• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

At least 8 dead in Mass Shooting du Jour

Derec said:
laughing dog said:
Carrying a weapon in one’s house is not equivalent to carrying on openly in public,
Click to expand...
He wasn't just carrying it around the house, he specifically armed himself to answer the door when the deputy clearly identified himself.
Both parties made mistakes in this tragic encounter. It cost one his life, it may cost the other his freedom or job.
Click to expand...

The Constitution supports his right to be armed, period. This means that once he is armed in his home, he can cook, use the bathroom, and even answer the front door while armed because it is his constitutional right. It's absurd to think the Constitution implies that one can't do anything else while being armed. The Constitution does not support an officer shooting a citizen for exercising his constitutional rights no matter how strongly you feel about it.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
I'll blame both sides here.
Click to expand...
What are you blaming the dead guy for?
Exactly.
I'm not seeing it.
Tom
Click to expand...
Answering the door with a gun.

He went towards danger (as evidenced by his picking up the gun, he considered what was outside dangerous) without adequate reason.
Click to expand...
Someone showed up unexpectedly, claimed to be the police, hid, and when he opened the door they shot him.

I see no way to pin any blaim on the dead guy.
Tom
 
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
I'm sure I could get through our walls (stucco over wood framing) with a hammer and tinsnips. There's utterly no point in door or window defenses tougher than that.
Click to expand...
...unless you plan to start shooting rifle bullets, and want to have at least some clue about where they will end up, when you do.
Click to expand...
You're not making sense.

I'm saying there's no point in making doors and windows hard to break through than walls.

If you're thinking about where a miss goes--the reality is that small, fast bullets tend to shatter when they hit solid things like that stucco layer.
 
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
I'll blame both sides here.
Click to expand...
What are you blaming the dead guy for?
Exactly.
I'm not seeing it.
Tom
Click to expand...
Answering the door with a gun.

He went towards danger (as evidenced by his picking up the gun, he considered what was outside dangerous) without adequate reason.
Click to expand...
Someone showed up unexpectedly, claimed to be the police, hid, and when he opened the door they shot him.

I see no way to pin any blaim on the dead guy.
Tom
Click to expand...
I'm blaming both. Guy did something stupid, system did something stupid. Two stupids met, an innocent ends up dead.
 
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
TomC said:
Loren Pechtel said:
I'll blame both sides here.
Click to expand...
What are you blaming the dead guy for?
Exactly.
I'm not seeing it.
Tom
Click to expand...
Answering the door with a gun.

He went towards danger (as evidenced by his picking up the gun, he considered what was outside dangerous) without adequate reason.
Click to expand...
Someone showed up unexpectedly, claimed to be the police, hid, and when he opened the door they shot him.

I see no way to pin any blaim on the dead guy.
Tom
Click to expand...
You forgot, the police are always right. You silly goose.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
He went towards danger (as evidenced by his picking up the gun, he considered what was outside dangerous that to be his Constitutional right) without adequate reason.
Click to expand...
FTFY.

Americans have a Constitutional right to bear arms.

They are NOT required by any law to avoid going "towards danger"; and "he went towards danger ... without adequate reason" is NOT an adequate justification for summary execution of citizens by law enforcement officers.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
the reality is that small, fast bullets tend to shatter when they hit solid things like that stucco layer.
Click to expand...
The reality is that rifle rounds can easily still be lethal after passing through a wall or door, and there are plenty of recorded cases where bystanders, friends, and family members of a person attempting to defend their home with a firearm have been killed or wounded in this way.

Observed reality trumps hypothesis, even if the hypothesis really, really suits your preferences, biases or prejudices.
 
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
the reality is that small, fast bullets tend to shatter when they hit solid things like that stucco layer.
Click to expand...
The reality is that rifle rounds can easily still be lethal after passing through a wall or door, and there are plenty of recorded cases where bystanders, friends, and family members of a person attempting to defend their home with a firearm have been killed or wounded in this way.

Observed reality trumps hypothesis, even if the hypothesis really, really suits your preferences, biases or prejudices.
Click to expand...
A bullet from an AR15 can travel through 4 inches of wood and still have enough energy to penetrate body armor and kill the human wearing it. A wall with sheetrock and insulation offers considerably less resistance than the wood. A common sidearm round like the 9mm or 45 auto can penetrate through multiple walls and still have enough energy to kill or wound a human.
 
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
 
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
 
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
Deter what? If someone has already invaded your home it’s gone past the point of deterrence. A gun can deter if the invader already knows you have a gun.

Whatever your point here is, it would seem “deter” was the wrong choice in words.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
A bat is a better deterrent than a pistol, if only because it is larger and so more easily seen and appreciated for the dangerous weapon it is.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
The only people who the recoil of a shotgun would be a problem for are people who have little to no experience shooting a shotgun. Such people should never be near such a weapon in the first place.
 
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
A bat is a better deterrent than a pistol, if only because it is larger and so more easily seen and appreciated for the dangerous weapon it is.
Click to expand...
Just the sound of a pump shotgun being cocked can deter many.
 
Shadowy Man said:
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
Deter what? If someone has already invaded your home it’s gone past the point of deterrence. A gun can deter if the invader already knows you have a gun.

Whatever your point here is, it would seem “deter” was the wrong choice in words.
Click to expand...
Deter as in make him depart if there is an actual encounter.
 
ZiprHead said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
A bat is a better deterrent than a pistol, if only because it is larger and so more easily seen and appreciated for the dangerous weapon it is.
Click to expand...
Just the sound of a pump shotgun being cocked can deter many.
Click to expand...
So, recording that sound and having it ready to play back at the touch of a button would seem the safest option ;)
 
bilby said:
ZiprHead said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Loren Pechtel said:
ZiprHead said:
A short barrel shotgun is a far better choice for home protection over a rifle. Birdshot if you want to scare people away, buckshot if you want lethality.
Click to expand...
And a hell of a lot of recoil, unsuitable for many. And that buckshot also goes through walls.
Click to expand...
Hence my recommendation of a baseball bat, (which has neither shortcoming, and is similarly effective at the very short ranges typical of combat inside a home), as the weapon of choice for home defence.
Click to expand...
A bat can clobber, it can't deter.
Click to expand...
A bat is a better deterrent than a pistol, if only because it is larger and so more easily seen and appreciated for the dangerous weapon it is.
Click to expand...
Just the sound of a pump shotgun being cocked can deter many.
Click to expand...
So, recording that sound and having it ready to play back at the touch of a button would seem the safest option ;)
Click to expand...
I actually thought of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom