Man gets robbed at gun point trying to buy vintage cards on ebay

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

For all those who own a gun, or a small arsenal of weapons, I have a question:

If somebody broke into your home, do you actually think you might try to shoot him to protect yourself? Because if I owned fifty guns and someone broke into my home to take my stereo or TV, I would just tell them to take it. I know it is everyone's constitutional right to bear arms, but if you shoot somebody (not to mention he may shoot you first) your life will probably never be the same. It just seems that many people who carry guns will never actually use them, even under difficult circumstances.

I know the standard response is "I will do anything to protect my family" but I doubt they are coming to get your kids, they are just looking for something to sell. Who is actually going to pull the trigger for that?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dylan

Barry, should i make them a pot of coffee too? No im not going to shoot them unless its absolutly neccesary, but having a gun in my hand and saying get out of my house, nothin wrong with that. Your only supposed to shoot if your life is in danger. And to tell me that people break into homes just for theft isnt true. Like i said in the previous post ive had two people close to me violently raped and beaten. So dont tell me that people come into homes only interested in stereos and tvs.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Barry,

I would do everything possible not to shoot someone that had broken into my house - let them take laptops, etc. But I do like having a gun around because if push really came to shove and I thought I was in danger I would use it (or at least I hope I could). I'd even fire into the wall first just to make sure it was unmistakeable that I had a gun.

But you are right. Shooting someone would change a life forever, and that's why I would do whatever needed to not get to that point. I guess it would come down to a choice between changing my life forever and possibly not having a life to change.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: Cat

I have two hand guns in the house and a small rifle. One is a 9mm with a clip (the loaded clip is in the dresser drawer and the gun high up in the master bedroom closet), and the other a loaded .22 revolver (which holds nine casings) stored high in the master bedroom closet as well.

The problem with allowing them to take your property is once they are in your house you have already lost control of the situation. Don't ever assume you can reason with a criminal. You will never be able to predict their moves. Who's to say their next step isn't to take you (or your wife), at gun point, down to the local ATM to empty your account. Again, you will never be able to predict what will happen during that little excursion. On only two occasions have I ever grabbed one of the pistols (I prefer the .22 revolver) when I heard those noises in the night. My theory is they get one warning: "I have a gun." and then the minute I see that they are a stranger and they are coming in rather than heading back out the door/window, they will be gut shot.

There is no way I would ever carry one on my body or in my car (at least I haven't yet). I can also understand why some people do not want guns around. I grew up in Oregon where rifles and shot guns were extremely common, and to a lesser extent hand guns.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Dylan- fair enough, there are crimes more violent than robbery. But if the victims in that case had access to a gun, somebody probably would have been killed.

In 1988 I walked into my apartment to find two people ransacking it. They were not expecting me back in the middle of the day. They pushed me into the bathroom, cut the phone lines, and left with some valuables. But the loss was minimal, and amazingly they were caught that night (after robbing someone else) and most of what they stole I recovered. They were amateurs and even though my collection was in the house they never saw it. I've never owned a gun but wondered if I did how I would have responded in that situation.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

An intruder comes through my door he goes out in a body bag. Period.

One thing I find very interesting is how totalitarian regimes move to ban civilian arms ownership. Some of the worst perpetrators of genocides over the last 100 years have first banned citizens from owning weapons:

Ottoman Turkey
Armenians (mostly Christians) 1-1.5 million murdered
Art. 166, Pen. Code, 1866 & 1911 Proclamation, 1915
• Permits required •Government list of owners •Ban on possession

Soviet Union
Political opponents; farming communities 20 million (at least) murdered through the gulag system
Resolutions, 1918 Decree, July 12, 1920 Art. 59 & 182, Pen. code, 1926
•Licensing of owners •Ban on possession •Severe penalties

Nazi Germany & Occupied Europe
Political opponents; Jews; Gypsies; critics 20 million murdered
Law on Firearms & Ammun., 1928 Weapon Law, March 18, 1938
•Registration & Licensing •Stricter handgun laws •Ban on possession

China
Political opponents; Rural populations Enemies of the state 20-35 million murdered or starved
Act of Feb. 20, 1951 Act of Oct. 22, 1957
•Prison or death to "counter-revolutionary criminals" and anyone resisting any government program •Death penalty for supply guns to such "criminals"

Cambodia (Khmer Rouge)
Educated Persons; Political enemies 2 million murdered
Art. 322-328, Penal Code Royal Ordinance 55, 1938
•Licenses for guns, owners, ammunition & transactions •Photo ID with fingerprints •License inspected quarterly

Rwanda
Tutsi people 800,000 murdered
Decree-Law No. 12, 1979
•Register guns, owners, ammunition •Owners must justify need •Concealable guns illegal •Confiscating powers

Am I saying that every gun regulation is wrong? Of course not. Only a fool would advocate that sort of position. I support background checks before sales, bans on certain types of weapons like fully automatic machine guns (but ban them based on performance, not looking scary), and mandatory firearms training and safety storage before a gun is turned over to a purchaser. However, as a member of a small minority group that has been targeted repeatedly by officially sanctioned violence and official violence, I firmly believe that the most fundamental safeguard against tyranny is the right to own guns. On November 10. 1938 -- one day after the Nazi party terror squads (the SS) savaged thousands of Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses throughout Germany -- new regulations under the Weapons Law specifically barred Jews from owning any weapons, even clubs or knives. As Adolph Hitler said: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall."

"The right of self-defense never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals." President James Monroe (November 16, 1818)

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Adam- you realize if an intruder leaves your home in a body bag there is a possibility that he was only there to steal your stereo, and the result might be you go to jail and are disbarred. Would you take that chance and lose your career over something that trivial?

[Archive]

Posted By: pat

barry- there is no way i would pull the trigger in the scenerio you mentioned over a sterio or such. but if i feel that my life or my girlfriend's life or either of my 2 rottie's lives are in danger, then that is absolutely a different story. i strongly feel that you can never end up in a situation whereas you are at the mercy of a criminal. i think one would be more affected by not pulling the trigger and having a family member raped or killed as opposed to taking down the aggressor. another point is the type of ammunition. some can go right thru walls of homes and hit neighbors. thats one reason to have fragmentation ammo also. once it hits an object it breaks into 3 seperate smaller fragments, thus doesnt penetrate past the intended target. some of this other ammo for the high powered rifles seem to just keep going. pretty dangerous stuff. 22 cal hollowtips although weak, for the home is ok. the mags holds 12+ rounds. doesnt overpenetrate. but as i said, i like the nine mil hollows myself. alittle more punch. my 45 cal is too much to trust.

by the way, didnt a coin dealer get robbed of 4 million in coins at knife point just recently? i am sure that would have turned out alittle different. but at least he didnt get hurt though, which is the most important thing. but nothing would have stopped the perptrator of cutting his throat anyway. he was lucky.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

Actually Adam, that's my other reason for wanting to own guns. I just don't trust that our government will remain trustable forever, and agree that one of the first things they'll do is try to take guns. Good luck. Some countries restrict gun ownership (Canada, England, etc) and are pretty responsible with it, but I prefer an armed populace thanks.

lol. I am a die-hard liberal on pretty much all issues except two. And one of those is gun control.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: mike mullins

Seriously, no sarcasm meant in any of my questions. I really thought that some people might be joking. I live in central Iowa, which is not exactly a high-crime area, so carrying a firearm is not something I often think about.

Sorry you read something into my question that wasn't intended. I tried to write the question as neutrally as possible, and I guess I failed.

Cheers,

mm

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I realize all the different scenarios that can take place between perpetrator and victim, and there are no easy answers. Someone might want to only point a loaded gun in that situation, but with the adrenaline racing and the intense stress of the moment, you just don't know how it will turn out. I guess we are using very extreme examples where your only way out may be having a gun. But while my burglary experience was scary, it didn't warrant that kind of potentially violent force.

[Archive]

Posted By: pat

the usa has more register guns to civilians than any other country in the world.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Joann- I too believe in the constitutional right of every American to own a gun. But I don't think the spirit of it is that everyone, no matter how unstable or violent he or she might be, should have one. I'm guessing more people own guns than is really necessary. And let's not even get into how many illegal guns are out there (teenage drug dealers carrying sub-machine guns).

[Archive]

Posted By: pat

barry- at least here in nj you have to have a spotless record to be able to get handguns. its not easy. forget about a license to carry. just cant do it unless law-enforcement or such. nj is one of the toughest states. but naturally it seems as though most of the violent offenders have no problem getting them. i believe in right to own/bear but you must have/show great responsibility with them.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I'm with you Pat- owning a gun is a huge responsibility, and shouldn't be taken lightly. The number of illegal guns out there is truly disturbing. It might be tough in NJ but in some states it's way too easy, and that's where criminals go to get them.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

First, you are presuming an awful lot to assume that either (1) you know why the intruder is in your home or (2) the intruder is telling the truth in stating that they are only there to steal the stereo. Do you really trust your child's life to your assumption or your faith in a criminal's word? I don't. I prefer to rely on the word of Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson.

Second, legally, there is a doctrine called the "castle rule". It presumes that an intruder in your home is there to harm you and that you need not retreat in your own home. I have never seen a case where shooting an intruder under the circumstances we all envision was not determined to be justifiable self defense. I seriously doubt that the DA would even bother to indict if I shot a burglar in my kitchen. And while I hate to go bumper-sticker on you, I truly would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Finally, it is illegal in CA and most states for a criminal engaged in a felony to sue for injuries received in the commission of the crime. Simply by breaking and entering my home, the intruder is already in the commmission of a felony.

I have had to pull my gun once, just after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. My condo complex was badly damaged in the quake and as a consequence we lost power and had to open the parking garage gate to allow people access to the complex's tuck under parking. I was on the board of directors at the time and was in the garage helping other directors assess the damage in the hours after the main quake. I also had my .357 with me, which I started to carry just after the quake hit. A few of the other board members there also were armed. A pair of toughs from the low income apartments down the block came through the open gateway. The president of the board approached them as they were entering and asked them what they were doing. They responded by saying that they were there to "look around" and went right past him. Bear in mind this is private property, not the street, and would have been secured by a gate had we not lost power. The four of us who were armed and in the garage stepped out into the main aisle, pulled back our jackets and showed the guns. The thugs saw them, one said "cool", and they turned and walked back out. I have no doubt that we would have had a major problem had we not had guns that morning, as there was no police presence in our area and it was far too early for the National Guard to be deployed.

Unfortunately, Los Angeles is a particularly unstable and lawless place in a crisis owing to its sheer sprawl. The earthquake was one example; the riots were another. I had friends and clients in Koreatown who had to use their guns to protect themselves and their families and businesses from the looters and burners. The police are worthless in a city this expansive; they just cannot cover it all. Even the National Guard deployment was such that you did not see a trooper for miles. You have no idea what it is like to live somewhere knowing that natural and manmade disasters are a permanent feature of the place and that there is no short-term help for basic security.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Barry,

In May 2005 I was assaulted 15 feet from a door to my home by a man I had never seen before. In a fraction of a second I made the choice not fight and went back into my home to call the police and grab my gun. The assailant decided he was not done and broke down the back door with his bare hands and entered my home with the intent to cause great bodily injury. Upon entering the home he told me how many different ways he was going to kill me. Also mentioned that he was a former British SAS. The gun undoubtedly saved my life. I would not have stood a chance against a trained SAS in hand to hand combat.

Guns set limits and boundaries for people who are unable to do so for themselves. I firmly believe in using them to stop threats, even if that means having to take a life to save your own. If you take out a gun you must unequivocally be willing to use it. I take owning a gun very seriously and shoot regularly on a range. More importantly is that I have completed over 75 hours of classroom and on range education.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Fair enough- I guess I have never been in a situation where my life was in danger (the burglary I experienced never even came close to that), and there are some really bad people out there.

I still feel too many people own guns, many who are unstable, and of course there are those who get them for the sole purpose of committing a crime. It should be much tougher to get one, but I don't think that is going to happen.

[Archive]

Posted By: Larry

Greg-

Were you forced to use your weapon or did the mere threat of having one deter the intruder after he broke in?

I believe that we should always be cautious and never allow someone to get that close that we do not know near our home..I maybe paranoid but I always look around ...always! Even when I go to card shows, I never let my guard down. Seems to be better safe than sorry however there is always someone better trained with a firearm, even a criminal.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

I'm stabel. I mean stabble. No, staybl. lolol.

No, really though, I agree that they shouldn't be available to anyone that wants one. I think most of the safeguards in place (at least in Michigan) are fairly effective, and the criminals get them by going around the system.

Tightening the requirements isn't going to fix this. Illegally owned guns are available because they are manufactured and exist, and clearly the manufacture numbers are not related to legal ownership since there are so many more guns out there than legal owners. So making it extremely difficult would probably not put fewer in the hands of criminals. Only restricting manufacture numbers to relate more closely to approved buyer levels would do that. It would increase the cost and definitely the lead time of getting a gun, but a requirement that manufacturers make to order instead of make to dealer stock might at least help. I'd fear though that it would take months or more to get delivery though.

Michigan used to have an extremly strict policy on issuing carry permits. It really got down to whether the applicant was "famous" (a political figure, etc) or someone personally known to the board members making the decision. It was kind of a joke. The citizens voted in a "shall issue" measure to overcome this - the board now has to have a specific reason for denying a permit.

Since then crime hasn't exploded as predicted by the opponents of the measure. Even Governor Jennifer Granholm has flat out said that her opposition was wrong and that it has not turned into the Wild West doomsday that many feared.

I'm not smart enough to know where the line should be drawn. But if obtaining a gun at all (as opposed to a carry permit) is made very strict, then that process would also turn into a "who you know" process. I don't think that's the answer either.

Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

I don't think I would feel bad about protecting my family by any and all means.

You never know what is in the mind of someone who is in your house. You may like to assume it is just the stereo he is after... but maybe he then sees your wife - or your children.


I don't own a gun... mainly because I have never had the experience / know how to use one - and fear that maybe my kid or another kid would accidentaly harm themselves with it (I'm sure gun owners know how to avoid this situation), or that I would accidentally harm someone with it.


But I don't think the gun owners should feel bad about shooting an intruder... even if that intruder was just coming in to take a stereo.

thats just my opinion.

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

"and fear that maybe my kid or another kid would accidentaly harm themselves with it (I'm sure gun owners know how to avoid this situation), or that I would accidentally harm someone with it."

"I'm sure gun owners know how to avoid this situation"

I hope you realize the fallacy of the statement above - which is an excerpt from the first qoute (which provides the context).

Kids get accidentally shot with guns all the time - which should be sufficient proof that many gun owners dont know how to avoid such a situation.

I have no problem with most people owning guns - just the irresponsible ones and the criminals.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

i should have said "responsible" gun owners know how to avoid that situation.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

It's a tough call- guns save lives and destroy them.

I too would like to think if my life were in danger and I owned a gun I would have the presence of mind to use it properly. But in life and death situations people can panic, and at that point you just don't know. You could pull out a gun and it could misfire; you could be very nervous and have it wrested away by the intruder, and a simple robbery could turn into a murder.

I know I don't ever want to go there.

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Elkins

Guess I will share mine, as I have been familiar with guns since before I went to Kindergarten. That is one advantage of living in the hills - you can go out back of your home and shoot firearms. Plus, I had six years experience in the Military as well. To be honest, I own around 30 or more firearms - some collectors items dating back to the 1800's - others for home defense - others for hunting (though I haven't been able to go hunting for a few years now).

I did go out and buy myself a Desert Eagle 50 cal. last year, since I had an attempted break in at 3:30 AM two years ago. It is a long story, so I won't go into detail. However, someone attempted to kick my back door to my home in at 3:30 AM. By the time I got there, the perp. was in the woods behind my home. I shot where I heard them moving, but I believe they were hiding behind a tree. That is when I decided to retire my 357 Magnum and get the 50 Cal.

I don't care how brave one is or how much experience one has with guns (or militarty training). It IS SCARY to be asleep and hear someone attempting to break into your home! I guess that is why the perp. was in the woods by the time I got to the back door - I really didn't know if they were inside the house or not, so I had to move slowly throughout my home with my .357 until I reached the back door. My fiance' called 911. However, it took the police around 20-30 minutes to get here. If someone would have broken in and I didn't have a firearm, it would have been too late by the time the police arrive.

Goes back to the old adage - "I would rather have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have one".

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Larry,

Every situation requires quick thinking and assessment of the threat. The person who broke into my home demonstrated an immediate threat as he already assaulted me, continued to verbalize how he was going to kill me and broke into my home specifically to carry out his threats.

Upon entering my home, he continued to make threats, speak completely irrationally but did obey my commands and for that his life was spared. Had my girlfriend been home at the time he would have been killed by two to the center of the chest. Had I known that he was on probation for beating a man within inches of his life 3 years earlier or known how disappointing the criminal justice system would be, I would have ended him.

It is an indescribable feeling to know that you have someone's life in your hands. The 3 minutes he was inside my home before 10 cops showed up, 3 of which come through the door at one time with their weapons drawn, felt like an eternity. This was the most profound experience in my life.

In hindsight I am not sure I did the right thing or not. Looking into his eyes on the day of sentencing says I have not seen the last of him. For his crime he spent about 6 months in jail while we went through the "process." The DA's office allowed him to plea to lesser charges (probation violation), he was given a year and released 4 or 5 days after his sentencing.

As long as he knows where I live I have to take the necessary precautions to ensure that he will not get another chance. Should the guy tempt fate I will get to see how much different a Glock 30 performs on flesh as opposed to a paper target.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

What ended up happening to the moron, Greg?
Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

Thanks for the clarification, Mike : )

Howard

[Archive]

Posted By: t206King

I live in canada, and stats canada said 1 in 3 houses have firearms. the 1 of 3, have as many as 3 guns. i dont no 1 person who does. the US government should ban automatic weapons peroid! what do you need a machine gun for? AK-47s? scorpions? 93Rs?
these guns get smuggled into canada, mexico etc etc and cause more problems then good. i dont understand why they cant say no more automatic weapons.
look what happens, columbine high school for example. gun companies and the NRA seem to have more power then governments.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Greg- it really does sound like you could have been killed, and based on the fact you have trained extensively, I say you had every right to shoot him. Am I correct that this guy is back on the street? That is what is so galling about our legal system. I'm all for second chances, but not with a maniac like this.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

I really hate to give tips out on what to do in the case of a home invasion, but.

If you are a home owner and you have a gun you can go to prison for shooting someone that broke into your home (obviously while they're in your house). I subsrcibe to the idea that if someone breaks into an occupied home then all bets are off on how people will react, especially if both parties are armed. So, with that said here's some really bad advice:

You discharge your weapon twice. When the police arrive tell them you fired a warning shot into the ceiling and the unwanted visitor made some type of move that scared/startled you and you shot the person. You damn well better know that the person is someone that shouldn't be there and not someone you know or you'll be living with that the rest of your life.

First shot - kill the assailant

Second shot - the warning shot into the ceiling

I know that sounds pretty bad but why take a chance with the lives of your family. This may sound ignorant and stupid but maybe, just maybe those idiots that feel that they have to break into peoples homes to steal (or whatever else is on their mind) will think twice or three times about doing so if their is a sharp rise in the number of people that get killed doing so.

Barry, I understand what you're saying about just letting the thieves have what they want but what if they're not satisfied and they did some unspeakable things to you or your family members. Could you live with yourself knowing that you could have prevented it? Everybody is different and will react differently to a given situation.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rick

the guy said all the cards were certified.

Im assuming this means graded by a third party...

its a fair guess to say this guy did not own these cards....the victim should have checked websites and old auctions.

a good movie about guns its " city of god"

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

very well said.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Fred- I have no idea how I would respond in this situation, but since I don't have a gun and weigh 148 pounds, my guess is he would win and I would lose. That's why I said I hope I never have to go there.

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

Excellent posts, Warshawlaw. You too, Fred although I would suggest that if you are on the ground floor of your house the second shot should be put into the floor since your family is likely upstairs.

I want to add that had just one responsible gun carrier been present at a San Diego McDonalds or a Luby's in Texas the killers in those cases might have been taken out after the first couple of shots and forty-six(!) people (including many children) might still be alive today.

Howard

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

AMEN!!!...Howard
Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Those are extreme cases but I agree that would be the time and place for a licensed gun owner.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

This guy is back out on the streets someplace in LA. The DA's office will not tell me where he is living. The evening that he broke into my home, he was completely drunk. He obviously has an anger management issue and claims to suffer from PTSD from battle. The guy is dangerous and based on his training, he is a deadly weapon.

I was disgusted with my experience with the DA's office. All they want is a conviction of any kind and since this was not a violent crime, by their definition, I guess it did not warrant spending the time and money to prosecute. I had to put incredible amounts of pressure the entire time to get them to prosecute on any level. The system is set up to punish after the fact and not so much to discourage or prevent crimes.

Without help this guy will kill someone one day and if they care, it will rest of the the DA's office and to a lesser degree, the judge who did the sentencing.

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

"Kids get accidentally shot with guns all the time - which should be sufficient proof that many gun owners dont know how to avoid such a situation."

No, it shows that nature weeds out the nimrods. But seriously, we do not outlaw all sorts of things that kill or injure simply because some morons misuse them; it fascinates me that guns are such an exception. Some old fart just got convicted out here for killing and injuring dozens of people by driving his car through a farmers market; should we outlaw cars or old farts?

My guns and ammo are properly stored and properly handled. No one is going to get hurt with them unless I want them to be hurt with them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

The whole scenario of having someone breaking into a persons home is really a little unnerving. Let me see how we got to this point...

Post about some ebayer that didn't exactly do a smart thing.

Posts about guns and defending ourselves

Posts about home invasion

Posts about what we would do in these situations...

You know, I think I need to steer this into a PSA bashing post, we haven't had one in a while now...

Ok, how do I do this... some guy broke into my home. He found my cards. He found the PSA graded cards and started going through them all. He became very agitated because he couldn't figure out how a card with paper missing could warrant a PSA7 grade so he waited till I got home and then started screaming at me that the cards were really graded wrong. I told him it wasn't me that graded them and that I agreed. I pointed him in the direction of Orange County and some guy with the initials of J.O. He said he was going to set things straight with this J.O. guy. As he started to walk down the hallway to exit my home, I pulled my gun out and put a cap in his ass... not because he broke into my home but because if J.O. wasn't around then who else could we fight as common villain? Ok, maybe I shouldn't hit the sauce bottle so early in the afternoon....

[Archive]

Posted By: Larry

Greg-

That was a very serious moment you have described, obviously you are quite amazing that you can do baseball cards and many other activities with this traumatic experience under your belt.

Hopefully your training and knowledge will deter this guy or any others from interfering with you in the future but always be prepared, I take that philosophic pill daily and never put myself in a position knowingly of taking unnecesary risks. Having a family, I feel more vulnerable but they all have been prepared and warned at the youngest age to be wary of strangers.

It is most important that we never live in fear but always know that security is a temporary state and we must be prudent in our daily decisions. Meeting strangers with cash to buy baseball cards over the internet is stupid, period. The guy featured by this article was very lucky.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bottom of the Ninth

Larry,

Well said and thanks for the kind words. They say what does not kill you makes you stronger. It certainly can be a jungle out there.

Take care,

Greg

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

Hey Fred,

That's pretty funny, but you forgot to put a bullet into the ceiling/floor after shooting the PSA critic.

So unfortunately, in your scenario, PSA is likely responsible for you going to jail. How's that for a reason to bash them.

[Archive]

Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)

Greg,

I think that would be one of the worst things to have happen to someone. I'd hate the fact that there's some idiot out there roaming the streets knowing who I am, where I live and with a big chip on their shoulder to boot... I'm not trying to make light of your situation but I think a new twist to that saying about "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" would be:

What ever doesn't kill you, just doesn't kill you...



Barry,

I'm one of those people that wouldn't know what to do if put into that predicament. All I could do is hope that my instincts lead me in the right direction. I'm not too bright. One time I chased an idiot out of a convenience store when he was trying to steal beer. I can remember the look in one of the punks eyes when he said (while handcuffed) I'll find you some day. It kind of bothered me. Never happened but still knowing some idiot out there has it out for you... I guess I was lucky that guy and his buddy didn't have a gun or some other weapon.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

JK-yes there are reports of those accidents and there caused by those that dont store their firearms properly. But i believe that vast(like 99%) majority are very careful when storing firearms. Everyone i know infact has either a safe, or some kind of lock that would keep an adult from getting to it without proper tools, let alone a young kid. There will always be some story about some kid in a hicktown shooting himself with his pops rifle. but if you really want to get to the root of the problem, it was terrible parenting. Any parent thats too stupid to lock their firearms up around their children has no business having children. Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Even in accidental shootings like that, its someones ignorance that was the cause. Placing the blame on the firearms is the easy thing to do. But the real problem wasnt the gun, a five dollar magazine/cylinder lock couldve prevented all of those accidental shootings. You would think anyone interested in owning a firearm would educate themselves, but i guess thats asking to much of some people. Some states do have mandatory training to own a firearm, i dont know statictics on gun accidents in those states but maybe thats helped.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Dylan- I agree that whenever I hear a story about a kid getting hold of his parent's loaded gun, I can only think of how stupid and careless the parent is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Damian

A 1954 Hank Aaron, a 1948 Jackie Robinson, a 1932 Babe Ruth, a 1955 Roberto Clemente and a 1956 Ted Williams kill people.

[Archive]

Posted By: anthony

1. whether through ebay or otherwise, i've only met 2 people in person for transactions...and both are net54 members

2. with all those signs and his gut feeling, he's an idiot. his greed got the best of him as well as a beating