Who owns guns and you carry?

[Rob]

Neither the city or the county does that near Houston, and I don't know of anybody that does. Maybe some really small departmens. Its not like Super Troopers, great movie. I know I wouldn't want to do it, its hard work.

We do up in ct. Dispatchers call out, go on vacation. Or if a officer is on light duty for whatever reason, they can get stuck in there.

[KMG]

We do up in ct. Dispatchers call out, go on vacation. Or if a officer is on light duty for whatever reason, they can get stuck in there.

Yikes, I'm glad we don't. I know some dispatchers and I can promise you that it can be an endless job some nights.

[CatandDiallo]

He walked because he did nothing wrong. In Texas you have the right to use force, including deadly force, to protect your property and your neighbors. I would take Joe Horn as a neighbor any day. I love Texas!

This is the attitude that scares me a bit.

I don't think anyone should have the right to protect property by the use of deadly force, EVER. It's stuff VS someone's life. That someone may be a criminal, but if your life is not in danger, and you see this guy walking away with some of your stuff, you should go to prison for a long, long time if you shoot him.

If you feel like your are in grave danger, then that is a different story.. but just property.. just materialistic stuff?

No. Way.

[PitOnTheProwl]

This is the attitude that scares me a bit.

I don't think anyone should have the right to protect property by the use of deadly force, EVER. It's stuff VS someone's life. That someone may be a criminal, but if your life is not in danger, and you see this guy walking away with some of your stuff, you should go to prison for a long, long time if you shoot him.

If you feel like your are in grave danger, then that is a different story.. but just property.. just materialistic stuff?

No. Way.

If I broke into your house, prove to me you life is not in danger

[BrandiR]

If I broke into your house, prove to me you life is not in danger

I get the impression that there are a few people in on this conversation who believe a person should be shot for stealing your stuff, period. Yes, you can say that if someone is in your home, you don't KNOW that your life isn't in danger, and that is absolutely true, you really don't know. But I don't think that's where she was going with her comment. I think she was talking about the attitude that someone deserves to die simply for being a criminal.

If you think it's ok to shoot someone over a tv, that's your opinion and you're not alone. Just don't hide that opinion under the guise that you'd shoot this person stealing your tv because you "can't be 100% positive your life isn't in danger."

PS- Those are general "you", not YOU, Pit on the Prowl.

[sorraia]

This is the attitude that scares me a bit.

I don't think anyone should have the right to protect property by the use of deadly force, EVER. It's stuff VS someone's life. That someone may be a criminal, but if your life is not in danger, and you see this guy walking away with some of your stuff, you should go to prison for a long, long time if you shoot him.

If you feel like your are in grave danger, then that is a different story.. but just property.. just materialistic stuff?

No. Way.

I get the impression that there are a few people in on this conversation who believe a person should be shot for stealing your stuff, period. Yes, you can say that if someone is in your home, you don't KNOW that your life isn't in danger, and that is absolutely true, you really don't know. But I don't think that's where she was going with her comment. I think she was talking about the attitude that someone deserves to die simply for being a criminal.

If you think it's ok to shoot someone over a tv, that's your opinion and you're not alone. Just don't hide that opinion under the guise that you'd shoot this person stealing your tv because you "can't be 100% positive your life isn't in danger."

PS- Those are general "you", not YOU, Pit on the Prowl.

I agree to an extent. The gray area comes in when that "property" is a living being. For example... someone breaking in to steal our snakes, or stealing livestock, etc. Animals are considered property by law, but they aren't a lifeless piece of plastic or metal that can easily be replaced, they are living breathing beings. I'm not sure I would want to shoot someone in the process of stealing an animal (I would be concerned about the animal being injured in the process), but I do think something more than just letting them walk should be allowed, legally speaking. I don't know what, but something.

[BrandiR]

I agree to an extent. The gray area comes in when that "property" is a living being. For example... someone breaking in to steal our snakes, or stealing livestock, etc. Animals are considered property by law, but they aren't a lifeless piece of plastic or metal that can easily be replaced, they are living breathing beings. I'm not sure I would want to shoot someone in the process of stealing an animal (I would be concerned about the animal being injured in the process), but I do think something more than just letting them walk should be allowed, legally speaking. I don't know what, but something.

I don't think anyone should ever be allowed to walk if caught committing a crime. If less kids were given a slap on the wrist for their teenage nonsense, we'd have fewer adult criminals. We're WAY too lenient on criminals.

As for stealing animals, that's a different story. A life is clearly in danger, even if not human. Would I personally shoot someone to save a snake or a dog? Uh, no. But some people are more passionate about animals than I am. When I use the word "property" I mean inanimate objects, not a living anything.

[KMG]

If yall only knew what kind of people these are committing these crimes I think you would feel different. You are normal and rational, thinking these people are the same, they are not. You can bet that they would take your life over property. Sometimes they do while stealing it. Its not theirs to start with but they are willing to kill for it. I just think if its that important they should be willing to die for it themselves while trying to take it.

Another issue they cause is higher property insurance. Everything that is stolen and damaged is replaced by insurance. No big deal until you realize that everybody paying for insurance is paying higher premiums because the insurance company has to make up for losses and charges us to do it. Nothing is free unless your a criminal. Even when they go to prison we are flipping the bill for their food, lights, clothes, medical, tv, ac/heat. We are never done paying for them and their poor choices.

I get tired of finding people in their mid twenties with over thirty arrest, sometimes including one or two homicides and they are out walking the streets. Those kind of people are just not needed in society.

[sorraia]

I get tired of finding people in their mid twenties with over thirty arrest, sometimes including one or two homicides and they are out walking the streets. Those kind of people are just not needed in society.

Sounds like the bad neighbor I had! After she was arrested (and released the next day... prisons and jails are too over-crowded to hold them, so they get released to commit more crimes!) I was able to get her full name and look up her record. 30 years old and had a 10 year criminal history, including multiple felonies. Most were drug-related (possession, cultivating marijuana), but others included identity theft, check fraud and forgery, and DUI. The other stellar individuals arrested on that property during the time had similar records. I collected over 20 license plate numbers which I gave to the police, and at least 5 or 6 of those included stolen vehicles. Other stolen property was found on the premises after each arrest. This is a big reason I want to move out of this state. These kinds of creeps are being released by the hundreds from state prisons and county jails.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think anyone should ever be allowed to walk if caught committing a crime. If less kids were given a slap on the wrist for their teenage nonsense, we'd have fewer adult criminals. We're WAY too lenient on criminals.

As for stealing animals, that's a different story. A life is clearly in danger, even if not human. Would I personally shoot someone to save a snake or a dog? Uh, no. But some people are more passionate about animals than I am. When I use the word "property" I mean inanimate objects, not a living anything.

Need to get the laws changed then, since animals are legally considered "property" the same as inanimate objects.

[MrLang]

When I first posed my question I thought there would be one of 3 responses:

1. To carry your toys around with you to show off to the other boys and compare muzzle lengths

2. Because you live an exceptionally dangerous lifestyle or in an exceptionally dangerous neighborhood

3. Because you have a bleak, pessimistic, dangerously paranoid view of the world around you

Apparently I needed to add general aggression/psychosis to that list. "Since I don't want to get in trouble for murder, I'm just begging for the opportunity to waste someone legally."



When people started responding #3, I thought it would be interesting to see what they had to say about other dangers in the world that one could be completely justified in being concerned with. Those things would be that which contributes (obesity) to the leading causes of death in the US, heart disease and cancer.

Interestingly, the people who gave calm, reasonable responses also cited a concern for the food they eat and the lifestyle they live. The others chose to lash out with personal insults and attempts to derail the conversation into a debate about their right to carry arms or when it is appropriate to use lethal force on criminals.

I agreed in the beginning and continue to agree that every American has the right to bear arms. All I sought was a brief explanation of the decision to exercise the right. When people gave reasoning with huge holes in it, I felt obliged to provide a different perspective. I believe in the whole 'love thy neighbor' concept even though I don't actively participate in any religion. It felt my duty to try to shed light on rational fears about the world to help people question their own beliefs and practices. I think questioning one's beliefs and practices is the only way to personally advance and become a better person.

Doolittle hit the nail on the head when she said McDonald's was worse. Safe gun ownership is low-risk. What's more dangerous to children than the boogie man robber is the one who instills a culture of eating pizza as a celebration and having 'fry parties.' There is a blazing contradiction between that cultural training and one which says you should keep yourself and your body protected by firearms everywhere you go. I hope this last post helps a few of you understand where I was coming from with my 'debate.'

I'll leave this here and won't post again on your thread. I really did not mean to get it so side-tracked, but I guess I should have expected it.


"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing."
Helen Keller