Three Punks Allegedly Attempt a Midday Burglary -- FAFO

[PBC_Democrat]

What was likely intended to be a quick smash-and-grab property crime turned into a nightmare for three Florida men last week when the homeowner defended the private property by opening fire on the intruders, authorities say.

Rather than walk away with someone else’s belongings and before they had the chance to potentially harm anyone, two of them were shot — one fatally. The third was quickly arrested

https://www.operanewsapp.com/us/en/share/detail?news_id=9410541d53e77c196b30031a5000d215&news_entry_id=4a8bbc95231031en_us&open_type=transcoded&from=apex&request_id=share_request

[Silent Type]

1. Is this one of those "see how great guns are" type posts?

[ret5hd]

2. Oh c'mon...don't you wish you could be the guy...

that gets to shoot somebody and get a pat on the back for doing it???

[Silent Type]

3. I'm convinced gunners don't spend time arming up and training because they don't want to shoot someone.

Give ‘em a chance and they’ll shoot an unarmed teenager rummaging in the carport.

I do think once someone is in your house, they are a danger. But sounds like killing them wasn’t the only option here.

[yagotme]

6. I have a question:

You bring up training, I wonder what your view is on it. I have seen anti-gunners on this site complain about gun owners "training to kill", then complain that gun owners don't train enough after an accidental shooting. Just wondered how you felt about that issue.

[Silent Type]

9. If you are arming up and training for urban warfare, need more than a 38 special or shotgun

for HOME protection, etc., you should be under surveillance. Most public toters are scum like George Zimmerman and/or too paranoid/afraid to be trusted with lethal weapons.

[yagotme]

10. OK, thanks for your opinion on that. Do you have a stance on training? nt

[Silent Type]

12. Let's hear your reason for posting this gun love junk, first.

[yagotme]

13. You brought up training. I asked how you felt about it.

You responded with a post that had nothing to do about training. I asked again how you felt about training, and here we are. And, what gun love junk am I posting? That anti-gunners state 2 different opinions at 2 different times? Little hard to follow logic when that happens. Calls for policy change when 2 different views are presented at the same time makes things difficult. Just wanted to know how you felt about it. I guess I know, now.

[Silent Type]

14. I feel like we need to restrict guns, particularly toting. As far as training goes,

if you are training with assault style rifles, hi cap mags, etc., you are no longer interested in self defense other than an excuse to use your lethal toys. And, gun supporters — again, particularly assault style weapons — are not interested in a better society.

[yagotme]

17. "Restricting guns" covers a wide definition.

Restricting certain types, or all of them? And "toting isn't fully defined, either. Do you mean ALL firearms carry, or just open carry?

Training with other than an "assault weapon" is OK, then? Do you have a good description of an "assault weapon"? Many descriptions have been offered on this site, some, completely wrong. Just want to make sure we're on the same page.

What does supporting the 2d amendment, "gun supporters", have to do with a better society? No guns, no violence? That won't happen, and for more than one reason. There was violence in the world before guns, and would be long after you would get rid of them. Violence is currently committed without firearms, in case you need a cite.

[ret5hd]

19. Drop the pretense...why post gun-humping blood lusting bullshit?

[yagotme]

20. Lotta adjectives there. Pretty negative ones, too.

I have not posted anything about having intercourse with firearms, nor the killing/injuring of multiple beings. You might want to take a chill pill, and breathe deep for a moment.

[ret5hd]

21. Always asking'...never answering.

[yagotme]

22. You asked "Why post..."

I answered "I didn't." Asked, answered. Your post is incorrect.

[ret5hd]

23. You are correct. My mistake.

[yagotme]

24. NP nt

[Silent Type]

25. However, it is reasonalble to assume from your gun love, you might well get excited about the feel of a barrel.

[yagotme]

27. Now, you're putting words/thoughts of yours, and attributing them to me.

Transference, I believe it's called? And, when you assume...

[Silent Type]

28. How often do you oil your guns?

[yagotme]

31. As needed. Like any other mechanism.

Do you change the oil in your car? Oil bicycle chain? Clean microwave? I can ask silly questions, too. But, it just makes things sillier, doesn't it?

[TexasDem69]

30. That's just restriction for the sake of restriction

It will have zero impact on crime.

[Silent Type]

32. Less guns means less crime, if for no other reason than guns are the most sought after item in burglary.

[yagotme]

35. Let's stop selling liquor.

Less drunks means less DUI accidents/deaths. Sounds like a plan. Oh, wait...

[Silent Type]

36. Everyone has heard that lame junk before. Besides, most gunners I've known were drunks.

even though booze and guns don’t mix.

[yagotme]

39. A LOT of drunks are drivers, too. Cars and booze don't mix, either. What's lame about saving lives???

Sit outside a bar out in the suburbs/rural area. Nearly everyone there arrived by car. Betcha a lot drive themselves home, too.

We can do this all day.

[Skittles]

4. of course it is

this is their reasoning why school shootings are just collateral damage

[TexasDem69]

5. I guess this person shouldn't have defended the home?

What would you prefer?

[Skittles]

7. plenty of people deal with crime without guns

not everyone is a gun humper

DONE HERE

[TexasDem69]

8. That doesn't answer the question even a little bit

But thanks for playing I guess. That individual had every right to defend the home. Glad we have the 2d Amendment to the Constitution and it is a key platform for Democrats to defend.

[Silent Type]

11. When someone breaks into your house, there is a presumption you were protecting your life. If

If there is evidence you shot them fleeing, especially if they were unarmed and did not attack you, then that presumption begins to weaken.

Too many innocent people shot on the front porch or front yard for me to play these “what ifs” with gunners.

[yagotme]

15. The listed article is lacking in pertinent details.

Closest is near the bottom, where the word "inside" is used. No info on where, how, how many shots, etc. Might have to wait for a better source to determine. Being "under investigation", it may be awhile.

[Silent Type]

16. In my opinion, article would have mentioned they were armed or attacked home owner.

[yagotme]

18. Article is kinda sketchy.

Not gonna try to read between those lines.

[Silent Type]

26. Of course you wouldn't. Why post a sketchy article in the first place. The NRA has a site for posting gun love.

[yagotme]

29. This board has a section to post about gun control and RKBA.

You're in it, in case you weren't aware. It's up to OP to decide to post it or not. If you don't like it, don't click on it, trash it, or report it. You DO have options here.

[Silent Type]

33. Don't we still have the option to express a rebuttal opinion?

[yagotme]

34. "Why post a sketchy article in the first place. The NRA has a site for posting gun love."

Of course. I was only answering the question you posted above. Did you forget that you asked it?

[AndyS]

37. From the current Party Platform:

Ending the Epidemic of Gun Violence

Gun violence is a public health crisis in the United States. Over 100,000 people are shot and nearly 40,000 people die annually from guns—devastating countless families, friends, and communities. We can and will make gun violence a thing of the past. Addressing the gun violence crisis requires supporting evidence-based programs that prevent gun deaths from occurring in the first place, including by making mental health care more accessible and supporting suicide reduction initiatives, funding interventions to reduce homicides and gun violence in neighborhoods, and strengthening protections against domestic violence. Democrats will also ensure the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have sufficient resources to study gun violence as a public health issue, including the ongoing health care, mental health, economic, and social costs that can affect survivors and their families for years.

Democrats will enact universal background checks, end online sales of guns and ammunition, close dangerous loopholes that currently allow stalkers, abusive partners, and some individuals convicted of assault or battery to buy and possess firearms, and adequately fund the federal background check system. We will close the "Charleston loophole" and prevent individuals who have been convicted of hate crimes from possessing firearms. Democrats will ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. We will incentivize states to enact licensing requirements for owning firearms and extreme risk protection order laws that allow courts to temporarily remove guns from the possession of those who are a danger to themselves or others. We will pass legislation requiring that guns be safely stored in homes. And Democrats believe that gun companies should be held responsible for their products, just like any other business, and will prioritize repealing the law that shields gun manufacturers from civil liability.

Gun rights are a losing issue. Get used to it.

[yagotme]

40. I agree with this:

Gun rights are a losing issue. Get used to it.

Former Pres Clinton agreed with it, too.

[TexasDem69]

41. "Gun rights are a losing issue"

For who? Certainly not gun owners or supporters of the Constitution. If anything, “gun rights” have strengthened and expanded over the last 30 years.

[yagotme]

42. Arguing/passing laws restricting gun rights is a losing issue.

As per Pres. Clinton, upon the loss of the House after passing the 1994 AWB.

[AndyS]

43. It depends on whether you are a money grubbing Republican or not.

Gun control a strong issue for anyone supporting the American People:



If, on the other hand, you're a Republican . . .



Almost all of this money comes from:
The NSSF
Gun Owners of America
The NRA
Almost none of this money is from membership, but from the gun makers filtered through these organizations.

If you want votes, go for gun control, if you want money with blood on it go Republican.

I know as much or more about the mythological 2nd as anyone and I'm here to tell you the 2nd isn't what you've been told by the NRA and NSSF

[TexasDem69]

45. Hmm. An internet survey from seven years ago

Doesn’t seem like the sort of data point that justifies infringing on the individual right of the people to keep and bear arms.

[yagotme]

46. Look at the bottom of the top poll, for the "**" reading.

I guess legality has no bearing on the answers.

[AndyS]

47. The numbers are the same now and you know it.

However what you think is moot because you're simply wrong on this point.

[The Mouth]

38. Good riddance

They valued someone else's stuff more than their own life. No loss.

[Fla_Democrat]

44. I hate it for em...

but you know who wasn't shot around 2:10 PM on Friday? Over 300 million people who didn't break into someone's house.

I reckon there's a lesson in there, somewhere.

[The Mouth]

48. Good thief dead thief

Good riddance.
Kudos to the homeowner for taking out the trash.