Home invasion repelled with guns

[psyche101]

8 hours ago, aztek said:

i highly recommend cold steel shovel, if you learn how to throw it, it is only second to a gun, a true universal survival\defense tool

I really liked Pineys idea of a fire extinguisher near the front door. 

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, skliss said:

So two young guys, my son's are in their 20's, are alone in a house, terrified, while hostiles are running around outside and threatening them with mayhem.....And they don't shoot until their perimeter is breached, again for what hostile purpose, they don't know.  Sounds like they acted appropriately. I don't get blaming the victims for the actions of the intruders. I would tell my son's to protect themselves in whatever manner they could. 

I'd also hope you would teach your sons to be more mature than to let a lousy Facebook fight turn into a situation where they shoot at minors and kill people. 

I'd like to hope that broad advice can't be translated into turning any altercation into a life and death situation. I have a son, but if someone younger than him threatened him, I'd like to think he would resolve the situation without any deaths involved. Especially something as stupid as a Facebook argument. 

Edited May 31, 2018 by psyche101

[psyche101]

3 hours ago, skliss said:

So from the news story, the guy ran in masked and fired his gun:

"In stormed a masked gunman who fired off a single round before two of the men inside, one armed with an AR-15 rifle and the other with a handgun, emerged from two bedrooms and opened fire."

 

Keep reading and maybe you can explain the huge inconsistencies in the article 

 

One suspect, Corey Lauramore, died of gunshot wounds to his head and an unidentified 16-year-old was hospitalized in unknown condition. Officers found “a heavy amount of dried blood caked on the front steps of the home, a bloodstained mask with a bullet hole through it and a .380 caliber handgun lying nearby.”

So if the gun and alleged victims were inside, why is the evidence outside? The blood was on the front steps, not inside the residence as was the gun and

'a' 

Mask. With a bullet hole in it. 

So if the kid was wearing the mask, and a shot the the head is most likely the kill shot, how did it end up off the body? If the gun was fired inside, why was it found outside with all the blood? Was there more than one masked person? 

When did they come inside at all? How is it a home Invasion if the home was not invaded? The front door was vandalised, that was the end of it. 

Again from the op

when the suspects kicked in the door, claiming to be from the sheriff’s office. Three residents were at home at the time, and two responded by opening fire. The resident with the AR-15 estimates he fired 30 rounds by himself.

As soon as the door was opened the kids were mowed down. 

So it seems they did not enter the home and were slaughtered on the front steps. And the occupants of the residence heard yelling outside before the incident, so forgive me for assuming, but I really find it hard to believe they did not look outside the window. One of the group has been proven to have worn a mask, one was proven to have carried a weapon, what is not proven is if the kids got inside, if they were all masked, if they were actually unknown to the residents at the time of shooting or if anyone was actually injured inside the residence. 

And none of these questions will be asked because gun culture says if someone comes into your home murder them, but it seems to me this case is fishy as hell and I don't feel the killing was justified and I do feel what we do know puts the story in doubt and spells a severe over reaction on the part of the residents. 

Again, this is simply not a case of guns saving lives, this is not a story of heroes or justification for home defense. Its a good reason to consider gun regulation and its success in other countries very seriously. 

[psyche101]

54 minutes ago, Alaric said:

C’mon man... forgive me for saying, but I think this is a cop-out answer. You have stated that to use deadly force against armed and masked home invaders is the wrong answer, what then, is the right answer? How, realistically, without the use of deadly force, would you protect your family in that situation? It’s a fair question.

Its not a cop out, I just have not ever had to seriously consider the situation which is why I cited the closest I have ever come to that, and that would have been 25-30 years ago. I could say I'm a master boxer, I could say I live behind a police station, that, like offering you a realistic answer to your proposed scenario would just be making **** up  and I consider you to intelligent to accept such BS. So the best answer I can give is one I have, I would send my family out the back door having them call police and go to the closest neighbour to stay safe while I held the invaders of at all costs. What else would you have me say? I don't agree that a baseball bat and knives where it I can find them isn't a big advantage, one doesnt just spring back up after a baseball bat to the jaw at full force, and I train, I'm quite fit for my age, capable of lifting my bodyweight and I actually rather enjoy boxing. I started in martial arts when younger, but have taken quite a shine to boxing over the last few years. 

You say locality demands a weapon, in turn I have less to worry about because of gun regulation. Why wouldn't I sing its praises seeing as how it bettered my own country over the last couple decades? And why wouldn't that affect my response to your given scenario? 

[Alaric]

37 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

there is no gun control right now

I don’t know where you would get this idea... guns have been heavily regulated in the Philippines for a long time. Only well connected people or those who can afford to bribe the licensing authority can  even get a legal firearm. Also, the types of firearms civilians are allowed are severely restricted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Philippines

“During his presidency Ferdinand Marcos implemented gun confiscations against citizens. These were part of his martial law regime, what he referred to as "The New Society" or the Bagong Lipunan, as well as to quell the Moroseparatist groups in Mindanao. Since then, gun control has become a moderate and strong issue in the Philippines.”

The current law exercises full control over all firearms and requires full registration by all owners:

“... requires gun owners to renew their licenses every two years on or before the date of expiration. If they fail to renew their licenses, the PNP will revoke them and this means confiscation of the firearm.”

“The registration of the firearm shall be renewed every four years. Failure to renew the registration of the firearm on or before the date of expiration shall cause the revocation of the license of the firearm. The firearm shall be confiscated or forfeited in favor of the government.”

“Failure to renew a license or registration within the periods mandated by the new law on two occasions shall cause the holder of the firearm to be perpetually disqualified from applying for any firearm license.”

There are a huge number of guns in the Philippines, they also have very strict gun laws and penalties... this is proof positive that strict guns laws do not get rid of guns. All the people who want to do evil still have them... while the innocents that need to protect themselves have nothing.

[Alaric]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

I just can't fathom why people would be so ruthless though, why are the people so barbaric? This is ISIS level barbarism, why are so many so violent in everyday life? What drives the community to behave like wild animals? 

Wait, did you just call some criminals “animals”?

I think I may just have a lower estimate of human nature... maybe I’ve just seen too many things. I don’t think Filipinos are any more barbaric than Aussies or Americans or Africans or Germans or any other people... we all have the same capacity for evil.

“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

 

[Alaric]

32 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Its not a cop out, I just have not ever had to seriously consider the situation which is why I cited the closest I have ever come to that, and that would have been 25-30 years ago. I could say I'm a master boxer, I could say I live behind a police station, that, like offering you a realistic answer to your proposed scenario would just be making **** up  and I consider you to intelligent to accept such BS. So the best answer I can give is one I have, I would send my family out the back door having them call police and go to the closest neighbour to stay safe while I held the invaders of at all costs. What else would you have me say? I don't agree that a baseball bat and knives where it I can find them isn't a big advantage, one doesnt just spring back up after a baseball bat to the jaw at full force, and I train, I'm quite fit for my age, capable of lifting my bodyweight and I actually rather enjoy boxing. I started in martial arts when younger, but have taken quite a shine to boxing over the last few years. 

You say locality demands a weapon, in turn I have less to worry about because of gun regulation. Why wouldn't I sing its praises seeing as how it bettered my own country over the last couple decades? And why wouldn't that affect my response to your given scenario? 

OK, that’s an answer at least... my point was you said that our answer was not the correct/ appropriate one without suggesting what should have been done instead. Like a fire escape plan I think that a “home invasion plan” is probably a good idea to have, even if you will likely never use it.

BTW, you might not want to send your family out the back since any gang with half a brain would already have the rear exit covered and you would be sending them out into their waiting arms...

[psyche101]

57 minutes ago, Alaric said:

I don’t know where you would get this idea... guns have been heavily regulated in the Philippines for a long time. Only well connected people or those who can afford to bribe the licensing authority can  even get a legal firearm. Also, the types of firearms civilians are allowed are severely restricted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Philippines

“During his presidency Ferdinand Marcos implemented gun confiscations against citizens. These were part of his martial law regime, what he referred to as "The New Society" or the Bagong Lipunan, as well as to quell the Moroseparatist groups in Mindanao. Since then, gun control has become a moderate and strong issue in the Philippines.”

The current law exercises full control over all firearms and requires full registration by all owners:

“... requires gun owners to renew their licenses every two years on or before the date of expiration. If they fail to renew their licenses, the PNP will revoke them and this means confiscation of the firearm.”

“The registration of the firearm shall be renewed every four years. Failure to renew the registration of the firearm on or before the date of expiration shall cause the revocation of the license of the firearm. The firearm shall be confiscated or forfeited in favor of the government.”

“Failure to renew a license or registration within the periods mandated by the new law on two occasions shall cause the holder of the firearm to be perpetually disqualified from applying for any firearm license.”

There are a huge number of guns in the Philippines, they also have very strict gun laws and penalties... this is proof positive that strict guns laws do not get rid of guns. All the people who want to do evil still have them... while the innocents that need to protect themselves have nothing.

I got the idea from your link, the part I quoted from it, if there are twice as many illegal firearms as legal, it can't be enforced all that tightly, and the people aren't behind the measure, which is going to spell failure. 

Edited June 1, 2018 by psyche101

[psyche101]

38 minutes ago, Alaric said:

Wait, did you just call some criminals “animals”?

Wild animals, I've known too many dogs with much higher standards. 

38 minutes ago, Alaric said:

I think I may just have a lower estimate of human nature... maybe I’ve just seen too many things. I don’t think Filipinos are any more barbaric than Aussies or Americans or Africans or Germans or any other people... we all have the same capacity for evil.

“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

 

Well, our citizens got behind regulation to make it work and don't make crossbows or soak people in sewers  like I say, that's ISIS level barbarism. What's the difference there, why such inhuman acts? 

[psyche101]

36 minutes ago, Alaric said:

OK, that’s an answer at least... my point was you said that our answer was not the correct/ appropriate one without suggesting what should have been done instead.

In the instance of the op I honestly feel the incident could have been addressed with some level of dignity and should never have degenerated into a life and death situation. I can only see the lax approach to ownership of a deadly weapon escalating that incident into a life and death situation. 

36 minutes ago, Alaric said:

Like a fire escape plan I think that a “home invasion plan” is probably a good idea to have, even if you will likely never use it.

That's the thing, I've asked on these boards and 99% say they never have had to use the plan. But keeping that option opens up easy access to weapons deteriorating the same situation in the meantime, keeping alive the excuse of Home Invasion when it's the emergency plan that's elevating the situation at the same time, the solutuon feeds the problem. And in the meantime, public massacre has stepped into schools  elevating the situation  to what I would consider a critical level. 

The perceived prevention is only costing lives due to the fact it encourages people to own deadly weapons and makes it easy for criminal minds to access them. 

36 minutes ago, Alaric said:

BTW, you might not want to send your family out the back since any gang with half a brain would already have the rear exit covered and you would be sending them out into their waiting arms...

That's not the scenario you gave though, you said 4 through the front door, we can come up with scenarios all day long, but the reality of the situation is that this just won't happen to me because of the measures we took as a nation to end that sort of thing. And it worked. 

[skliss]

19 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I'd also hope you would teach your sons to be more mature than to let a lousy Facebook fight turn into a situation where they shoot at minors and kill people. 

I'd like to hope that broad advice can't be translated into turning any altercation into a life and death situation. I have a son, but if someone younger than him threatened him, I'd like to think he would resolve the situation without any deaths involved. Especially something as stupid as a Facebook argument. 

A) These guys seemed to be all around the same age. 

B ) The victims were in the house sleeping peacefully at home when they had their front door kicked in and a shot fired. 

C ) Not that's it any of your business, but my son's were always too mature for Facebook. Neither have active accounts since round Jr. High age. They think it's a waste of time.

[skliss]

19 hours ago, psyche101 said:

So if the kid was wearing the mask, and a shot the the head is most likely the kill shot, how did it end up off the body? If the gun was fired inside, why was it found outside with all the blood? Was there more than one masked person? 

When did they come inside at all? How is it a home Invasion if the home was not invaded? The front door was vandalised, that was the end of it. 

Wow, you are a zealot, still blaming the victims....the door was undoubtedly kicked open. Do you know how powerful a shot is?  He was probably thrown backwards out the open door! It doesnt matter who all had masks...maybe they all did. His mask could have been blown off, he could have taken it off or someone with him could have taken it off...there's a myriad of possiblities

You just keep changing the story to fit the narrative you want. Do you think we don't have the best forensic teams in the world here? Do you not know that any incident where a firearm is discharged,  especially in the case of a fatality, is scrutinized with a fine tooth comb? 

The bottom line is.....you don't go to someone's house with an intent to harm, kick open the door, fire off a shot and not expect them to fire back. If you do then you have chosen a course likely to get you hurt or killed and your companions with you. Who've been charged in this case? The home invaders...that says the investigation shows after interviewing both sides, they're the ones at fault.

Is it a stupid, sad, horrible reason to die...yes...but people die for making bad decisions every day.

Edited June 1, 2018 by skliss

[Alaric]

22 hours ago, psyche101 said:

That's not the scenario you gave though, you said 4 through the front door

I didn’t say anything about how many there were in all (if you recall, there were 7 in th OP). There could be 4 in the front and 3 in the back, you don’t know... that’s the whole point of not just sending your family out the back without first considering the possibility and checking to be sure.

I think you’re being Pollyanna-ish in that you think just because there are strict gun control laws, that means there are no guns and that you don’t have to worry about them. Up until 1986 in the Philippines the government’s defacto gun control policy was, “shoot on sight”... can’t get any more strict than that. Even so, I had to worry about guns ALL the time... as I mentioned, my best friend was shot. Even an instant death penalty for illegal gun possession will not prevent evildoers from having them, I can’t understand how you fail to see the point. 

 

[Alaric]

23 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Wild animals, I've known too many dogs with much higher standards. 

Gee, who woulda thunk it? A fan of Trump’s immigration policy  

[Alaric]

23 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I got the idea from your link, the part I quoted from it, if there are twice as many illegal firearms as legal, it can't be enforced all that tightly, and the people aren't behind the measure, which is going to spell failure. 

I think you misunderstood what was written, it speaks of a “nascent gun control movement”... it’s talking about a citizen’s gun control movement. Which did not previously exist because, from 1965 to 1986, we were ruled by a dictator whose gun controls were so strict that there was no point.

As for “can’t be enforced all that tightly”, see my previous post regarding Marcos’s gun control policy. If a dictator can’t effectively enforce gun control then who can?

I think you have a highly unrealistic view of just how many guns are in Australia.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-14/australians-own-as-many-guns-as-in-1996/4463150

“More than 1 million guns were destroyed in the aftermath of the massacre, but research shows Australians have restocked over the past 10 years, importing more than 1 million firearms.”

“Despite that, the number of gun-related deaths has halved since the gun buyback.”

That last bit is particularly interesting as it pretty much proves more guns doesn’t equal more gun deaths.

[Farmer77]

6 minutes ago, Alaric said:

Despite that, the number of gun-related deaths has halved since the gun buyback.”

That last bit is particularly interesting as it pretty much proves more guns doesn’t equal more gun deaths.

 By that logic it also proves that more gun laws equals less gun deaths. 

[Alaric]

23 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Wild animals, I've known too many dogs with much higher standards. 

Well, our citizens got behind regulation to make it work and don't make crossbows or soak people in sewers  like I say, that's ISIS level barbarism. What's the difference there, why such inhuman acts? 

I think you also have a highly unrealistic view of your fellow Aussies, some of them are not that nice... 

“... also known as the bodies-in-barrels murder... the murders were preceded by torture...”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowtown_murders

“Victoria is now living in a state of fear, with violent crime spiralling out of control over the past year, with overworked and under resourced police struggling to keep up with the problems.”

https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/june-2017/alarming-spike-in-violent-crime-and-murder

This story is from just a couple of months ago:

“VICTORIANS are terrified and rightfully so.”

“Every morning they wake to news of another violent home invasion overnight. A knife held to a pensioner’s throat. Children screaming as masked men hover over their beds. Intruders using crowbars and baseball bats to terrorise homeowners.”

“In January and February this year, homes were broken into by armed men in Cranbourne, St Albans, Albion, Brighton, Bayswater, Skye, Mentone, Taylor’s Hill, Hillside, Ascot Vale and Geelong.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/crime/violent-home-invasions-surge-in-victoria-in-january-and-february/news-story/3c4983a6208751eecd544c566c32a281

[Alaric]

20 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

 By that logic it also proves that more gun laws equals less gun deaths. 

How so? That doesn’t make any sense at all. The ban was implemented in 1996... gun deaths continued to decrease, while gun ownership has steadily increased so that in 2018 there are just as many guns as before. So if more gun laws equals less gun deaths, what new gun control laws were passed that account for the current level of guns but no increase in gun deaths?

[Alaric]

Looks like there may be just as many illegal firearms in Australia as in the Philippines...

As many as 600,000 illegal guns in Australia

https://amp.theage.com.au/national/victoria/as-many-as-600000-illegal-guns-in-australia-20161020-gs74ay.html

[Alaric]

On 5/31/2018 at 5:26 PM, psyche101 said:

What's the difference there, why such inhuman acts? 

I think this just may be the most productive line of questioning you’ve hit on so far. 

Some want to make like guns are the “Root of All Evil” and say that their mere presence makes for a violent and broken society... that is just not the case. There was no gun control whatsoever in the United States until 1934, yet all these “gun violence” incidents are a fairly recent phenomenon.  

So really, the relevant question is: What factors make certain societies or subcultures more susceptible to the use of violence?

[Alaric]

I can say with a high level of certainty (from personal experience) that Filipinos are, pound for pound, some of the toughest fighters in the world. They became so historically by necessity. The Philippine archipelago occupies the natural shipping lanes in that part of the Pacific and everybody comes through on the way to somewhere else. So, if we couldn’t hold our own, they would just roll over us. Had to be open enough to trade, but at the same time, tough enough to enforce the bargain.

Filipinos are the original practitioners of MMA... forget styles, whatever works. Somebody kick your butt with some different moves? Learn and use it against someone else next week. Don’t just fight hard and fast, fight smart. I’m sure you’ve heard the story of the famous explorer who made it almost all the way around the world, only to suffer a humiliating defeat and die by the hand of a Filipino that he thought would be easy pickings.

Since Filipinos are small in stature and not physically imposing, force multipliers have always been a thing... use whatever you can in the environment to your advantage. In the absence of an actual weapon, anything you could pick up would have to do. We were fighting with everything and the kitchen sink before Jacky Chan was. Poisoning weapons (like the sewer soaked darts) were just another way to create a force multiplier.

[Alaric]

Which naturally leads us to the largest force multiplier of all: firearms.

A people who were already fans of weapons in general, naturally gravitated to the most effective weapon we’ve invented so far. So, already fans of guns and accustomed to the use of violence if and when necessary... we have another force multiplier: Philippine Cinema. Hollywood likes to disavow any culpability whatsoever... but is there really no connection? One of the most common tropes in Philippine Cinema is “A Good Man Pushed Too Far by the Powers that Be”, and guess what the solution is? Guns... lots and lots of guns. Think “Rambo: First Blood”.

Corrupt cops hassle you and take it too far? Guns. Robber baron steals your land and turns your family out into the street? Guns. Gang kills your wife and rapes your daughter? Guns. Corrupt politician targets you for extermination because your are running against him? Guns. Rival businesman sends a hit squad to kill you and your family? Yep, you guessed it: Guns. BTW, the above may be things you see in a movie to most of you, but these are actually for real regular occurrences in the Philippines... so, when these things happen in real life, guess what? Guns and more guns.

Does life imitate art or the other way around? Which came first? Who knows? But for sure, there is a connection... one reinforces the other. A culture of violence and disregard for human life seems to be much more of a factor than the just mere presence of guns.

Here’s the thing: 

Everybody thinks they’re a good person (so all we’re missing is the “pushed too far” part)

Here’s the problem: 

Young-uns these days believe things like someone expressing a differing opinion actually constitutes an attack on their person... and they need a “safe space” to protect them.

Put the two of them together and you have the perfect storm. Fragile egos that can’t handle reality, a sense of entitlement along with powerlessness and impotence... because they always got participation trophies just for showing up... and now they can’t actually get anything done in the real world. So of course it must be the fault of this person that person or the other person, because I’m just great (my mom tells me so).

Edited June 2, 2018 by Alaric

[F3SS]

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

On 02/06/2018 at 11:26 AM, Alaric said:

Looks like there may be just as many illegal firearms in Australia as in the Philippines...

As many as 600,000 illegal guns in Australia

https://amp.theage.com.au/national/victoria/as-many-as-600000-illegal-guns-in-australia-20161020-gs74ay.html

Those guns are innocent. All they did was steal a loaf of bread in order to survive in the UK and were transported here.

[aztek]

'I just let loose.' Homeowner uses AK-47 to kill burglars who shot at his friend, cops say

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/4e813c62-d27e-3747-9701-2134d2dae001/'i-just-let-loose.'-homeowner.html

 

another happy ending

Edited June 4, 2018 by aztek