UPDATE: Elderly Man Defends Himself in Home Invasion, 1 Person Dead

[sarisataka]

UPDATE: Elderly Man Defends Himself in Home Invasion, 1 Person Dead

Fairmont police have identified the three people involved in Tuesday morning's deadly home invasion on the 700 block of Gaston Avenue.

Upon arriving at a residence, police said they found a man dressed in black lying in the road with a gunshot wound to his head/neck. He has been identified as Larry Shaver, 28, of Fairmont. Shaver was later pronounced dead at the scene.

They also found another man shot in the lower torso, across the street. He has been identified as John Grossklaus, 28, of Fairmont.

An 80-year-old man living in the residence said Shaver, Grossklaus and a woman attempted to rob him after the woman came to his door, asking to use his phone for an emergency, according to a press release from the Fairmont Police Department. When he let her in, two men dressed in dark clothes entered the home, showed what appeared to be a handgun, and demanded items from the victim.

http://www.wvalways.com/story/31758109/fairmont-police-investigate-shooting

Should the homeowner have taken on the three assailants bare-handed for the good of society?

[ViseGrip]

1. How about for the 'good of him' it's his right.

[840high]

28. .that^

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

2. Good for him. With three assailants,

you really do have to shoot to kill or cause such harm as to immobilize the home invaders. An elderly person certainly can't take on three people - even if they're wounded.

[heaven05]

3. per your last question

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 10:11 AM - Edit history (1)

no. He defended himself against those who had no right to do what they did. Threaten to rob him while brandishing a deadly weapon. If he had been unarmed, these vicious animals would have more than likely ended this gentlemans life since life is not respected by these types. I would do the same.

[DashOneBravo]

4. + 1

[needledriver]

5. You're completely missing the point!!1!1!

Because it is possible for Innocent Children™ to gain access to poorly secured firearms, elderly people do not have the right to use firearms to defend themselves because the lives of Innocent Children™ are automatically more valuable than the lives of elderly people because reasons.

[ileus]

6. You're supposed to be dead by 80 anyway, not very nice of him.

[Eleanors38]

7. Guns or no, NEVER attack an old man...

They don't have the strength to fight a younger person. So they are more likely to kill you.

If thenstate has felony murder laws, there is a strong likelihood the survivors will be Warehoused in the Obsolete Surplus Dept.

[Marengo]

8. He should have retreated to his panic room constructed of derelict refrigerators.

After all, his life isn't as important as some others and his gun puts people entirely unrelated and unknown to him in danger:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=188993

[MillennialDem]

9. I see my post of several weeks ago is still getting to you

Because you know by the law of large numbers, it's true in the aggregate (but not individual situations of course, every one is different) so you have to straw man that I said it's better in all cases.

And in any case, while this happened, there were 2 fatal accidents by gun, 33 murders by gun, and 67 suicides by gun.

But keep it up, you guys kill yourselves faster than anyone else.

[beevul]

10. How many DGUs?

And in any case, while this happened, there were 2 fatal accidents by gun, 33 murders by gun, and 67 suicides by gun.

How many DGUs?

But keep it up, you guys kill yourselves faster than anyone else.

Right. Because the misuse of less than .1 percent of all guns, by less than .1 percent of the people that own them, equates to "you guys".

[MillennialDem]

11. IDK, but we know threatening people needlessly with a gun

counts as a DGU in your opinion.

Now, for serious we don't know how many DGUs there are. There's never been an open, falsifiable study on this, especially one that also controls for instances where the criminal is scared off even in the absence of a gun.

And yes, you guys are causing deaths. And I know most of you have likely had a negligent discharge or at least a close call to one. But it's alright.

[beevul]

12. Its not nice...

IDK, but we know threatening people needlessly with a gun counts as a DGU in your opinion.

Its not nice to attribute to others, sentiments which they have not expressed, like you just did. Disingenuous much?

Now, for serious we don't know how many DGUs there are. There's never been an open, falsifiable study on this, especially one that also controls for instances where the criminal is scared off even in the absence of a gun.

What does a criminal scared off where there is no gun, have to do with DGUs where there IS a gun?

And yes, you guys are causing deaths.

Who "you guys"?

And I know most of you have likely had a negligent discharge or at least a close call to one.

You are assuming facts not in evidence.

[MillennialDem]

13. Because it's not a legitimate reason to have guns if most criminals are scared off by

assertive citizens, rather than the fact that assertive citizens have guns.

Another DGU. Most gun nuts are compensating and just want to push people around. Glad the biker was having none of it

[beevul]

14. Says who?

Because it's not a legitimate reason to have guns if most criminals are scared off by assertive citizens, rather than the fact that assertive citizens have guns.

Says who? You? In America, the only legitimate reason that matters for the law abiding is "because I decided I'm going to have a gun".

That must just burn you up.

Another DGU.

You count that as a DGU?

Most gun nuts are compensating and just want to push people around.

Yet anti-gun bullies are the ones trying to dictate the actions of tens of millions of people, not "gun nuts".

If "push people around" is the metric, the anti-gun bullies have the 'gun nuts' beat hands down, since anti-gunners are about as pushy a bunch as anyone can find.

[MillennialDem]

15. Yes says me.

You count that as a DGU?

No, but most firearms enthusiasts do.

Yet anti-gun bullies are the ones trying to dictate the actions of tens of millions of people, not "gun nuts".

If "push people around" is the metric, the anti-gun bullies have the 'gun nuts' beat hands down, since anti-gunners are about as pushy a bunch as anyone can find.

Lack of access to a firearm is not pushing someone around. Sticking a gun in their face is. Or secretly fantasizing about wanting to shoot that shitty driver in traffic, the boss who gave you a bad review, or that store clerk who wouldn't give you a refund.

[beevul]

18. Color me shocked...

Yes says me.

Color me shocked.

No, but most firearms enthusiasts do.

Surrrrre. Sure they do.

Lack of access to a firearm is not pushing someone around.

Trying to take away the access from the current 300+million people that have it is.

Its the textbook definition.

Sticking a gun in their face is.

Get back to me when this becomes the rule, rather than the noteworthy exceptional outlier that everyone here including you knows it that is.

Or secretly fantasizing about wanting to shoot that shitty driver in traffic, the boss who gave you a bad review, or that store clerk who wouldn't give you a refund.

More outliers.

That all you got?

Unoriginal, and unimpressive.

[MillennialDem]

23. And shooting a criminal in justified self defense is an outlier.

[beevul]

31. Did someone say it wasn't?

In most DGUs there are no shots fired.

[TeddyR]

16. So in your opinion

What is a "legitimate reason to have guns"? I mean, other than the fact that the Constitution prohibits the government from infringing on the right to keep and bear arms.

[MillennialDem]

17. There isn't one, unless you're in the military.

[TeddyR]

20. The Second Amendment only applies to the military?

There's nothing in the Constitution to support that idea.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

21. Your opposition to self-defense is noted

[MillennialDem]

24. No opposition to self defense, just using guns to stick in someone's face who pisses you off becaus

e of their (or your) driving.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

30. I'm unaware of any self-defense training integrating firearms that...

...advocate that to which you're opposed. There are already laws against such behavior.

[friendly_iconoclast]

35. And neither is your interlocutor- that is a red herring

[Lizzie Poppet]

32. "Most gun nuts are compensating"

FFS, are there any more vacuous gun-controller cliche's you'd like to trot out?

[DashOneBravo]

40. Ah come on Lizzie!

There has got to be an underlying reason why a female would shoot competition.

You can share with the group, we don't judge.

[Straw Man]

33. If you believe that video isn't staged ...

... then I'll need your bank account number and password so I can deposit a check for the $10 million that my uncle in Nigeria left me in his will. You can have 10%. I promise.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. If assertive citizens and derelict refrigerators are sufficient to ward off criminal behavior you

Last edited Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:20 AM - Edit history (1)

don't need gun control.

[sarisataka]

19. A fascinating disconnect...

willing to reject all DGU studies made by credentialed social scientists because the studies do not meet a ridiculous personal standard.

Yet will put out accusations of mass negligence based nothing more than on fantasy and prejudice.

[DonP]

22. Just another online "commando" hoping for a hide

Another "sincere" and "better than us" gun control "supporter" that gets their facts from bumper stickers and Everytown press releases and doesn't really do anything in the real world in support of their so called "beliefs".

Has been asked several times and always runs away, or changes the subject.

In a week or two the novelty of "teaching those stupid gun nutz a lesson" and patting themselves on the back will wear off and they'll go back to the primary wars.

In the meantime 3 more states are about to go constitutional carry, probably to celebrate the poster's ignorance of facts and their dedication to their "all talk and no action" strategy.

And violent crime will continue to drop.

[MillennialDem]

26. ...

But please, continue getting depressed and killing yourselves. Happens far more often than you will ever need to point it at someone else.

And this is coming from someone who has struggled with depression. Get help, mental illness is not fun.

[DonP]

29. Not a chance, you pathetic excuse for an activist

You see the people here that support the 2nd amendment, actually do things to show that support. You don't see them wishing or hoping for gun control people to die horribly. But we hear it from so called "sympathetic and caring" gun control supporters pretty regularly.

On the other hand, all you do is post angry screeds online and whine about it.

That might account for the fact that for over a decade gun control hasn't achieved jack or shit, even with Bloomberg's million$ backing you.

3 more states going constitutional carry this month! Keep up that good gun control work.

[DashOneBravo]

34. Typical millennial activism

[friendly_iconoclast]

36. Calmate, amigo; that sort are getting shriller and nastier as they lose power

Naturally, they are lashing out...

[MillennialDem]

25. No, I'm very consistent. I don't support any study that shows lower DGU than some of

the higher ones.

Or any study that uses unfalsifiable data.

[sarisataka]

27. I did say you reject all studies.

Yet you assert as fact the neglligent, homicidal and suicidal behavior of gun owners based on no data or study. For those "facts" your bias is all the evidence you need.

[Marengo]

39. Please provide a citation to back this statement...

"And I know most of you have likely had a negligent discharge or at least a close call to one. But it's alright."

Most? How do you know this?

[Marengo]

38. Absurdity is eternal, and it would be a disservice to anyone debating with you...

to allow such a prime example of your intelligence to slip into obscurity.