2007-04-22 19:58:30 · 11 answers · asked by tellitlikeitis 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I said "someone is breaking in" not your kid got up for a glass of milk.
2007-04-22 20:18:58 · update #1
Oh no! I'll gather my family together and hide in the closet and call 911 and pray that the police show up before the robber gets away with my stuff or shoots my family and myself. See, because I believe in gun control I have full faith that the police will come and protect me from the evil intruder even though the United States Supreme Court in Castle Rock v. Gonzales stated that under the Constitution the police are not obligated to protect anyone.
And in response to kiltsablowininthewind: So you'll stake your life of the vain hope that the criminal MIGHT NOT be armed? Cars have brakes so I'll go play in the street because there is a better chance they'll use their brakes and they MIGHT NOT run me over and kill me.
2007-04-22 20:06:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Gun control works, but only to a point. If everyone had a home security system and a gun in their house, burglaries woudl drop dramatically. In the above sinario, I woudl want to know where my kids are before useing the gun. At 3am, the sounds of someone breaking into the house and a child getting up in the middle of the night to gt something to drink are about the same if you were just waken up. At my house, I have motion detectors all over and cameras. Even with this, a rabbit or a squirel in the back yard and my wife is calling me about an intruder at 2 am. Their are enough laws on the books about gun control. Now it is time for some laws protecting the victims. If I shoot someone who breaks into my house as they are exiting (Fleeing) then I am charged. The robber broke into my house. It shoudl not matter if I shoot him entering the house, exiting the house or any point in between, but according to the law, if I shoot him in the rear while he is fleeing then I am useing excessive force. If I attach weapons to the motion detectors, then i am liable if someone is shot who is not obviously in the process of robbing me. These are the problems with guns in that situation, never mind the possiblity of shooting a child who just got up for milk and is holding his toy water gun.
2007-04-22 20:15:03 · answer #2 · answered by daddyspanksalot 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In California, you are able to get in problem in the experience that your dogs bit him on your position. in case you want to shoot burglars, you want to bypass to three different state. (specifically, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia have some variety of "stand your floor" guidelines to apply deadly rigidity adversarial to a probably risky intruder.)
2016-10-18 03:13:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Make shure to educate the kids about the dangers of firearms.
2007-04-22 20:21:09 · answer #4 · answered by scott p 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd prefer to use a stun/taser gun on him, hog tie him, put my foot on his nuts and wait for the cops to arrive.
That way I don't have to worry about his grieving family, or guilt from having killed the punk.
2007-04-22 20:06:19 · answer #5 · answered by Tumbleweed 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only gun control you want at this time is a STEADY AIM.
2007-04-22 20:08:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
YES, then there is less chance of them having a gun
2007-04-22 20:04:15 · answer #7 · answered by kiltsablowininthewind 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. I want to protect what is mine. This is my constitutional right. Take this right away from us and what will be next. Communism...
2007-04-22 20:11:49 · answer #8 · answered by cswilson139 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
yes...Gun control is being able to hit your target
2007-04-22 20:02:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I will Blast them
2014-01-11 21:21:20 · answer #10 · answered by randy 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋