105
Anon the murderer (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/shitposting@lemmy.today
86 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 1 month ago (8 children)

The comment section is filled with usamericans. Owning weapons is stupid and just because you can own and use a weapon doesn't mean you should. Harassing isn't the right thing either but damn maybe don't shot 5 times?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Shooting five times is normal. Self-defense shootings occur in the tight confines of domestic homes. By the time the intruder enters line of site to whatever room you're in, they will only be a few meters from you. There's no time to fire a warning shot. You also only have one chance to act. Guns don't work like they do in movies. It often takes several shots to disable an attacker. If you shoot once, stop, gauge, and reassess, the intruder will have walked across the room and be on you before you can fire again. You only have a single split-second chance before they can walk across the room and be on top of you. And if they're physically larger and stronger than you, at that point you are at their mercy. And if you only shot them once, now they're angry.

    This person acted exactly as they were trained. In self-defense classes, they teach you to not hesitate, to not attempt a disabling or warning shot, and to fire several shots in quick succession. It's the only way to actually use a firearm in close-quarters self defense.

    This person acted exactly as they were supposed to. They did exactly as they were taught.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Have you considered the self defense talk and guns as the problem? All that talk is only a result of guns being allowed in the first place. All the self defense classes I know about revolve around one thing: get yourself to savety asap and alarm people near you. And that is possible when the average joe doesn't own a gun. So I will not respect the decision to shot someone 5 times just because "he acted exactly as they were taught", maybe he should've taken a self defense course for self defense without a gun idk

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 month ago

    That self-defense class advice is not intended for home break-ins. It's fine for altercations in public, where there's a safer place you can flee to. But homes are supposed to be the safest place. They ARE the place you flee to from danger. And you're delusional if you think fleeing is a viable response to a home break-in. My bedroom is on the second floor of my home. If someone has broken in and is standing at my bedroom door, I'm not even going to have time to open the window before they're on me. and even if I did, then I would have to risk breaking my legs by jumping out the window. I'm sorry, but I should not have to seriously injure myself as a standard response to a thug breaking into my house. I wouldn't want to live in a place where we would expect a potential rape or murder victim to cripple themselves rather than letting a potential rapist receive the consequences of their own actions.

    As far as the whining about US gun ownership rates, you're offering solutions for a world that doesn't exist.

    And that is possible when the average joe doesn’t own a gun. So I will not respect the decision to shot someone 5 times just because “he acted exactly as they were taught”, maybe he should’ve taken a self defense course for self defense without a gun idk

    In other words, you're going to completely ignore the actual lived experiences of Americans and offer advice that's only applicable in a perfect world that doesn't exist. And honestly, your advice would be terrible even if no one in the US owned a gun. Frankly, as a 5'5" who weighs a buck and a quarter, I'm glad firearms are an option if I want to practice self-defense. I'm not going to be in any position to physically defend myself from an intruder. In that case, my only hope of self-defense is a firearm.

    I have a simpler solution to all this. How about if you don't want to get shot, you don't break into people's houses! If you break into someone's house, whatever happens to you as a consequence is on you. You should expect people to assume you are a rapist or a murderer and act accordingly. And that's not an unreasonable thing for victims to do. You cannot know why someone is in your home. You do not have time to find out. You have a split second to either put them down or have them on top of you. Maybe they're only there to rob you, but by the time you find that out, it's too late.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Well said. Two things come to mind here: Mozambique Drill (Two in the chest, one in the head) and the Tueller Drill (21-feet drill).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Thanks. I'm no gut nut. I don't even own a firearm. But I'm glad they're an option available to me. And so many folks on here are just downright delusional. I'm a 5'5" woman that weighs a buck and a quarter. If someone breaks into my home, you're damn right I'm going to assume they're not there just to steal the television. And if I have a firearm on me, I would not hesitate to use it. A lot of the commenters on here are asking potential rape victims to gamble with their own lives, just on the chance the thug breaking into their house is only there to steal and not harm anyone. I don't think someone stealing a TV deserves to be shot. It's not about punishment. But when you break into someone's home, you are putting them in a position where they cannot know your intentions and do not have time to find them out.

    If it turns out I end up shooting and killing someone that only ever intended to steal property? I'm sorry, but this is firmly in the territory of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes." Don't break into people's homes and make them fear for their lives, unless you're willing to gamble your own.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    You sound pretty down to earth. Yes, fuck around and find out is true. Something that no one ever thinks about is the trauma associated with being forced to shoot someone. Fortunately I've never had to experience it and hopefully never will. I don't even know what could prepare you for that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago

    Exactly. The last thing I ever want to do is to take a human life. If I had to do that, I'm sure it is something that would haunt my til my dying day. But at the same time I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who force other people into "my life or yours" situations. And every home invader does this, whether they intend to or not.

    And if someone genuinely means no wrong at all? If they're just severely mentally disturbed and are breaking into random houses, not intending to steal or hurt anyone? Those I would have the most sympathy for, but I think that kind of behavior falls into a "Of Mice and Men" scenario. A tragedy on all accounts. But sometimes mental illness forces people to put themselves into situations where they are inadvertently threatening the lives of others. Someone doesn't deserve to be executed for that. But when a split-second decision determines life or death? I would classify the death of such folks as their illness finally taking them. No different than if they're so delusional they think they can fly and leap off a tall building. Ultimately, everyone involved is morally blameless.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent