Gun-GAF, would you kill somebody for breaking into your car?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Unless there is an imminent threat to my person or my family members/friends, I would never use a firearm to mitigate a situation.

Property can be replaced. And my car is insured, so I don't care. That is what insurance is for.
 
Ekdrm2d1 said:
I overlooked something in your posting.

A modified car with man-hours into it? That would piss me off too.
The guy from Houston? Word to him
Click to expand...

That's a whole other bag or worms. I was referring to the proposition of an individual's time spent working for said property, which now this individual might be back at risk of having to start over again on. Not only that, but criminals who get away with it will not stop until someone makes them stop. Committing crimes of this nature takes someone who has no regard for anything since the risks are so high, and I would not give such a person the benefit of the doubt.
 
BigBeauford said:
Not only that, but criminals who get away with it will not stop until someone makes them stop.
Click to expand...

If only they were to leave something traceable when they commit a crime, like DNA, or fingerprints, or a description, or..


Committing crimes of this nature takes someone who has no regard for anything since the risks are so high, and I would not give such a person the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...

Most criminals only go after low-risk targets. I also don't know if they're armed. My vehicle is not worth my life or theirs, replaceable under insurance, and potential punishment doesn't deter crime.

Responsible gun owners will only use their gun as a last resort, not Deputy Stans shooting people over 500 dollars of Dodge parts.
 
SteveO409 said:
Speaking of local story, some scumbag was stealing something in a garage and the homeowner turned on the light. Scumbag shot him and he died. If someone is messing with your property then you should shoot first before they shoot you.

http://kfdm.com/news/local/teenager-charged-with-murdering-a-beaumont-man

this pisses me off so much since i live 2 minutes from where this happened
Click to expand...

Yeah that's a massive statistical outlier and you're still much more likely to accidentally shoot your wife. May as well live in a rubber house to avoid lightning strikes.
 
FyreWulff said:
If only they were to leave something traceable when they commit a crime, like DNA, or fingerprints, or a description, or..




Most criminals only go after low-risk targets. I also don't know if they're armed. My vehicle is not worth my life or theirs, replaceable under insurance, and potential punishment doesn't deter crime.
Click to expand...

In the case of the gentleman from Houston whose car was stolen, there was an actual school slip of the name of a suspects child. They left a huge variety of evidence in the car, and the police were not receptive to any of the victims requests. Seems to me these occurances happen so often that it is becoming relegated to a lesser crime.
 
I'm not gonna bag some fool over my car. I love my car but I'm not going to go crazy and end some dude's life. Fuck that, it ain't worth it.
 
In my dealing with car burglars, they very very rarely operate alone. There is often two-three at a time hitting as many cars in an area as possible. Leaving the safety net of your home (which is much easier to articulate defending with force) could inadvertently put your family at risk.

You leave the house to confront the one burglar, when you're suddenly attacked by all three. Now they have access to your house and you are incapacitated.

Unless there is an imminent threat to yours or someone else's safety, stay inside, call 911 immediately and provide as much info as possible. I can't stress calling immediately enough. I can't tell you how many times people wait 5-10 minutes to call. Do you know how much of a head start that is for a motivated person?
 
Theives are scum, this guy probably would have brought harm to the gunowner if he had the chance to get away with the truck. Now I'm not saying he deserved death for this, but I feel zero pity for him. I personally think detaining him and playing rough would have been sufficient personal justice before the police picked him up.
 
Kill him? Nah. Warning shot? Oh yes. You're on my property and fucking with my stuff, you're lucky you're not dead but you would have to threaten my family for it to get that far.
 
Don't start none
Won't be none

Seriously though, if you're on my property trying to steal my stuff, I'm pulling my Glock on you.
 
I don't like guns and don't own any but last week I heard my neighbors car being broken into early in the morning, looked outside and there were 3 guys going through her car. I called the cops and the arrived maybe 20 mins later after they were long gone and nothing came of it.


I've been asking myself what else I could have done without putting myself or anyone in danger but it just seemed like those 3 guys could just walk around and take whatever they wanted.
 
I would only use one of my guns to kill someone if my life or the life of a family member were in immediate danger and I had absolutely no other option. I would never kill someone over a material possession.

To anyone who says yes: please do not own a gun, ever.

Ekdrm2d1 said:
Guy doing the stealing just needed money. Guess being a criminal comes at a price :/
Click to expand...

Obviously shooting the dude for that isn't reasonable, but you make it sounds like breaking into cars and stealing things is totally okay when you need money. There are other ways out of poverty.
 
Would love to know if shooter's car was insured or not..

Glad I don't live in America. I really think my friends and I would have suffered a loss by now.
 
I'd think about it. Yeah it's just property but that does represent a lot of hard work and time given to be able to buy something like that. So yeah I'd be pissed to just see it stolen or ruined potentially. Now I'll have to worry about dealing with all of the fallout and paperwork that comes with reporting it and potentially having to get a replacement car, dealing with work issues, etc.

But unless actual life was at risk, I ultimately wouldn't.

I'd hope they would get into a fatal car crash, though.
 
Kozak said:
Would love to know if shooter's car was insured or not..

Glad I don't live in America. I really think my friends and I would have suffered a loss by now.
Click to expand...

Yes, because the crime rate and risk of death/loss is exactly the same no matter where you live in the US.

You really shouldn't let Gaf/the media skew your perception of a place, be it good or bad.
 
Nope, I wouldn't even intervene.

For one, I have insurance. I can replace the shit in my car.

For two, even if I have a gun, the other guy might have one too. He might be better with it than I am.

No reason to waste a life over a car. This attitude apparently is at odds with my being a native Texan. The only reason I'd ever own or use a gun would be as an absolute last resort, or if I lived in an area where predatory animals were a problem.
 
BigBeauford said:
If people have no recourse for defending personal property, you are basically telling people their right to own said property can be forfeit at any time. Not a great recipe for a functioning society.
Click to expand...

But you do have recourse. Insurance. Police. Society.
 
GaimeGuy said:
But you do have recourse. Insurance. Police. Society.
Click to expand...
Insurance is just a cost transfer to the rest of society that the criminal gets to free ride on, particularly if and when, as has been pointed out, the cops treat auto theft as an inevitability they can't or won't do anything about.
 
Joyful said:
nah but id threaten them with one

for most gun owners it probably boils down to their mood that day
Click to expand...
I would threaten, and if they appeared aggressive, is aim for a less lethal shot. Not about to risk them getting close enough to take the gun from me.
blame space said:
can't warning shots fall to earth and kill people
Click to expand...
If you shot in the air. You could shoot your own car instead to prove how crazy you are
 
Ya cause I want my insurance rates raised because I had to make claim. I would threaten them with the gun hoping they would run. By the time the police show up the thief is long gone with your stuff. If he turned on me and had to be shot, so be it, my stuff is for sure worth more than a scumbag thief's life.

Why should they get away and leave me with all the bullshit hassle? The cops aren't ever going to follow up or find your stuff.
 
Jedi2016 said:
No. The law's actually pretty clear on that sort of thing, this guy's probably going to jail. That's pretty much all the Concealed Carry class is, is hours of sitting in a classroom listening to all the things you can't do without severe repercussions. Something it might not hurt to have all gun owners go through, not just the ones that want to carry.

That being said, the would-be thief would have a very bad day if I actually laid hands on them.
Click to expand...
Texas law could be interpreted a few different ways here:

Texas Penal Code § 9.42 said:
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41;  and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;  or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property;  and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;  or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Click to expand...

So he has a chance of walking.

Also, holy shit at 2B. They are not fucking around down there.
 
Amon37 said:
Ya cause I want my insurance rates raised because I had to make claim. I would threaten them with the gun hoping they would run. By the time the police show up the thief is long gone with your stuff. If he turned on me and had to be shot, so be it, my stuff is for sure worth more than a scumbag thief's life.

Why should they get away and leave me with all the bullshit hassle? The cops aren't ever going to follow up or find your stuff.
Click to expand...

Fingers crossed you never find yourself in a situation where you have to steal.
 
Systolique said:
I mean if you have urges to shoot things at least shoot the tires so he can't run off with your car, but everytime I hear this "I have a gun to defend myself against intruders" I want to vomit.
Click to expand...

(Not a lawyer, this is not presented as legal advice, etc.)

In at least some states, I'd expect that attempting to shoot out the tires of the vehicle being stolen from you would be unlawful use of your firearm if it's not also within your rights at that moment to use deadly force against the suspect outright, since you could plausibly hit the suspect instead of the tires. Or, very likely, the intent to shoot out the tires *instead* of the intent to use deadly force against the suspect could be outside of your rights, regardless of outcome, since your specific intent when firing your weapon matters, not just the scenario itself.

As a general rule, you don't use your firearm at *all* unless you're justified in the use of deadly force when doing so, and operate under the clear expectation that any use of your firearm will result in lethal consequence, whether that consequence actually results or not. If you're taking a half-measure like trying to shoot out tires, which could still result in someone's death or serious injury (the suspect's or a third party's), it's immediately going to be a question of why you used your firearm at all. Why was your intent with your deadly weapon something other than the application of deadly force? You can't treat your firearm as a "tool that could be deadly but I'm really good at Call of Duty so no worries." It would stand to reason, then, if you're trying to shoot out tires, that you concluded deadly force wasn't necessary at the time, yeah? If so, you probably just fucked up when you fired those shots.

Texas law in particular, though, since the story in the OP is from Texas, is pretty cut and dry about this sort of thing:

https://www.texaslawshield.com/portal/texas-gun-law/
In Texas it is presumed that deadly force was reasonably necessary if it is used against an individual who was unlawfully or forcibly entering or entered into an occupied home, business, or vehicle or is attempting to forcibly remove another against his or her will from an occupied home, business, or vehicle. Deadly force is also presumed to be justified to prevent the commission or attempted commission of murder, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery and aggravated robbery.

In Texas if a person is present in any place where they have a right to be, they have no duty to retreat and have the right to use force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe that it is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to themselves or to prevent the commission of murder, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery or aggravated robbery.

Texas law allows a person to use force in the protection of property to prevent or terminate another’s trespass or other unlawful interference with the possession of real or personal property. Deadly force can be used in Texas when the crime against property is classified as arson, burglary, robbery, criminal mischief at night or theft at night. Deadly force may also be used to prevent a person from fleeing with property immediately after the commission of a burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime if the actor believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means or the use of force other than deadly force would expose the person to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Click to expand...

Basically, not good for your long-term health prospects to choose robbery as a profession in Texas.
 
RichiRamjag said:
When you use a gun, you do so because your life is in danger. If you feel comfortable enough to purposely wound someone and you admit that, you'd be in some shit and most likely get sued.
Click to expand...
If i was in the car, maybe my life would be in danger. How else would someone drag me out to steal it?

If i would catch a thief trying to break in my parked car, it means he most likely doesn't have a gun and he is probably just a common thief. So the worst i could do would be to hope i'm stronger than him and punch him away.
 
the enlightened one taught us that we must free ourself from all worldly possessions so that we can reach nirvana

uh, anyway, I'd probably not take the burden of having to live my life with the guilt of having killed someone over a car
 
prevent or terminate another’s trespass or other unlawful interference with the possession of real or personal property
Click to expand...

Does this actually mean what it reads like it means? Can you shoot somebody if they go, "haha I'm going to put my foot on your lawn" in Texas?
 
No. I would still draw on him, but I never keep it loaded. The fear of a gun pointed at you is more than enough to either run them off or scare them into submission.
 
Ashby said:
Does this actually mean what it reads like it means? Can you shoot somebody if they go, "haha I'm going to put my foot on your lawn" in Texas?
Click to expand...

(not a lawyer, this is personal opinion and supposition and not in any way legal counsel)

Criminal trespass wouldn't begin at a "lol I'm stepping on your lawn" moment alone, since otherwise your friends could legally shoot you when you come to hang out. By making that comment you're only establishing your intent to enter what you know to be their property, which is one element of the "how to get shot in Texas" game, but it would also have to be previously established and known to you, without any ambiguity, that the owner of the property would consider you to be trespassing if you were to enter their property, and despite that you chose to intentionally violate their personal property rights with your foot-flourish.

I imagine it would be pretty difficult for the shooter to prove in court that all that had been firmly established, therefore justifying immediate use of lethal force, in the instant your foot touched lawn and that it wasn't just a ridiculously thinly veiled excuse for murder. The cops wouldn't just show up and note the foot there amid the pool of blood, take a statement to the effect of, "he announced it and everything as the foot touched!" and then nod, throw you in a body bag, and go have some coffee. Mr. Yee-Haw with the lever-action would be arrested and an investigation would be performed and the application of the law would be interpreted...
and *then* they'd release him and go have coffee.
 
McGreevious said:
Some people in this thread sound like they're just waiting for the day they can shoot someone and be revered as a hero.
Click to expand...

Anecdotally, having grown up in a military family, I get the sense that some gun owners really, REALLY want someone to "try something" so they have a chance to shoot them. It's very uncanny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
How would you handle your wealth.
42
1K
jason10mm replied
  • Poll
Would you consider yourself a snacker?
2
60
1K
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
How would kid you think of current you?
Social  2
54
3K
Artistic replied
Naked Gun Trailer - August 1st.
News  2 3
124
6K
Hookshot replied
  • Poll
You ever had your eyebrows threaded?
43
110
AJUMP23 replied
Top Bottom