous post, I said clearly that if someone came into my home, especially with my new baby, I couldn't at that point assume anything else but they were there for harm, especially in the middle of the night.

I'm talking about, lets say I come home and see a guy running across my yard with my pink flamingo.

Mr.FiredUp wrote:

Pace... I'm confused. I agree that property is not worth dying over as I am a Christian man myself. What I don't understand is where anybody said this was over property. As you yourself said, you have drawn on intruders before. If this was all over property, why even draw? If you draw your weapon, you should be willing to take a life. If you did not intend to take a life being that the intruder was looking only for property, you should not have drawn your weapon. If someone is in my home I can only assume he is there for harm and will act as such. I don't believe any of us should own or carry guns with the intent to take a life, but use them to stop someone that intends to take a life without reason. If someone is in my home I can only assume they have chosen to commit a violent act. Therefore, I would kill them to save the innocent.

Carry your weapon in the hope that you never need to draw it... draw your weapon only if you plan to use it.

 

[McX]

imported post

i call copyright infringement on the draw or no draw thread in the wisconsin forum! it's ok, the more scenarios, the more the learning opportunities! regarding the scenario discussed here; if he retreats i can't shoot, yeah i know he just tried to whack me, but the threat is retreating, and has gone outside the building, so all i could do is remain vigilant, stay in place, and wait to see if they return.

 

[hopnpop]

imported post

Pace wrote:

If you read my previous post, I said clearly that if someone came into my home, especially with my new baby, I couldn't at that point assume anything else but they were there for harm, especially in the middle of the night.

I'm talking about, lets say I come home and see a guy running across my yard with my pink flamingo.

...Are you seriously trying to tell me that a pink yard flamingo isn't worth killing over?! Surely you must be mad!

kidding, of course (C.Y.A.)

 

[McX]

imported post

hey now, no bustin on the flamingos. i happen to appreciate tasteless lawn ornaments!:lol:

 

[Pace]

imported post

Hah! My point was something inconsequential and worthless. If it was my garden gnome, now that's a whole other story.

 

[hopnpop]

imported post

lmao @ thegarden gnome :lol::lol::lol:

 

[Old Grump]

imported post

To much thinking, boogerman fired two shots at you, return fire, I don't care what direction he is facing when he gets hit. It also doesn't matter if he hit me my lamp or the picture on the wall; return fire and keep returning it till he is on the ground and not able to shoot back.

 

[Mr.FiredUp]

imported post

Pace wrote:

If you read my previous post, I said clearly that if someone came into my home, especially with my new baby, I couldn't at that point assume anything else but they were there for harm, especially in the middle of the night.

I'm talking about, lets say I come home and see a guy running across my yard with my pink flamingo.

Mr.FiredUp wrote:

Pace... I'm confused. I agree that property is not worth dying over as I am a Christian man myself. What I don't understand is where anybody said this was over property. As you yourself said, you have drawn on intruders before. If this was all over property, why even draw? If you draw your weapon, you should be willing to take a life. If you did not intend to take a life being that the intruder was looking only for property, you should not have drawn your weapon. If someone is in my home I can only assume he is there for harm and will act as such. I don't believe any of us should own or carry guns with the intent to take a life, but use them to stop someone that intends to take a life without reason. If someone is in my home I can only assume they have chosen to commit a violent act. Therefore, I would kill them to save the innocent.

Carry your weapon in the hope that you never need to draw it... draw your weapon only if you plan to use it.

I brought this all up because I had no idea when anyone said they would shoot over property. Did I miss something?

 

[blueice]

imported post

I am new here and have just gotten my permit to carry but common sense would tell me that, at the point this individual is exiting the residence, it would be ill-advised to shoot. Grabbing the cell and doing the 911 deal would say so much more for responsible gun ownership. I would LIKE to put a round into him but I wouldn`t.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

blueice wrote:

I am new here and have just gotten my permit to carry but common sense would tell me that, at the point this individual is exiting the residence, it would be ill-advised to shoot. Grabbing the cell and doing the 911 deal would say so much more for responsible gun ownership. I would LIKE to put a round into him but I wouldn`t.

Welcome to OCDO Blueice.

The problem with "what if" threads is that there is never enough information and people start presuming, make rash or overly simplistic responses.

Hope you don't judge our collective common sense by the responses of a few. :?

Yours may well be the best reply yet.

Yata hey

 

[bomber]

imported post

Tony Santiago wrote:

You have a family. You awaken to the sound of glass breaking in the front room. You grab your weapon and head out to investigate. As you get to your hall and turn on the light, you look down the hall and see a man, who is armed, that has entered your home.

He sees you, and also sees that you're armed. He fires off two shots at you, but misses. The man proceeds to flee the scene and run out the door. As the man turns around to run out the door, you notice you have a clean shot on him, right in the back.

Do you fire? Would this be justifiable? The man has fled the scene, and is exiting your house. Is he still a threat?

He DID fire two shots at you.

If he leaves, will you have to worry about him coming back at a time when you may not be home?

What would you do in this situation?

i would not hesitate to shoot anyone in the back who had broken into my house. weapon or not. i might roll him over and shoot him in the chest a couple of times, just to even things out.

 

[eye95]

imported post

What would I do? I'd throw my mother-in-law overboard and save the poodle.

Oh, wait. Wrong scenario.

 

[bomber]

imported post

Mr.FiredUp wrote:

I am a Christian man myself.

i dont remember reading anywhere where jesus said it was ok to kill anyone, ever. can you point me to where jesus said he was cool with homicide?

sorry, thats a thread hijack, sort of.

the cool thing about being a non believer is that i can value my own property over someone else's life and not lose any sleep over it.

 

[eye95]

imported post

Just before Jesus was taken, He told his disciples to get swords. The implication was clear. After Jesus was gone, they'd need the swords.

The instruction, had Jesus given it today, would be to get guns.

Please don't imply that someone is somehow less of a Christian because he is willing to defend himself and other innocents. Such an implication is despicable.

 

[Mr.FiredUp]

imported post

eye95 wrote:

Just before Jesus was taken, He told his disciples to get swords.  The implication was clear.  After Jesus was gone, they'd need the swords.

The instruction, had Jesus given it today, would be to get guns.

Please don't imply that someone is somehow less of a Christian because he is willing to defend himself and other innocents.  Such an implication is despicable.

I appreciate the defense. I believe the quote was "If any of you does not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one". And to Bomber... I feel that property is not important. My belief. Yours is what yours is. Don't patronize me, or my beliefs. Especially when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Grapeshot]

imported post

bomber wrote:

Tony Santiago wrote:

You have a family. You awaken to the sound of glass breaking in the front room. You grab your weapon and head out to investigate. As you get to your hall and turn on the light, you look down the hall and see a man, who is armed, that has entered your home.

He sees you, and also sees that you're armed. He fires off two shots at you, but misses. The man proceeds to flee the scene and run out the door. As the man turns around to run out the door, you notice you have a clean shot on him, right in the back.

Do you fire? Would this be justifiable? The man has fled the scene, and is exiting your house. Is he still a threat?

He DID fire two shots at you.

If he leaves, will you have to worry about him coming back at a time when you may not be home?

What would you do in this situation?

Snipped to allow the poster the opportunity to edit/delete

:shock: I'm sorry Mr. Bomber, I didn't hear your answer very well. Could you please speak up so that the jury may hear you better.

Believe you are overdue for some in-service training on what not to say or do.

Yata hey

 

[hopnpop]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

bomber wrote:

Tony Santiago wrote:

You have a family. You awaken to the sound of glass breaking in the front room...

Snipped to allow the poster the opportunity to edit/delete

:shock: I'm sorry Mr. Bomber, I didn't hear your answer very well. Could you please speak up so that the jury may hear you better.

Believe you are overdue for some in-service training on what not to say or do.

Yata hey

+1!! I read that and my face went from to :shock:

 

[bomber]

imported post

eye95 wrote:

Just before Jesus was taken, He told his disciples to get swords.  The implication was clear.  After Jesus was gone, they'd need the swords.

The instruction, had Jesus given it today, would be to get guns.

Please don't imply that someone is somehow less of a Christian because he is willing to defend himself and other innocents.  Such an implication is despicable.

i'm not saying he is less of a christian. i am saying he is a christian who doesnt follow christ

if christ's intention was that the disciples use the swords, why didn't they use them? where is the defensive bloodshed in the NT? why were all but one of the 12 martyred? why is there no mention of them fighting to defend themselves or others? the most they ever did, that we know of, is to run.

 

[bomber]

imported post

Mr.FiredUp wrote:

eye95 wrote:

Just before Jesus was taken, He told his disciples to get swords.  The implication was clear.  After Jesus was gone, they'd need the swords.

The instruction, had Jesus given it today, would be to get guns.

Please don't imply that someone is somehow less of a Christian because he is willing to defend himself and other innocents.  Such an implication is despicable.

I appreciate the defense. I believe the quote was "If any of you does not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one". And to Bomber... I feel that property is not important. My belief. Yours is what yours is. Don't patronize me, or my beliefs. Especially when you don't know what you're talking about.

i do know what i am talking about.

i know that the statement "If any of you does not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" was one of those things christ said to fulfil prophesy, if you ever took time to actually look up the passage, and read the next verse of the passage in luke (37): "For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.".

Please flip your bibles to Isaiah 53:12 "Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

now please lets flip back to luke 22 and finish the passage:
38 They [the disciples] said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"It is enough," he replied.

enough? enough for what? to fight off the romans? hardly.

enough to fulfill the prophesy? yes.

the entirety of modern christianity's justification for self defense rests on this single passage. and its easily shown that it is a contextual rape of the text.

how about another of christ's statements about defense, this one hits home for a lot of us with families
Matthew 10:37-39
37 Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."


i believe wholeheartedly that it is my right to defend myself and my family, and i will do it when i need to. i also believe wholeheartedly that christians who justify self defense within their faith are twisting their own religious text to fit with what they want it to say, and i am going to patronize that as much as i can.

 

[bomber]

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

:shock:  I'm sorry Mr. Bomber, I didn't hear your answer very well.  Could you please speak up so that the jury may hear you better.

Believe you are overdue for some in-service training on what not to say or do.

        Yata hey
[/quote]

I said i would not hesitate to shoot anyone in the back who had broken into my house. weapon or not. i might roll him over and shoot him in the chest a couple of times, just to even things out.

rolling him over was for comic effect, but i am within the laws of my state to shoot any intruder in my home, armed or not, and i would do it. i would do it for just the inconvenience he caused me in breaking my window. if the dipsh*t values my property over his own life, why should i not also abide by the same rule?