• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Wrong door shootings.

Steve said:
Can you connect this to the topic of the thread - you know, Wrong Door Shootings - where the shot person was doing none of the actions you describe? Do you see any moral objection to such shootings? Do you think that the shooter in such cases is likely have no remorse, no following ptsd, and will just carry on with their life as if they never shot anyone?
Click to expand...

All of the shootings mentioned in the OP are clearly immoral and criminal.
 
Meanwhile, a Doordash delivery goes to the wrong address.

They never even get out of the car. Homeowner shoots their car. Local law enforcement state that they will not press charges because the homeowner was justified.

Couple Delivering Instacart Groceries Says Car Was Shot at After They Drove to Wrong Address

Waldes Thomas said he was delivering for Instacart Saturday, and his girlfriend Diamond D'arville was with him. They were on the phone with the customer trying to find her address but ended up at another home on Southwest 178th Avenue. As they were about to drive off the property, they saw a flashlight.

"He's like, 'Who are you?' and we're saying we're with Instacart," D’arville said.

D'arville said they thought this could’ve been the person they were supposed to deliver to, but things took a terrible turn.

“The guy gets in his truck and reverses, and he pulls up behind us,” D’arville said.

When they tried to get away, that's when she saw a man pull out a gun.
Click to expand...
"(A detective) asked if we wanted to prosecute and we agreed to do that, but he said since they didn't break any laws or do anything unlawful, they couldn't do anything because we were on their property,” D’arville said.
Click to expand...

The moral of the story: If you cross one inch onto private property without clear explicit permission from the owner, your life if forfeit. No matter how accidental, human mistakes are NOT TOLERATED.

What a bloodthirsty barbaric society we have become.
 
crescent said:
Meanwhile, a Doordash delivery goes to the wrong address.

They never even get out of the car. Homeowner shoots their car. Local law enforcement state that they will not press charges because the homeowner was justified.

Couple Delivering Instacart Groceries Says Car Was Shot at After They Drove to Wrong Address




The moral of the story: If you cross one inch onto private property without clear explicit permission from the owner, your life if forfeit. No matter how accidental, human mistakes are NOT TOLERATED.

What a bloodthirsty barbaric society we have become.
Click to expand...

Bloodthirsty and barbaric are not so bad. This is cowardice. And I'm hoping the courts will find that the cops are way wrong in their assessment of legality
 
Thermal said:
I don't want guns at the ready in my home for exactly this reason. That's not the kind of blood I want on my hands. I've had strangers walk right through my front door on several occasions, none of which were actually a home invasion (summer renters walking in the wrong house, plumber working on the next door neighbors house, teen boys who probably thought it was empty during major remodeling), and I likely could have killed like a half dozen or more so far and have faced no charges. There may come a day when a real invader comes to do us harm, and I guess I'll be throwing my dice then. But just like I don't have a nuclear fallout shelter in place, I don't want the nuclear option readily handy. I couldn't live with the consequences of a bad guess.
Click to expand...

I have had one person try to get into my house when I didn't want him to, when I was living in Aldershot. He was very drunk and seemed to be convinced it was his house. I pushed hi put, fairly gently but firmly and as he wouldn't go away, informed the police - and because it was the UK, it was as much for his safety as mine, as sleeping it off in a cell was probably a place where he wouldn't wander into traffic etc, and the police were not primed for a violent confrontation.
 
jimbob said:
I have had one person try to get into my house when I didn't want him to, when I was living in Aldershot. He was very drunk and seemed to be convinced it was his house. I pushed hi put, fairly gently but firmly and as he wouldn't go away, informed the police - and because it was the UK, it was as much for his safety as mine, as sleeping it off in a cell was probably a place where he wouldn't wander into traffic etc, and the police were not primed for a violent confrontation.
Click to expand...

As strange as it sounds, I'd be highly reluctant to call police here in the States, as things would be virtually guaranteed to go downhill for all involved. I mean that without an ounce of hyperbolic cynicism.
 
Ryan O'Dine said:
The moral objection to shooting someone is in potentially taking their life.

Even if justified -- even if it's kill or die -- it should be morally repugnant. You should have to overcome a deeply ingrained resistance to it, whatever the circumstances.

In the cases presented in this thread, where it's nowhere close to kill or die, I don't know how you can avoid the implication that there's something fundamentally lacking in the shooter on a very deep, ethical level.
Click to expand...

I agree. From what I’ve understood a large part of military training is to help get people to a point where they can kill another person.
 
My buddy bought some land in Georgia and the other day he uploaded a video of himself walking around his farm with a rifle saying he thinks he heard some trespassers on his property.

I had a short convo with him over social media and he's adamant that he's allowed to do what he wants in his own property.

To me this is just toxic hyperindividualist ********. Driving instructors talk about defensive driving, taking into account other people's actions on the road to avoid trouble whenever possible. How about we start talking about defensive fire rather than shoot first no matter who cuz it's my right?
 
This is absolutely nowhere as complicated as we, well one of us, is pretending it is.

If the military, as imperfect as it is, can take an 18 year old from Dishrage WV and in 8 weeks of bootcamp (while teaching them a bunch of other stuff) drill the concept of Opportunity, Intent, and Ability as the requirements for the use of lethal force into them to the point that it functionally works well enough that it can at least be used as a legal standard you can hold people to, it can work. "But can it work what if blah blah blah strawman in the other direction" is not a valid argument.

The deployment of lethal force in a dynamic, high stress environment being "a thing that can reach a level of good enough" is a fact and it is not up for honest debate.

"Can a reasonable legal standard exist where in most cases a person can defend themselves without being allowed to deploy lethal force against people who aren't a valid threat?" is a question that got answered with the resounding "Obviously!" a long, long, long time ago.

Running a trolley problem trying to figure out exactly where "I jump straight to Stage: Gunning the kid who's basketball rolled to the edge of my property line" becomes "LOL but the maniac running at the home owner with a machete screaming 'I'm going to kill you, here's my notarized Going To Kill You Form didn't have the form signed in triplicate only initialed so the guy is a murderer" isn't a discussion we have to have because, ******* news flash, only one of those events ACTUALLY HAPPENED!
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
And literally everything is a drug deal or gang sign.

Few weeks back city works, in like actual City of Jacksonville branded utility trucks, drove around the neighborhood and spray painted a small orange symbol on certain drain openings, I'm assuming marking them for some kind of check or maintance or whatnot. Like I saw them do it and I work all day and I pay zero attention to the neighborhood and I still noticed them. No way the busy-bodies didn't.

But the next day "OMG is this a gang sign? Time to move! Gang signs all over the neighborhood!"
Click to expand...
Try Dublin in the run-up to Biden's visit....
 
Darat said:
I think Joe may have got it wrong. I think that's the new school bus for the district.
Click to expand...

Given the youtube videos of idiot drivers crashing into and roaring past school buses with their stop signs deployed, you may be onto a good idea...

Get a few MRAPs and paint them yellow.
 
sackett said:
God love ya, Ryan, we all wish that "should" was an ingrained "will" in human nature.

Many a killer, convicted murderer or decorated hero, will tell you how easy it is to take a life.

A few members of this forum could do it.
Click to expand...

Given the sample size, I'd suggest that it is likely that a handful of members have done it.
 
novaphile said:
Given the sample size, I'd suggest that it is likely that a handful of members have done it.
Click to expand...

And yet, one member once posted, "I killed a man" in a thread some years ago. Nobody followed it up. I don't care to follow it up either.

My only point is that killing comes easily to Homo sapiens.

Well, all right, here's a further assertion. We don't have much luck regulating human nature. But we can regulate gun posession.

Don't reckon I have much else to contribute here.
 
Thermal said:
There's a Netflix show about a convicted murderer who gives some kind of Silence of the Lambs advice about killers, and on the trailer he says something about "everyone can murder. It just takes crossing paths with the right person and circumstances"
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that about murder. I do about manslaughter.
 
Hercules56 said:
My first comment in this thread was in support of much stronger gun control, nationwide.
Click to expand...

Even if there was universal strong gun control across the USA, it would still need government, courts, public and police support to enforce that control.

Europe has strong gun control and everyone agrees with it. The USA has patchy gun control, with many disagreeing with it. That perfect strong means the USA just has to live, and die, with regular mass, gang, domestic, commission of crime, accidental and wrong door shootings.
 
Hercules56 said:
We don't have any laws that favor armed victims over unarmed criminals. Unless the criminal is capable of killing you with his bare hands.
Click to expand...

The unarmed person who gets shot is the victim and the armed person who does the shooting is the criminal.

You tried to deny my point but you confirmed it by the way you framed your reply.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom