LambChop
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2008
- Messages
- 21,160
- Reaction score
- 29
Sounds like a question for Grandmaj.
George Zimmerman's Injuries #1
- Thread starter JBean
- Start date
- Status
Sounds like a question for Grandmaj.
Yep. Because I do not pull my gun unless I feel a VALID life threatening situation is at hand. I do not shoot to WOUND, for a number of reasons. Number one, pistols are very inaccurate due to the short barrel length and maximum damage to neutralize the threat is the goal. Number two, shooting a gun out of someones hand or shooting them in the leg is the stuff of Hollywood. When you pull your gun, you aim for the largest traget a human has, body mass. And third, and MOST important, when that criminal comes at me, to take my stuff, harm my family, or harm me, and I only wing them, some bleeding heart jury will make me work for the rest of my life to support this lowlife who wanted to harm us.
I carry a gun, because I cannot carry a cop, and when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
What "stuff" that you have could possibly be worth a human life?
MY stuff, and the "human life" is that of a person who hold NO respect for law and order, thus I hold none for them. It is such beliefs that its only STUFF and we shouldn't KILL to protect it that has allowed our criminal justice system to evolve into what it has. I hold no harm or ill will to those who do not threaten me. But if you are suggesting that I should NOT respond with force, because the intruder MIGHT only want to take my stuff, and NOT rape my daughter, you are sorely mistaken.
Thank you.
I would suggest you ask that of the criminal who is willing to take someone's stuff at the risk of his or her life. Don't want to risk your life, don't try and take my stuff. Simple.
francie
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2009
- Messages
- 329
- Reaction score
- 1
Personally, I'd have more respect for a thief than a murderer.
So would I, sort of, I guess. If I were inclined to attribute respect to varying degrees of criminals. But I'm not. And I don't consider someone defending themselves from a criminal invasion a "murderer."
Ask yourself whether, if someone broke in to your house tomorrow and ran into your 8 yo child at the door, whether you would distinguish whether they "only" wanted your tv or your daughter.
vlpate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,113
- Reaction score
- 2,927
People who carry concealed handguns for self defense, regardless of what one thinks of this case, use hollow point bullets for two reasons....to kill the person who is trying to kill them. Their aim is not to wound them and have them continue their attack. The other reason is this type bullet poses less danger to bystanders.
I love the analogy that a victim should shoot the attacker in the leg - my thought, the attacker wasn't hitting the victim in the leg.
JMO
vlpate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,113
- Reaction score
- 2,927
I wouldn't think twice about shooting someone who came into my house to rob me. They know going in what the risks are. JMO
LambChop
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2008
- Messages
- 21,160
- Reaction score
- 29
It must be hard living one's life in constant fear. jmo
Kimberlyd125
Softball is for everyone. Fast pitch is for athlet
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 16,167
- Reaction score
- 44
It's not about living in fear. It's about being prepared.
Just because someone carries, it does not mean they live in fear.
We have fire alarms to save us from fires.
We have seat belts installed in cars.
We have airbags.
We have a ton of things that keep us prepared in case something awful happens.
Not because we live in fear. It's because bad things do happen. And many would rather be prepared for them instead of just hoping they don't happen.
I don't carry. It's my choice not to.
But, I certainly wouldn't categorize those who do as living in constant fear.
JMO
imamaze
Former Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 21,126
- Reaction score
- 304
We're not talking about someone coming into the home though are we? Someone coming into your home with you there, you would have no idea what they were coming in for. How would you know if they were just coming to rob you? Still in my opinion GZ should not have been following Trayvon. None of this would have happened if he had just stayed in his vehicle. So what if the *advertiser censored**holes always get away!
JMO
LambChop
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2008
- Messages
- 21,160
- Reaction score
- 29
But they are. You can see some of the fear revealed in their postings. Everytime you put that gun on you are thinking about the fact that someone may attack you or you would not reach for it.
The only time my husband ever took his gun was after he left the PD and he knew he had to go back into an area of the city to take a statement. He said some people would still remember him as a cop. He never put it on for any other reason than that.
Don't get me wrong there are some who were victims and do feel that fear and it may never go away. I just remember my husband telling me that if you carry a gun you have to remember that gun could be turned on you. Most people do not see an attack coming. Anyone meaning to do you harm would not walk away without taking that gun if it's there for the taking.
It's sad to think that people feel they have to carry a gun but that is their choice. I believe GZ should have never been permitted to carry a gun because I don't think he would have gotten out of that truck had he not had one on him. jmo
LambChop
Former Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2008
- Messages
- 21,160
- Reaction score
- 29
That is good to know. So the next time I see someone with a weapon I should fear for my life if I accidently tick them off. lol
I think what we will find from this case is that both GZ and TM felt their life was threatened and only GZ had a gun so that means he wins. jmo
And suppose TM HAD been up to no good? Suppose you lived i The Retreat, and GZ stayed in his car, and that "*advertiser censored**hole" got away. came to your apartment and raped you. Would you then still be saying he should have remained in his car? GZ presented NO evidence of being a danger to TM. He was FOLLOWING him. TM did NOT react like someone who was in fear of a crime. GZ DID act that way, he called the cops. TM called his GIRLFRIEND, chatted with her, bopping along like nothing was wrong.
Now, simple question, you have a cell phone, you feel like your life is in danger, who do you call, the police or your significant other?
See, you have equated "threatened" to "ticked off', which is not true, nor the same thing. Have GZ shot TM when he "ticked" him off, he would have done so right after he left the vehicle, and not waited until TM attacked him.
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 28,228
- Reaction score
- 70,736
Was there any mention of "blow back" blood spatter on GZ?
If GZ fired his gun during a struggle while on the ground with TM on top of him, then TM's blood should be on him somewhere. On his face, hands and clothes. No gun powder residue on GZ or TM from firing a gun from close range while on his back on the ground?
That would tell about how close he was when he fired his gun. If there was an exit wound to TM's back was the bullet recovered at the scene?
The blood patterns on back of his head is still just weird to me. The blood just stops flowing? In two different directions around the same time? Fighting for your life and no blood is smeared on your head or clothes while your moving around trying to get a man off of you. None of your blood on a boys hand"s that you claim was banging your head against a sidewalk?
Why would you let a man, whose said his head was pounded on a sidewalk several times, and those injuries might need stitches, go without transporting him to the ER so they could check to see how severe his wounds were and if he had a head concussion?
Why would you not want to see how badly hurt you were when you were in a fight for you life? Blood flowing from the back of your head, blood flowing down your throat and you say your OK.
If GZ fired his gun during a struggle while on the ground with TM on top of him, then TM's blood should be on him somewhere. On his face, hands and clothes. No gun powder residue on GZ or TM from firing a gun from close range while on his back on the ground?
That would tell about how close he was when he fired his gun. If there was an exit wound to TM's back was the bullet recovered at the scene?
The blood patterns on back of his head is still just weird to me. The blood just stops flowing? In two different directions around the same time? Fighting for your life and no blood is smeared on your head or clothes while your moving around trying to get a man off of you. None of your blood on a boys hand"s that you claim was banging your head against a sidewalk?
Why would you let a man, whose said his head was pounded on a sidewalk several times, and those injuries might need stitches, go without transporting him to the ER so they could check to see how severe his wounds were and if he had a head concussion?
Why would you not want to see how badly hurt you were when you were in a fight for you life? Blood flowing from the back of your head, blood flowing down your throat and you say your OK.
- Status