Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
AnchorSteam

Home invasion repelled with guns

367 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

psyche101
8 hours ago, TomasaurusREKT said:

Lol. You mentioning ignorance is funny. You know NOTHING of gun culture but seem to love giving a biased opinion on the matter.

You lot talk about it quite a lot in the most disturbing manner, so it's the gun proponents themselves offering a very dim view of their own morals here. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
psyche101
8 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

You have to hand it to @psyche101 - the man is holding his own on multiple fronts in this thread. 

I object to the case in the OP being an example of guns saving lives, it's just a sad story of some kids who went too far because of the complacency with deadly weapons and paid the ultimate price for the way they have been brought up not to respect a deadly weapons as a result of gun culture. I don't see this as heroic at all, it's a tragedy. 

That's pretty simple. It's the gun nuts trying to justify this killing that have gone well of the rails and ignore the thread title. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
4 hours ago, skliss said:

The fact that they were there is the fault of those who got in a car and deliberately drove to someone's home with the intent to harm.

Your not even listening to both sides of the story. The Victor's are writing this history. According to the group  they went to confront the people over a personal matter, the only one who knew a gun was there was the carrier. His complacency with weapons, thinking he was tough cost a life and injuries due to the response to the perceived threat. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

Again, the victims are the people in the home that was invaded.

They are not lying 6 feet under or in hospital injured are they. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

Of course they did!! They were afraid for their lives!! Note "exchanged gunfire" meaning shots were fired by both sides

One shot was allegedly fired. For all we know the men who killed could have done that. There was one weapon, the evidence indicates that the actual perimeter was not breached and only the holder knew a weapon was there. The people who did the killing did not exchange gun fire. They opened fire as the door was opened and if you read the recollection they state that the injured crumpled immediately. It sounds more like that's when the only shot from the invading party was fired. I really think if they were afraid for their lives, a 911 call would have been the first response, not a weapon. 

Two suspects immediately “crumpled to the floor with multiple gunshot wounds

4 hours ago, skliss said:

Of course it's a senseless tragedy! We've all said that...the difference is you are blaming the victims for protecting themselves.

Yes I really think they should at least be tried for manslaughter. The opportunity to end this peacefully was removed by their actions. 

Did you see Kismits thread in the other world section about a New Zealand gun threat situation? Now that's what I consider cool, calm, collected and civilised response. The victim even went do far as to express remorse at his attacker being killed by police. That deserves the ultimate respect. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

None of this would have happened if the home invaders had stayed in their own homes that night. How the fight started has no bearing on the outcome, it's the actions of the aggressors that dictated the event and its outcome.

Yes, how this got started it of high importance. Its not the first time a Facebook fight in the US has ended in death. That's just insane. If the people are too proud, and too scared to consider regulation then more lives will be lost in senseless altercations like this. If you think that's just fine then sorry, but I can't wrap my head around such a callous disregard for life. 

The aggressors would not have died in a country with gun regulation. Thats noteworthy in itself and something gun nuts just don't want to hear. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TomasaurusREKT
58 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

You lot talk about it quite a lot in the most disturbing manner, so it's the gun proponents themselves offering a very dim view of their own morals here. 

Huh. Doesn't surprise me. Yeah, I'll give my life to defend my rights. If that's disturbing to you, I feel sorry for you.

You can give your biased opinion as much as you want on here. It doesn't matter. Americans such as myself will continue to be armed and well and abled to defend ourselves if need be.

Gun owners wouldn't be so aggressive on the topic of we didn't have people like you, who know absolutely nothing about guns or gun owners, thinking WE need to be educated on gun culture. 

You're so quick to want us to hand out guns over to the government and trust them to protect us, and keep guns out of the bad guys hands. Why is it cities with the most strict gun laws have the worst gun crime? They can't keep meth out of schools but we need to trust them to keep illegal guns off the streets. Lol.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
4 hours ago, skliss said:

Doesnt matter how far, he kicked the door in at a home that wasn'this and fired off a shot. He was a threat to those inside.

We don't know when the single shot was fired, your assuming. 

Kicking in a door is not cause for a death sentence. I don't know how you can even think that. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

I read only 3 shots actually hit anything, don't consider that to equal "riddled".

The resident with the AR-15 estimates he fired 30 rounds by himself.

Two suspects immediately “crumpled to the floor with multiple gunshot wounds.”

One suspect, Corey Lauramore, died of gunshot wounds to his head and an unidentified 16-year-old was hospitalized in unknown condition. 

Sounds very much like an extreme over reaction to me. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

I'm not a gun person so I know less than nothing about them.

The only thing that's important is they are designed to kill. That should say it all. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

I assume someone who gets shot in the head will be pushed back....he could be 3 steps in, just fall over backwards and his head could be across the threshold.

Again, from the OP

Two suspects immediately “crumpled to the floor

4 hours ago, skliss said:

I'm sure the investigating officers are competent to make these determinations.

I'm not seeing the investigation made public, I'm just reading that the group was arrested in home Invasion charges. Where is there an investigation of the incident shown? 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

Not really, I don't know if he died instantly. People have been shot in the head and survived. Maybe one of his friends took it off.

The ones near him were injured, two went to hospital wounded, the others fled in a vehicle. So it sure seems unlikely. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

I don't have the time or the interest.

So I'll consider your ad hom to be BS then. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

You're right, Facebook fights are stupid and shouldn't end in death..that's squarely on the shoulders of the idiots who invaded the home of others. I don't see how it does spell a need for regulation.

You honestly don't see how complacency with weapons are obviously the ultimate cause of this argument going from confrontation to a life and death? 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

That's just hyperbole without any basis in fact.

Then why are only the claims of the Victor's being considered? 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

It absolutely does!!

In your opinion maybe. I just can't see how you would find this tragedy just in any manner. It's really stunning at how little value fear of home Invasion reduces the value of life to regardless of the situation. 

4 hours ago, skliss said:

And you don't know that, it's assumption on your part.

No it's not assumption, that's exactly what regulation results in. The proof is in the result. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
20 minutes ago, TomasaurusREKT said:

Huh. Doesn't surprise me. Yeah, I'll give my life to defend my rights. If that's disturbing to you, I feel sorry for you.

Its not your life that I find the concern, its the lives of all the innocent kids and people who pay for easy access to weapons. The community as a whole. That's where I see a marked difference in cultural approaches with individual perspectives over the safety of the community as a whole. 

Quote

You can give your biased opinion as much as you want on here.

Its not biased, it's simply a fact of life here. 

Quote

It doesn't matter. Americans such as myself will continue to be armed and well and abled to defend ourselves if need be.

And school kids will continue to be sacrifices to maintain that so called right. That's on your head IMHO. 

Quote

Gun owners wouldn't be so aggressive on the topic of we didn't have people like you, who know absolutely nothing about guns or gun owners, thinking WE need to be educated on gun culture. 

I think realisation of the consequences of your desires is more the point. If you know what your really doing, the death count of innocent kids and people doesn't reflect that. 

Quote

You're so quick to want us to hand out guns over to the government and trust them to protect us, and keep guns out of the bad guys hands.

Dat ebil gubbermint again huh? 

While your addressing your conspiracy theories kids are being shot. I thought you guys voted the horrid man in to make America great again. Why would he be such a threat to your lifestyle? 

Quote

Why is it cities with the most strict gun laws have the worst gun crime? They can't keep meth out of schools but we need to trust them to keep illegal guns off the streets. Lol.

Because those valiant efforts are undermined by surrounding states who allow easy access to the weapons that those noble forerunners are trying to keep out of criminal hands. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TomasaurusREKT

Lol, don't lie. What you spew is not fact. It is a biased opinion. You cherry pick any statistic you stumble into and ignore statistics like the one, that is fact, that shows gun crime is and has been steadily decreasing since the 60s (I think it was the 60s).

Don't let the MSM fool you either. Americans in the majority favor gun ownership as it is. Your large liberal cities aren't America remember. Us "rednecks" are the majority of gun owners, the same "deplorable" rednecks who won the election and put the first man in a long time who actually cares about America into office. 

You have to remember that, you see America as the MSM shows you us. They paint a picture of liberal San Fransisco and call it America.

Anyway, I know I'm jumping all over here, I'm at work and can't be bickering on here any more. Cheers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
35 minutes ago, TomasaurusREKT said:

Lol, don't lie. What you spew is not fact. It is a biased opinion.

Ad hom.

The last resort of someone losing a debate spectacularly. 

Quote

You cherry pick any statistic you stumble into and ignore statistics like the one, that is fact, that shows gun crime is and has been steadily decreasing since the 60s (I think it was the 60s).

And the school shootings? 

Quote

Don't let the MSM fool you either. Americans in the majority favor gun ownership as it is.

Ive seen US posters here deny that claim from gun nuts. So no, I don't believe that's the case. It seems evenly divided from statistics that I have seen. 

Quote

Your large liberal cities aren't America remember.

What are you talking about? How is this relevant? 

Quote

Us "rednecks" are the majority of gun owners, the same "deplorable" rednecks who won the election and put the first man in a long time who actually cares about America into office. 

Yeah, the guy who grabs other mens wives on the private parts, some hero you've got there. Most of the world is still shaking its head at that bewildering travesty. 

Quote

You have to remember that, you see America as the MSM shows you us. They paint a picture of liberal San Fransisco and call it America.

No, its the regular public shootings, too many of which are in schools that my comments are based upon. I applaud the individual states trying to implement gun regulation  but they have my deepest sympathies what with neighbouring states undermining their valiant efforts. They deserve praise for trying to change things for the better and considering the community as a whole. 

Quote

Anyway, I know I'm jumping all over here, I'm at work and can't be bickering on here any more. Cheers.

Its these posts that are going off the topic. The case in the OP is a monumental fail at achieving a positive aspect of gun culture. That's what the topic is supposed to be concerned with. The thread title. The OP set out to show that guns save lives and it failed miserably. It's just a horrible sad story. If anything  it shows the ugly side of gun culture and the complacency that attitude results in. It's actually a good argument against gun ownership, not one for it.

That so many posters are ignoring the OP  and rabbiting on about defending gun culture is very telling indeed. 

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Dat ebil gubbermint again

That one's definitely going on my fridge. :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76

Wait, you don't understand how two gunmen kicking down someone's door is worthy of a death sentence P101? SMH, are we on the same planet?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
12 hours ago, psyche101 said:

 

No it really isn't, not over a Facebook fight. This is where is see gun culture separating people from their humanity. If it was one of the posters sons making such a deadly mistake I doubt the reaction would be the same. Seeing life regarded as so cheap is just appalling. 

The Facebook argument is irrelevant.   This is what makes it justified.

 

It not being their home

They are masked

They are armed

They fired a shot

You would rather they let themselves be killed.    I side with defense.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
20 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Because those valiant efforts are undermined by surrounding states who allow easy access to the weapons that those noble forerunners are trying to keep out of criminal hands.

They’re not forerunners. They’re horrendously governed cities filled with blight but I never understand your stance on this. These forerunners are the murder capitals of the country and skew every negative national statistic there is and you say that’s because they can take a short drive and get all the guns they want. By your logic the surrounding areas where it’s “easy” to get all the guns they want should be blowing eachother away exponentially but they’re not.

That makes me think the weapons aren’t the problem. The people are and by extension the liberal policies that perpetuate generational poverty and government dependence which leads to crime and lack of self responsibility are the real problem.

To your dismay we have enormous amounts of gun regulation and hundreds of millions of guns and people are a testament to how much those regulations work and how people largely respect the responsibility of gun ownership yet you discount those extraordinary numbers over a fraction of a percentage of irresponsibile users and abusers. Society does not need to conform to its lowest denominator as you would say. The lowest need to rise up and conform to society or be weeded out. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
11 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Wait, you don't understand how two gunmen kicking down someone's door is worthy of a death sentence P101? SMH, are we on the same planet?

What two masked gunmen? 

One wore a mask and was killed in it. One gun was taken unbeknownst to the others. They went there to confront them over the facebook argument and made a great deal of noise before attempting to enter the residence, which the crime scene indicates they didn't enter at all. The blood, gun and mask were found outside the front door. 

Did you read the thread at all? 

This is the sort of complacency that I find disturbing and a result of gun culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
10 hours ago, Myles said:

The Facebook argument is irrelevant.  

No it's not. It well illustrates just how little provocation a person who has been brought up with gun culture requires to elevate a simple argument into a life and death situation. 

10 hours ago, Myles said:

This is what makes it justified.

 

It not being their home

They are masked

They are armed

They fired a shot

For one the crime scene I feel doesn't indicate that the killers are being totally honest. 

And for two, it wasn't all of them. Who actually brought a gun? Was it fired back at the killers or did it go off as the body hit the ground? And they weren't l masked, only one was and the mask was removes so what's the story there? Everybody involved knew who was there and what it was about. 

Can you confirm that the person who forced the door was also the person who died? And can you confirm that he fired the first shot because I can't determine that from the sketchy story from the killer. 

10 hours ago, Myles said:

You would rather they let themselves be killed.    I side with defense.

The people who initiated the altercation said they were there to confront the other party. I don't see that their lives were actually in danger, the only person who knew the gun was there was the person carrying it. The threat of death is a huge assumption that doesn't explain the other side of the story being ignored or the crime scene. I don't think they should let themselves be killed but I don't think that was going to happen. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
1 hour ago, F3SS said:

They’re not forerunners. They’re horrendously governed cities filled with blight but I never understand your stance on this. These forerunners are the murder capitals of the country and skew every negative national statistic there is and you say that’s because they can take a short drive and get all the guns they want. By your logic the surrounding areas where it’s “easy” to get all the guns they want should be blowing eachother away exponentially but they’re not.

That's not how regulation works though. A criminal mind is the first advantage, to even have that inside a person to go hurt another for personal gain is more motivation to create a bad situation than one defending themselves. When regulation is introduced all are on a level ground, the access to weapons affects all. Those who want to better society will comply, those who wish to take advantage of such a situation need only cross a border and then those trying to do the right thing are going to be disadvantaged. So crime will be higher where people are trying to do the right thing but criminals can change that situation with a short drive. 

Quote

That makes me think the weapons aren’t the problem. The people are and by extension the liberal policies that perpetuate generational poverty and government dependence which leads to crime and lack of self responsibility are the real problem.

I don't doubt that adds to the situation and makes it worse. Yet they can still afford to arm themselves. Surely removing that advantage has to result in the positive. Just like the mental health aspect Gunn highlighted I'm sure there are many aspects to the criminal mind but the 'great equaliser' enables the unhealthy minds to an advantageous position. Like with that family killing you pointed out that happened here recently. Deep depression resulted in a confused mind that saw death for the whole family as the only option to avoid suffering. Having easy access the a deadly weapon enables these thoughts and allows them to be actioned. Seeing guns used badly in the only place in the country where free access is granted as part of lifestyle I honest feel illustrates that guns greatly incresse the liklihood of death in any situation when resolve is often a realistic choice. These kids in the OP, one thinking that a gun equalised his chances greatly underestimated the impact of others being able to use even more deadly force. That elevated a verbal altercation and possibly some fisticuffs into a shootout. I think that we'll shows how complacency derived from gun culture lowers the bar of basic human standards. 

Quote

To your dismay we have enormous amounts of gun regulation and hundreds of millions of guns and people are a testament to how much those regulations work and how people largely respect the responsibility of gun ownership yet you discount those extraordinary numbers over a fraction of a percentage of irresponsibile users and abusers.

And those people don't have to he affected by genuine regulations. It didn't happen here but the death toll was affected generously. 

In turn this bewilders me. I can't see why you wouldn't want those good people showcasing their responsibility as an example to others. 

Quote

Society does not need to conform to its lowest denominator as you would say. The lowest need to rise up and conform to society or be weeded out. 

But then society suffers and the defenceless die. The school shootings are just out of control. Public massacre I just don't see as a worthy tradeoff or situations like the op elevating into life and death situations just because some idiot thinks having a gun present is a good idea. Society should be able to more easily weed out those incapable of acting responsibly and reduce their impact and its shown gun regulation does that. Those who find other ways to enact their bad deeds are at least hobbled greatly and the impact reduced. 

Lets face it  the lowest common denominator is not going to rise up. Just not going to happen, and in some cases that's why they are there to begin with. Gun culture might have been effective at one point but its a different world now and innocents, especially the school kids are paying the price of that situation. If society does not conform and recognise and repeat the examples of success in other countries, those innocents will continue to pay that price and in greater numbers. Its all well and good to insist the bad element of society do better, but why would they listen, and in the case of the disadvantaged, such as the mentally ill, they aren't even capable of reaching up without assistance. Letting them arm themselves is not helping anyone or making anything better nor is getting more and bigger guns to go to war with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.