quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

When you get done, I'll tell them, liberal lesson 101 - zero responsibility and everything is someone else's fault.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

When you get done, I'll tell them, liberal lesson 101 - zero responsibility and everything is someone else's fault.

Actually, lesson 101 is that you're accountable for your own actions, and that with freedom comes responsibility.

If you don't need someone to regulate your behavior, what would make you think everyone else does?

My parents actually did teach me to drink, as well as how and why not to get drunk.

While the kids whose parents moralized were getting drunk out of their heads, with a good number having unprotected sex while they were at it, I would enjoy a glass of fine wine with a home cooked meal together with some friends that I was able to show the merits of having a good time and remembering it the next day.

It never ceases to amaze me how readily some people will dismiss statistics and research that clearly demonstrate that restrictiveness and moralizing is causally related to a poorer outcome on average. It's as inane as teaching abstinence in schools, or doing that crazy "pledge" thing, both of which are near ideal recipes for teen pregnancies and early debuts with riskier, kinkier sex with more partners.

Health,
al-Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn



So parents in the 2/3ds of  US households who do not posses guns are deficient in not instructing the children how to use a weapon that is not in the house.

Interesting.

It is impossible for parents to train their children for every possible specific occurrence in life.

My parents could not give me specific training on how to avoid bad jobs, bad girlfriends, bad teachers, bad roommates, etc.

What I learned most from them is how to deal with various and sundry adverse situations by using one's wits as best possible. No perfect solution for the majority of unsuspected surprises in life.

They didn't teach me how to deal with bullies or viscious dogs (before leash laws)  or gay men relentlessly pursuing a 13-14 year old, or a lot of other things. I found out how to deal with all that on my own, and considering all the bizarre things that happened to me even before I moved out, I can't blame the parents here. They were too  busy working their arse off and dealing with the 'special situation' of some of their kids.

The world is just too weird for any parent to keep up with.

So yeah, sorry if gun training was missed out in all that. My parents and I were both too busy with a lot of other things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

But in any case Georgia law allows gun possession (concealed weapon law) in bars, taverns, the public transportation system, public parks ... anywhere in public, actually.

Thank goodness!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

Boy, I feel so much safer now, how 'bout you? You been into bars or on public trans lately?

I feel safer.  I am safer.

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardcybermaster
Do you really not make any distinction between a killer/rapist and someone sneaking in to steal your i pod and kick your dog?
You would really kill someone to protect a laptop or a phone?

The law here says that you cannot use deadly force to protect private property. That means if someone is stealing your vehicle from your driveway you cannot open fire on them. Fair enough. Once they forcibly enter your home that rule goes out the window. I have no duty to retreat and the use of deadly force is now warranted. If you break into my home why you are there is irrelevant to me. I don't have time to interview you and analyze your motives nor do I feel compelled to frisk you for weapons before I open fire. Rest assured, I will open fire.

The idiocy of your logic (and that of some of the other mental midgets in this thread) is mind boggling. You'll ask "You would really kill someone to protect a laptop or a phone?" yet you won't ask the burglar "Is it really worth risking your life to get that laptop or cell phone?". Astounding. All of the onus is upon the homeowner. None on the criminal. They are the ones who created the situation but they are not held accountable. The only accountability is in the manner I choose to respond. Amazing. Truly amazing.

Lastly, to answer your question - yes. I absolutely would kill someone to protect the property in my home. I'm an honest man. I am a law abiding citizen. I work hard every day and the things I own have meaning to me or I would not own them. I have already been robbed once. I am tired of these predators who think that they can just kick down someone's door and take whatever they wish. If someone breaks in my home and I am certain they are unarmed and I am certain they intend me no harm and I am certain they are only there to steal my television I am still going to do everything in my power to see that they leave the premises in a body bag. If you don't like that then don't break into my home.

Coddle the criminals all you wish. Just don't count me in,.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joybaby

So, because your fellow drunk drivers acted one way, all gun owners must then be the exact same? I can't speak for your friends, as I've never seen their packages, but what do you suppose I'm compensating for, since I'm female? I'm quite happy with the size of what I've got. It always eventually comes down to this level when the other arguments just aren't effective.

FWIW, I've heard the same things said about motorcyclists, that they're compensating for their owners' packages. And nice cars. And vacation homes. It must be loads of fun to be male and have every little thing you do put your masculinity into question.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Does that make your balls feel bigger?

I seriously doubt it, but I'm beginning to suspect that making these kinds of posts makes yours feel bigger.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad


Nobody said it was the gun owner's fault.
Actually, you did say it was the gun owners fault because you thought he didn't have enough security.

Incidentally, a window isn't exactly a layer of security.
If a window isn't a layer of security, then what is the point of locking a door?  It may not be the MOST secure, but it is still a layer of security. 

quote:

I suppose that if the kids broke into the homeowners locked shed and stole an axe, then hit you with it, that would again be the homeowners fault?

Compare the size of the kill zone.

The axe can't readily accomplish an accident at 400 meters.
The discussion is over fault and liability, not size of any supposed "kill zone".  When you are talking about apples you can't switch to oranges.

quote:

How many layers of security do you have on your own home to keep burglars out?

Rent-a-cop. Motion detection. Offsite camera feed. Window and door sensors. Hardened windows.
So since the topic is necessary layers of protection your suggestion is that any home owner that has a firearm in the house must have all of these safeguards in place to avoid liability if someone happens to break in and take the firearm?

Also, stealing is hard when you're blind, on fire, and have me closing with a steel hanbo.
Which has to do with what topic?

But, yeah, I will admit to being somewhat lax about security these days.

quote:

Or maybe they break in to your locked garage, steal your car, then have a hit and run accident where someone dies.

Attempting to steal any car of mine would be inadvisable.
Advisable or not, the question again is, is the car owner the one at fault if the car is stolen and ends up in a hit and run?  If you want to discuss something, then try to stay on topic.

quote:

Is that your fault for not securing your car better?

Again, nobody is concerned with blame, or claiming you're at fault.
And again, blame and fault IS what you claim when you say the home owner didn't provide enough security!

This is a statistics thing. On a population scale, the number of accidents is staggering. Taking steps to remedy that situation is done by the individual, responsible citizens who care about their role in these statistics. If I go bareback a random stranger, it's almost no risk at all to me. But on a population scale, it's citizens not using condoms that is the root cause of the sustained existence of STDs. Whether or not I am comfortable with the risk, I use a condom as a matter of being a good citizen, shouldering my part of the responsibility for the public health. It's a small sacrifice, on par with taking the time to secure a firearm when leaving it unattended.
And I say that he did secure it when he locked the door.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

quote:

After having been shot I can see why your opinion is what it is, but I don't agree with your assessment as to the gun owner being at fault.

Just repeating it one final time for clarity: the gun owner was not at fault here. Don't blame him for leaving an unsecured gun then try to say that there was no fault.  A woman walking down a dark alley alone in a bad part of town is not to blame for being raped; the blame rests squarely with the attacker. But both could take some steps to reduce the likelihood of a problem arising. This is not an obligation of theirs. But there is such a thing as going above and beyond the call of duty.  I understand the correlation you are trying to make, but again it is really apples and oranges.

quote:

If you want to place blame then put the blame where it belongs.  On the kids, and on the kids' parents for not teaching them to not steal.

Obviously. We're in perfect agreement on this point.

quote:

Instead, you blame the gun owner, even though he had a locked house, and you make excuses for the kids by saying they were just up to mischief, and "they didn't know the gun was loaded", and "they didn't intend to shoot me".

Excuses are irrelevant. I deal with cause and effect. I'm saying it's understandable how it happened, and that it does not require malice. I'm pointing out that it would not have happened if there weren't a round in the chamber, or if the rifle had been stored securely. It also would not have happened if the kids had not broken into a locked house!  Also, it would not have happened if the kids weren't who they were, or their parents handled things differently, or if I didn't stick around, or any of a number of other contributory factors. Incidentally, the law up here dictates the rifle goes in a locked rifle cabinet, seperate from its ammunition, and the failure to pay attention to that is a felony crime, making the gun owner a criminal.  He very well may also have broken local laws, but the resulting accident would not have happened had the kids had any respect for other peoples property and belongings.  The kids, on the other hand, are below the age of criminal culpability, making them non-criminals in the eyes of the law. It's pretty pointless to argue about what to call the parties.  Criminal activity, regardless of age, is still criminal activity no matter whether your local laws want to see it as such or not.  To try to say it was not the kids fault for breaking in to someone's house simply because your local laws don't want to call it criminal activity due to their age is ridiculous.

If I walk on by while someone is beating you up, I'm not to blame for your injuries.

But I could intervene, or at least call 911, and it would help you significantly.

Don't be so eager to go with the lowest common denominator.

What does it cost you to make the extra effort?
And all of this has what to do with kids breaking into someone's house, stealing a gun, and shooting someone?
Health,
al-Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Yeah, it's always good to have a drunk in a bar with a gun.

Do you ever go to bars Firm?

Do you know how often fights break out at even the most respectable places?

Yet you are thrilled to add guns to that mix.

Virginia's bars and restaurants did not turn into shooting galleries as some had feared during the first year of a new state law that allows patrons with permits to carry concealed guns into alcohol-serving businesses, a Richmond Times-Dispatch analysis found.

The number of major crimes involving firearms at bars and restaurants statewide declined 5.2 percent from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2011, compared with the fiscal year before the law went into effect, according to crime data compiled by Virginia State Police at the newspaper's request.

And overall, the crimes that occurred during the law's first year were relatively minor, and few of the incidents appeared to involve gun owners with concealed-carry permits, the analysis found.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

So parents in the 2/3ds of  US households who do not posses guns are deficient in not instructing the children how to use a weapon that is not in the house.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

My parents could not give me specific training on how to avoid bad jobs, bad girlfriends, bad teachers, bad roommates, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

What I learned most from them is how to deal with various and sundry adverse situations by using one's wits as best possible. No perfect solution for the majority of unsuspected surprises in life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

They didn't teach me how to deal with bullies or viscious dogs (before leash laws)  or gay men relentlessly pursuing a 13-14 year old, or a lot of other things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

I found out how to deal with all that on my own, and considering all the bizarre things that happened to me even before I moved out, I can't blame the parents here. They were too  busy working their arse off and dealing with the 'special situation' of some of their kids.

The world is just too weird for any parent to keep up with.

So yeah, sorry if gun training was missed out in all that. My parents and I were both too busy with a lot of other things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

You delude yourself into thinking you 'taught' your kids all those things.

They have enough respect for you to not inform you of all the things they learned otherwise.

My own parents were not deficient in any regard, whatever your poorly veiled implications in that stumbling attempt misstate otherwise.