ROOF KOREANS ?

[Bennettjh]

The list of armaments seen was staggering to the average Californian at the time, even though local gun laws were far more relaxed in 1992 than they are today. AK-pattern rifles, Glock 17s, Ruger Mini-14s, SKS carbines, AR15s (namely the Colt Sporter series), TEC-9s, Uzi-pattern pistols, Remington 870 shotguns, bolt action rifles, revolvers, and the now-coveted Daewoo K-1 semi-automatic variants

 

[DeadeyeChrista'sdad]

. That would be incorrect. If I'm shingling then I quantify roof Koreans. Well, 1/2 of me is. I have firing ports and stakes out for markers on my crib plus ultrasonic sensors and thermal imaging cameras but I tend to overdo persec

Top half? Bottom half? Left half? Right? I have so many questions!

 

[KokomoDave]

Left leg. Right arm and left ear + left hemisphere. Spleen, kidney and hands / feet are too. So, yes.
Motaur!

 

[Joshua]

Looks like at least one alleged looter has been shot so far.

And the shooter was rightfully arrested.

Good.

Your bloodlust is reprehensible.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

And the shooter was rightfully arrested.




Your bloodlust is reprehensible.

He was arrested because minnesota is a duty to retreat state. Defending your property isn’t lusting for blood. You know how to avoid it? DONT LOOT **** THAT ISNT YOURS!

 

[Joshua]

He was arrested because minnesota is a duty to retreat state. Defending your property isn’t lusting for blood. You know how to avoid it? DONT LOOT **** THAT ISNT YOURS!

This is a moral disagreement we have. I don't believe that killing to protect property is a moral act. You do. It was unhelpful for me to claim that you lust for blood, but I do reject your moral code as invalid.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

This is a moral disagreement we have. I don't believe that killing to protect property is a moral act. You do. It was unhelpful for me to claim that you lust for blood, but I do reject your moral code as invalid.

Understandable. I see where people think you don’t have a right to protect what you’ve earned but look at at this way. Thousands of people die every year at their jobs working, earning a living to support their families. They risk death to accumulate these possessions. They should have every right to defend someone from coming and taking that away in seconds.

 

[Joshua]

Understandable. I see where people think you don’t have a right to protect what you’ve earned but look at at this way. Thousands of people die every year at their jobs working, earning a living to support their families. They risk death to accumulate these possessions. They should have every right to defend someone from coming and taking that away in seconds.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I've done a LOT of introspection and soul searching and reading (I know it's unfashionable!) over the past few years to come to the conclusions I have. Not so long ago I was making exactly the argument you are. That's not to say that I'm wiser than you are or know everything, but I don't find your position compelling anymore. Even so, in this case we're not discussing personal property, but the property of a business. My take is that insurance is made for this purpose, and human life is more valuable than any amount of (in this case) tobacco products. Heck, I shoplifted once as a dumb kid. By your logic it would've been just for the store owner to put a hole in my face. That just doesn't sit right with me.

Defense of human life though? Sure, do what you need to do.

 

[Thor]

If you come to my home to break my things and take my stuff why would I think it's going to stop there? You're going down sparky.

Your reading and introspection comment is a (very) thinly veiled insult to everyone who doesn't profess your beliefs. I not only do not profess them I cast aspersions upon them.

As this is your post #19 I am tempted to say...nay shall even say

 

[abnk]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I've done a LOT of introspection and soul searching and reading (I know it's unfashionable!) over the past few years to come to the conclusions I have. Not so long ago I was making exactly the argument you are. That's not to say that I'm wiser than you are or know everything, but I don't find your position compelling anymore. Even so, in this case we're not discussing personal property, but the property of a business. My take is that insurance is made for this purpose, and human life is more valuable than any amount of (in this case) tobacco products. Heck, I shoplifted once as a dumb kid. By your logic it would've been just for the store owner to put a hole in my face. That just doesn't sit right with me.

Defense of human life though? Sure, do what you need to do.

 

[femurphy77]

The list of armaments seen was staggering to the average Californian at the time, even though local gun laws were far more relaxed in 1992 than they are today. AK-pattern rifles, Glock 17s, Ruger Mini-14s, SKS carbines, AR15s (namely the Colt Sporter series), TEC-9s, Uzi-pattern pistols, Remington 870 shotguns, bolt action rifles, revolvers, and the now-coveted Daewoo K-1 semi-automatic variants

Damn you! NOW I'm coveting a Daewoo K-1 Semi auto!

 

[churchmouse]

And the shooter was rightfully arrested.




Your bloodlust is reprehensible.

You need to get a bit easier on your responses new guy. Take me seriously as your responses are terse and borderline trolling.

 

[2A_Tom]

Please bear with me on this.

And the shooter was rightfully arrested.

Actually he's right you know. (read in Morgan Freeman's voice, you know, Kirk's brother)

Your bloodlust is reprehensible.

You need to get a bit easier on your responses new guy. Take me seriously as your responses are terse and borderline trolling.

The way he said it is rather abrupt, but the sentiment is not lost on me, at least. I can not think of anyone that has been more bloodthirsty than myself, in expressing the sentiment of"glad the justice system is saved the expense" or "darn, now we have to house the dirt bag". For evidence see my responses in this thread. [DGU] The 'Defensive Gun Use' Thread

I don't think it made the news, but a recent local one:

Parents are out. Alarm goes off. They see a break-in (I guess via remote security camera viewing). Day shift arrived and found the burglar prone being held at gunpoint by two teenagers, one with an AR and one with a handgun. Burglar had broken in by busting out a window. Nobody injured.

I did not respond to this one because the response was less than lethal (kind of) and the outcome positive, the kids were not hurt. (Police took the burglar into custody.)

Joshua got me to thinking, am I bloodthirsty? I may be. I have put a bunch of thought into it and am in a quandary.

In BBI's post,

• The thug was taken into custody, supposedly in Indianapolis.
• How long will he be held in that revolving door?
• Will the prosecutor "feel" that he has a strong enough case to indict?
• Will a jury of his peers convict?
• How long a sentence will he serve in jail, or will he be given house arrest? (We hope he does not set up an ambush for the police.)
• In whatever case, will he hold animus against the police? The homeowner and his kids?

One thing is for sure, the thug and his ilk know where they can acquire an Ar and a handgun at least.

So should I root for the home owner that kills the home intruder? Should I be happy there is one less person to hurt somebody else? or should I root for the "system" to do it's duty and protect me?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Actually he's right you know. (read in Morgan Freeman's voice, you know, Kirk's brother)





The way he said it is rather abrupt, but the sentiment is not lost on me, at least. I can not think of anyone that has been more bloodthirsty than myself, in expressing the sentiment of"glad the justice system is saved the expense" or "darn, now we have to house the dirt bag". For evidence see my responses in this thread. [DGU] The 'Defensive Gun Use' Thread



I did not respond to this one because the response was less than lethal (kind of) and the outcome positive, the kids were not hurt. (Police took the burglar into custody.)

Joshua got me to thinking, am I bloodthirsty? I may be. I have put a bunch of thought into it and am in a quandary.

In BBI's post,

• The thug was taken into custody, supposedly in Indianapolis.
• How long will he be held in that revolving door?
• Will the prosecutor "feel" that he has a strong enough case to indict?
• Will a jury of his peers convict?
• How long a sentence will he serve in jail, or will he be given house arrest? (We hope he does not set up an ambush for the police.)
• In whatever case, will he hold animus against the police? The homeowner and his kids?

One thing is for sure, the thug and his ilk know where they can acquire an Ar and a handgun at least.

So should I root for the home owner that kills the home intruder? Should I be happy there is one less person to hurt somebody else? or should I root for the "system" to do it's duty and protect me?

Unfortunately "the system" has no duty to protect you, per the USSC.

 

[KokomoDave]

What happened? I was busy trying to threadjack this post and missed all the fun!

 

[printcraft]

What happened? I was busy trying to threadjack this post and missed all the fun!

New poster with a lot of high and mighty going on, with thinly veiled insults mixed in. Should do well here.

 

[2A_Tom]

Unfortunately "the system" has no duty to protect you, per the USSC.

Well DUH! Didn't you see the purple, are you color blind? Time to see the eye doctor and get a new prescription!

New poster with a lot of high and mighty going on, with thinly veiled insults mixed in. Should do well here.

 

[Ruger_Ronin]

My question is: Instead of SimpliSafe/ADT/etc, can I just contract Roof Koreans for a monthly security membership?

On a more serious note, I can't argue that human life is far more valuable than material possession.

If someone was breaking in to my truck, it would be monitored and called in immediately. Just some CDs and a charger. If criminal element makes even one stride toward the house it's July 4th. Any and all attempts at the domicile will result in extreme consequences.

Why? Because I have children. A family. Do they only want my TV and cash? My wife and daughters? I cannot confirm intent. I must assume the worst. And this assumption will be met with great force. I'm not willing to roll the dice and find out. Are you?

 

[KJQ6945]

Get Burt Reynolds next!

language warning.

https://youtu.be/TS6_Y6r5r-8

 

[Alpo]

One of my favorite female duos in the world.


[video=youtube_share;Q3kX63qPr5M]http://youtu.be/Q3kX63qPr5M[/video]