- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
and let's remember, owning a gun is a high risk business
Sorry but I disagree. I should wait to see what their intentions are? O really? So how do I know when the intentions or good or bad? Countless home invasions end in murder. Use less than lethal when someone breaks into your home? Lets see last week I ended up with 7 stitches in my right forearm while myself, 3 other police officers (2 of which used their tasers), and 2 detention officers tried to end a subjects resistance.
A home invasion is a high risk / high danger / inherently violent crime and to think you will be able to survive by doing your ninja roll across the floor and tasing the subject(s) breaking in is beyond crazy. Most subjects will attempt to break in when someone isn't home as they typical "watch" the house. If they are breaking in when you are there a RED flag should pop up in your minds eye. True they might not have the will to harm you but you are foolish to think maybe this will end with them just taking my belongings and not beating me up, not killing me, not raping me....Instead of "I've trained, I've learned, I'm prepared to protect my home and family." It's different from carrying a gun in public. We can all argue back and forth on that one. A home is a different story.
Will some less than lethal uses of force work.....of course.....but to tell that man who had his home broke into last month he should have waited to see if they were going to kill him or not....all I can say is wow. Luckily he was prepared to return fire and did. This isn't stuff I'm making up. These aren't things that I'm saying I "feel" . This is what I see week in week out. Myself and other officers have been on the receiving end of "you should have waited to see what the subject(s)" was going to do. For example: Officer goes to arrest subject. Subject pulls away from officer's grasp. Subject might just run. Subject might just be upset and doesn't understand what is happening. Public tells the officer to wait and see which is which......
......In my world however. Subject pulls away and you put them down. You prevent the possible fight from happening. You use force one level greater than what resistance or force they have used. Someone breaks into your home while you are there, you have no way of knowing their intentions. Being in any type of fight is not fun AT ALL. Hoping that you will be able to "scare" them away will typically end with one result. These are the stats plain and simple. The number of home invasions that end in some form of violence is high.
Back to waiting to see what will happen. A few of my friends were in a shooting approx 2 months ago. Subject fired multiple shots in the "direction of them." Maybe the subject wanted things to end in suicide by cop or maybe he really wanted to harm them. Either way they didn't have time to hope it was the lesser of the two. They had to act violently towards the violent act.
The world isn't all bad. When things like this happen everyone forgets all of the good. Reason and logic leaves the equation. Bombers have claimed more lives than these shootings. People want to cause harm, they can. You don't fix the problem by weakening people's resolve.
I have to admit that a post like this, from a police officer, is what is most surprising to me, in this whole thread, and it tells me HOW big a difference there is between, not only the general population, but also police, in Europe and in America.
Cleve ...
Scenario 1.) 2 guys come to your house, armed with guns, to get money and your stereo. They see you have a gun, and therefore assume that you're willing to use it. Your family of wife and 2 kids are in the house with you. What is the intruders reaction, and the m,ost likely outcome ?
Scenario 2.) 2 guys come to your house with guns, to get money and your stereo. They see you unarmed, and willing to let them have what they're there for. Again your family is in the house with you. What is their reaction, and the most likely outcome ?
I can not believe, that a police officer would say...shoot...or even...let them know you have a gun. You would NEVER hear a police officer give that advice where I come from. THAT I know.
There are some HUGE differences there, where ever these differences come from, and I would love to know, if that's what police officers are taught in USA...that civilians, in any way shape or form, should get in a fight with intruders ? OR should a civillian do everything they can to diffuse the situation, and get the intruders out of their home as fast and painless as possible, at any material cost, and let the police do their job ?
I'm seriously curious about this.
well maybe we should just take all the guns from the soldiers on one side after all there to enforce with extreme prejudice the will of some fat bourbon drinking politicians that don't have the backbone to do the dirty work
point is a man has the right to use deadly force to protect his family against a home invasion period
So you think you'll need to shoot 15 people before reloading or 14 warning shots?
Start asking yourselves what's better for the country and not what's better for you.
I hope I don't need to shoot anyone, btw it's 16 rounds you added wrong.
My current job/business for the past 15 years isn't a police officer but I have many of the same duties as an armored car service such as Brinks, or Wells Fargo. I must carry each day, just like Cleveland cause I want to go home at night and be with my family too.
So you don't really know what's better for me as you've never spent a day in the city with me, going in and out of places all day and areas that many people wouldn't even get out of their car at.
Even at the cost of 1 or more of their family members life ?
What family members life? I'm not sure of many if any incidents where someone's home was broke into, the homeowner then tried to defend it with a firearm, thus causing the death of a family member. I wouldn't be surprised if it has happened but I'm sure its rarer than a U.S. player playing at 32red these days. However I can recall many incidents where a firearm has saved the lives of the family inside the home.
edit: I'm getting confused as to what the topic is at this point. I'm throwing in the towel. Mainly because I know these issues won't be solved like this. I will end in saying this though. The core of the problem isn't a homeowner that has a firearm in their bedroom.
Now isn't that interesting...
I know a guy who used to drive a money transport somewhere in Europe.
I noticed that they're not armed, and thought.....after watching American movies, that it was the norm, to be armed in a job like that.
When I asked him why they're not armed, he looked at me like I was nuts, and said "Do you think I go to work to get killed " ???
There is NO way they WANT to be armed, as it invites people to shoot at them, to get what they want. The cars are "bulletproof", and very hard to get into, and if they're robbed while outside the car, they give them what they want, and again....let the police do their job. Most of the money will be coloured, and worthless, after a short time anyway.
Since it's not easy to get to the money in the first place, and the money will be ruined after a while, very few people even try. I think in the 48 years I've been around 3 or 4 money transports were successfully robbed, where I come from, and 0 people have been killed doing their job, transporting money. Had they been armed, I am, and the people working in that business, are sure those numbers would be different.
There are obviously ... as I said before, some very big differences, in the mentality between American people and a lot of the rest of the world
well maybe we should just take all the guns from the soldiers on one side after all there to enforce with extreme prejudice the will of some fat bourbon drinking politicians that don't have the backbone to do the dirty work
point is a man has the right to use deadly force to protect his family against a home invasion period
Ahh, that's the Chicago way... You use force one level greater than what resistance or force they have used...
Malone: You wanna know how to get Capone? They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. *That's* the *Chicago* way! And that's how you get Capone...
No reason for confusion, what we are seeing here is the amazing differences in cultures, but these differences intersect in many ways. It has to do with attitudes. Look at the alcohol culture in Germany. The drinking age is sixteen. Beer is served everywhere to include school activities as long as one is of age. Yet even so, you just don't see people getting wasted like you do in the UK or the US (sorry Brits, but you drink to get drunk ). You do end up with drunk teenagers sometimes, but it's never been so bad as to prohibit their drinking. It's part of the culture....edit: I'm getting confused as to what the topic is at this point. I'm throwing in the towel. Mainly because I know these issues won't be solved like this. I will end in saying this though. The core of the problem isn't a homeowner that has a firearm in their bedroom.
Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands have a combined population of almost 391 million, as compared to the United States’ less than 312 million. The total number of gun homicides in those countries in the latest available year — 2010 for Germany, 2009 for the others — was 906. In the United States in 2010, that number was 9,960, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Ok this makes much more sense to me now!
Canada has almost 40 million.
UK has about 50-55 million? (I forget)
USA has 330 million.
This is a HUGE HUGE difference.
Canada is one of the lowest in the world of population density, whereas UK is one of the highest.
As you can tell I have been racking my brain to figure out why it seems like we have psychos on every corner, but now it is more clear to me.
maybe you should review some land mark atrocities that home invasions by one or more [breaking and entering ] have resulted in = im taking the decision weather to shoot to kill or shoot to stop when they come breaking in
and rest asure im not interviewing them
Sorry but I disagree. I should wait to see what their intentions are? O really? So how do I know when the intentions or good or bad? Countless home invasions end in murder. Use less than lethal when someone breaks into your home? Lets see last week I ended up with 7 stitches in my right forearm while myself, 3 other police officers (2 of which used their tasers), and 2 detention officers tried to end a subjects resistance.
A home invasion is a high risk / high danger / inherently violent crime and to think you will be able to survive by doing your ninja roll across the floor and tasing the subject(s) breaking in is beyond crazy. Most subjects will attempt to break in when someone isn't home as they typical "watch" the house. If they are breaking in when you are there a RED flag should pop up in your minds eye. True they might not have the will to harm you but you are foolish to think maybe this will end with them just taking my belongings and not beating me up, not killing me, not raping me....Instead of "I've trained, I've learned, I'm prepared to protect my home and family." It's different from carrying a gun in public. We can all argue back and forth on that one. A home is a different story.
Will some less than lethal uses of force work.....of course.....but to tell that man who had his home broke into last month he should have waited to see if they were going to kill him or not....all I can say is wow. Luckily he was prepared to return fire and did. This isn't stuff I'm making up. These aren't things that I'm saying I "feel" . This is what I see week in week out. Myself and other officers have been on the receiving end of "you should have waited to see what the subject(s)" was going to do. For example: Officer goes to arrest subject. Subject pulls away from officer's grasp. Subject might just run. Subject might just be upset and doesn't understand what is happening. Public tells the officer to wait and see which is which......
......In my world however. Subject pulls away and you put them down. You prevent the possible fight from happening. You use force one level greater than what resistance or force they have used. Someone breaks into your home while you are there, you have no way of knowing their intentions. Being in any type of fight is not fun AT ALL. Hoping that you will be able to "scare" them away will typically end with one result. These are the stats plain and simple. The number of home invasions that end in some form of violence is high.
Back to waiting to see what will happen. A few of my friends were in a shooting approx 2 months ago. Subject fired multiple shots in the "direction of them." Maybe the subject wanted things to end in suicide by cop or maybe he really wanted to harm them. Either way they didn't have time to hope it was the lesser of the two. They had to act violently towards the violent act.
The world isn't all bad. When things like this happen everyone forgets all of the good. Reason and logic leaves the equation. Bombers have claimed more lives than these shootings. People want to cause harm, they can. You don't fix the problem by weakening people's resolve.
LaHutti:
The point of my post isn't for someone to engage in combat. The point of my post is to be prepared. Taking away every honest citizens guns (from their home) and then telling them to wait for police to arrive is akin to putting them at the mercy of any bad element. Its a fact that violent crimes happen every day to good people. What would be the harm of a citizen training for the worst and hoping for the best and that same citizen then having a firearm in a secured area of the house? Those examples you gave can go either way. As an officer who takes pride in my profession, I realize this and as such train accordingly.
There are places with gun bans that also have the highest violent crime rates. How will taking away my ability to have a gun inside my home lower the crime rate? I will always tell a citizen to be prepared to protect their homes. Any police officer that says wait on us is not only a fool but shouldn't be an Officer. Burst blood vessels in both eyes, swelling on the left cheek, two black eyes, bruising around the neck from being chocked, is what I've seen when I looked into her face when she tried waiting on us to arrive. And then I've been faced with that question from family members: "Why did it take you so long to get there?" In that moment its very hard to explain the nature of police response times. If you are in your home you should be prepared to protect it. We are talking HOMES here not some idiot vigilant running around the city with a gun.
As for as "America." Using the same logic that "if we could just prevent one mass shooting its worth it." Well you know what many other country's that are such great places to live with better laws have fallen victim to mass shootings. O how quick we forget. Maybe if someone was prepared to return fire the incident in those other countries wouldn't have ended with so many dead. After all that country has the right rules / laws in place....Well....Guess what still happened? Enforce the laws we have in place, make them stricter, force those who want to keep a gun in their home to attend yearly training.....I don't care. But don't weaken my ability to protect my family because of random acts of evil. An evil act touches everyone's heart strings and causes their sight to become blurred.
I hope I don't need to shoot anyone, btw it's 16 rounds you added wrong.
My current job/business for the past 15 years isn't a police officer but I have many of the same duties as an armored car service such as Brinks, or Wells Fargo. I must carry each day, just like Cleveland cause I want to go home at night and be with my family too.
So you don't really know what's better for me as you've never spent a day in the city with me, going in and out of places all day and areas that many people wouldn't even get out of their car at.
What family members life? I'm not sure of many if any incidents where someone's home was broke into, the homeowner then tried to defend it with a firearm, thus causing the death of a family member. I wouldn't be surprised if it has happened but I'm sure its rarer than a U.S. player playing at 32red these days. However I can recall many incidents where a firearm has saved the lives of the family inside the home.
edit: I'm getting confused as to what the topic is at this point. I'm throwing in the towel. Mainly because I know these issues won't be solved like this. I will end in saying this though. The core of the problem isn't a homeowner that has a firearm in their bedroom.
Interesting comments here as well:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
The US gun crime is 10 times higher. And it's the only country that has lax gun laws. Sadly there is not much anyone can do about it. No one has either the answers or the guts to make a change.
Throwing down a criminal isn't quite the same as taking shots at him in the dark when you've been awake for 45 seconds.
Any police officer that says "It'll take us a while to get there so you better just start without us." Shouldn't be a police officer. It's just that simple. It's a completely irresponsible attitude.
It goes back further than that RE: Max's avatar....
The problem goes way back to Cain...
It goes back further than that RE: Max's avatar.
.....and women don't?
A remark from the stone age there rocky.
The soldier comment....really??