
Originally Posted by
Oscar
Cops already have guns (as do some crims).
I would far rather that a crim is tazered, whereupon there is a good chance he survives to argue his case in court, than shot (where there is little chance of due process).
As for crims having tazers, the same applies. Would you prefer to be held up with a gun or a tazer?
Thank you for asking. (I have used a bigger font to emphasize my point, so that it's clear) I would prefer neither but if somebody breaks into my house and threatens the life of my wife, kids or myself, and I am in imminent danger, I think I should have the right to shoot them fucking dead to protect myself/family. It'll be a lesson for the next asshole who thinks they can break into a poor defenseless person's house. Bang, Bang motherfucker, taste my .45! Crims should be living in fear, never knowing when they break into a house, if they'll get killed. Maybe they'll learn, and if not, they'll never be a burden on society or pass on their defective predator/dumbshit genes again.
Very harsh, certainly not taking into account the poor crims shitty upbringing and all the excuses that people allow others to not take responsibility for their lives.
If there is anybody who would rather not defend themselves in the face of imminent danger or death, I think they should have that right. That's what 111 is for. Tell the crim to wait, as the police are coming any minute/hour now.
Thinking that the police are going to come and protect me or us, is naive. I would think that most LEO's would agree.
While it is a harsh reality that I don't like, this is a reality, even here in NZ. There are sheep, sheep dogs and wolves in this life we live. We all make choices. I'm not a sheep my friend...
Thank you for asking. 
PS - One shot is all that's needed, as I am a good shot, but two shots, as the first goes right between the eyes, and the second goes right next to it, just for good measure.
Ride, eat, sleep, repeat!
Bookmarks