Mass shooting! Customer takes on 3 out of 4 robbers in Houston

[Camelfilter]

...It's not about getting rich. It's about getting the next fix.

Perhaps progressive states should just give away narcotics for free.

Unrestricted, uncut, pharmaceutical grade. As much as anyone wants.

However, no narcan...

 

[Nosferatu]

Perhaps progressive states should just give away narcotics for free.

Unrestricted, uncut, pharmaceutical grade. As much as anyone wants.

However, no narcan...

The Libertarian in me isn't going to argue much...except about the taxpayers paying for it part.

 

[RobMa]

Yeah that's what I noticed as well, not being specific about the assailants means that they were obviously.... and of course we can't say anything bad about those....

Ahem ahem...

 

[WillametteWill]

And yet another lesson as to why magazine capacity limits are bad for law-abiding citizens.

Completely lost on LEVO, Mom Demand Acton, et. al.

 

[nammac]

Me thinks this needs to become more commonplace in order to bring the balance back to society. When society starts shooting back at these criminals, perhaps they'll criminal less…

One way or the other…

 

[nwslopoke]

Me thinks this needs to become more commonplace in order to bring the balance back to society. When society starts shooting back at these criminals, perhaps they'll criminal less…

One way or the other…

You mean, consequences?

 

[WillametteWill]

Me thinks this needs to become more commonplace in order to bring the balance back to society. When society starts shooting back at these criminals, perhaps they'll criminal less…

One way or the other…

You are in good company with this logic.


If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim.

Jeff Cooper

 

[OldBroad44]

Yeah that's what I noticed as well, not being specific about the assailants means that they were obviously.... and of course we can't say anything bad about those....

Ahem ahem...

They were apparently minors, so news media would be unspecific about assailants no matter the race or ethnicity of criminals.

 

[The Heretic]

 

[sikhed]

They were apparently minors, so news media would be unspecific about assailants no matter the race or ethnicity of criminals.

Understand woke news speech:
"Minors" are people under the age of 18 (or 21)
"Teenagers" are of a specific race/ethnicity.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Understand woke news speech:
"Minors" are people under the age of 18 (or 21)
"Teenagers" are of a specific race/ethnicity.

They can shove those pronouns and woke terms up their arse.

 

[RobMa]

They were apparently minors, so news media would be unspecific about assailants no matter the race or ethnicity of criminals.

C'mon, you know better then that....

 

[Koda]

Me thinks this needs to become more commonplace in order to bring the balance back to society. When society starts shooting back at these criminals, perhaps they'll criminal less…

One way or the other…

this will never happen though. "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link", the vast majority of society does not want to take responsibility for their personal safety. They want to remain dependent on the govt to provide their needs because its easier.

 

[OldBroad44]

C'mon, you know better then that....

I think its illegal for media to print names or photos of minors charged with crimes. I'm guessing that would include descriptions too. The basic idea is that with minors it should be possible to expunge their records after they have served their time. Thats ckearly impossible if the names, photos, and descriptions of the juveniles are publicized. So no, I don't know better than that.

My understanding is this expounding of records is one reason why there is so much juvenile crime in some places. Gangs actually assign the jobs that are riskiest in terms of arrests to juveniles. I'm not convinced we should expunge records for juveniles. Some juvenile crimes have included murders.

 

[RyanG90]

Was hoping for more casualties

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Was hoping for more casualties

Rookie numbers meme in 3... 2... 1...

 

[OldBroad44]

this will never happen though. "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link", the vast majority of society does not want to take responsibility for their personal safety. They want to remain dependent on the govt to provide their needs because its easier.

I agree that many would rather delegate responsibility for protecting themselves from criminals to the government if possible. More for philosophical reasons than because it is easiest. In some ways allowing citizens unfettered rights to defend themselves against all harms, big or small, real or imagined is easiest. There's just this little problem that huge numbers of innocent people tend to get killed. And what some people consider a danger or harm to themselves is pretty illegitimate or trivial. Such as being the " wrong" race, or being tall enough so that nearly everyone is afraid of you if they have to pass you on the sidewalk late at night.

I disagree with the idea that its not possible for people to change their minds about taking more responsibility for their own SD. Even those who would prefer to allow only LE to protect citizens against criminals do take into account whether LE can. So we see many new gun owners now. And its long been the case that when city people move to the country its not long before they buy one or more guns. Because even if they believed (falsely mostly) that LE could provide their SD in the city, when they move to the country and LE is 30" or more away, reality tends to set in.

 

[Koda]

In some ways allowing citizens unfettered rights to defend themselves against all harms, big or small, real or imagined is easiest. There's just this little problem that huge numbers of innocent people tend to get killed. And what some people consider a danger or harm to themselves is pretty illegitimate or trivial.

To me that doesn't describe anything easy about taking responsibility for ones own SD. That actually corroborates my opinion that its easier to let or rely on the govt for personal protection.

I do get your point though, the subject is not as simple as I may have projected it to be. If hypothetically the majority of society took responsibility for this Im uncertain what the immediate outcome would be from such a paradigm shift in social actions of lawful self defense. Most people dont want to hurt others but the laws of lawful self defense are indeed complex and training would be in demand.
But I do think over time society would have a much clearer understanding of the criminal element and it would reduce crime.... like those city folk you describe who move to the country many eventually buy their first gun. People in the city dependent on 911 are very unaware of just how long even 5 minutes response time is.

 

[The Heretic]

To me that doesn't describe anything easy about taking responsibility for ones own SD. That actually corroborates my opinion that its easier to let or rely on the govt for personal protection.

Taking personal responsibility for any aspect of one's own life, whether it be SD, providing for necessities, thinking for oneself, etc. - is almost always going to be more difficult than letting some other entity be responsible.

That doesn't make it better, and usually makes it worse IMO - especially from the aspect of liberty/freedom.

 

[Stomper]

I enjoy happy endings.

It's a GAS STATION, not a "massage" parlor.