Multiple home invaders picked the wrong house in Texas

[SpatiallyAware]

Please educate yourself before making posts about what is and isn't legal because you clearly have no clue what the actual gun laws are.

AR-15s are legal in every state but new York and magazine size is not restricted in nearly all states.

That clown is a blatantly obvious troll and/or RBM.

 

[Oldgamer]

Please educate yourself before making posts about what is and isn't legal because you clearly have no clue what the actual gun laws are.

AR-15s are legal in every state but new York and magazine size is not restricted in nearly all states.

Clearly you did'nt actually read my post, I didn' t say that it was currently illegal, I said it should be. The semi automatic assault weapons ban expired for these. Most of my post comes from an author who IS an expert on firearms and the laws.

 

[monovillage]

Please educate yourself before making posts about what is and isn't legal because you clearly have no clue what the actual gun laws are.

AR-15s are legal in every state but new York and magazine size is not restricted in nearly all states.

He's also complaining because the .50 Beowulf, the .458 SOCOM or the .450 Bushmaster make the AR15 hybrids into efficient and legal hunting arms for all large game (elk,deer,feral hogs,black and brown bear,) that the .223/5.56 round isn't legal to use against. If ignorance is bliss then oldgamer is the happiest fucking anti-gun poster in the forums.

 

[Oldgamer]

You can tell the families of the victims at Columbine they were lucky their kids got killed by a handgun that only carried 10 rounds. Things would have been much worse if they were killed by a gun with a 15 round magazine.

They basically took our handguns in NY. A friend of mine already called the manufacturer about his pistols and one of them is not going to make a NY Compliant magazine for it.

What hand guns did they take from you? Please link your source. What type of magazine was he trying to get?

You are leaving quite a bit out.

 

[Oldgamer]

He's also complaining because the .50 Beowulf, the .458 SOCOM or the .450 Bushmaster make the AR15 hybrids into efficient and legal hunting arms for all large game (elk,deer,feral hogs,black and brown bear,) that the .223/5.56 round isn't legal to use against. If ignorance is bliss then oldgamer is the happiest fucking anti-gun poster in the forums.

No I am just not buying into the "lunacy" of some of these arguments, and most of American's aren't either. It is just a matter of time when these type of weapons are finally made illegal permanently. Each state can make these laws on their own and don't need the federal government to help them, if such laws can't get by the Senate and House. That is what some of these states are doing, is taking matters into their own hands.

 

[xj0hnx]

See this informative article: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...Aurora-and-by-the-DC-Sniper-It-s-the-same-gun

Informative? LOL, there's nothing "informative" about it, but then again, no one should expect anything informative about firearms to come from the DailyKOS.

The laws that most are proposing are to ban these type of weapons so that one cannot convert or use it as a automatic weapon period. Or have more than 10 - 11 rounds shot before reloading, hence banning high capacity mags or drums that can hold 100 rounds.

Any proposing a ban simply to make it not possible to convert a semi-auto to full auto is mechanically challenged, and doesn't understand the basic operation of a firearm. Or they are using it as a disguise to just straight up ban semi-automatics.

As the author stated in the article I linked, "Quote" The AR-15 has more variants than any other rifle I know of. The compatibility with both .223 and 5.56 rounds makes the Armalite extremely popular with disaster preppers. There are variants chambered in other rounds, such as the .50 Beowulf, a 50-caliber round developed for the military which is designed to be used against vehicles and other harder targets. Those very high powered rounds are available on the civilian market.

IME the AR has stiff competition with the AK platform for number of variants,

There are other very dangerous modifications, including the ability to have a rifle that is legally a semi-automatic weapon, but functionally an automatic weapon.

These completely legal devices are called "sliding stock" devices which allow shooters to bump-fire their weapons. They serve no practical purpose, even the advertisement admits that it's a "recreational" device."

Another ignorant fool jumping on the bump firing bandwagon, yippy.

The point is civilians don't need these weapons and some of these semi automatic weapons are just too easily converted back to an automatic weapon.

Yes, I do believe that these weapons should be banned from the market, and apparently other countries do to, like those listed in the article I just linked. I also believe high capacity mags should be banned.

As this author says with regard to variants of the AR-15: It is commonly sold with 30-round clips in the United States. In Germany, the maximum legally allowed AR-15 clip size for hunters is two rounds. With one round in the chamber, that means a maximum of three shots before reloading. I'm of the opinion that if you can't shoot a deer in three shots, you need to pick a different hobby, but I actually prefer the New York and California State law, which bans clips with a greater capacity than five rounds. That's the place where Americans seem to be comfortable. The AWB prohibited clips over a maximum of 10 rounds.

The other point I was making is that, most who try to rationalize keeping such weapons and high capacity mags available and legal to the general public use the old "but the government might come get us in our homes, so we have to defend ourselves" which is such a lame "fantasy based argument" it just falls flat on its face.

If it gets to that point in this country and the government has gone haywire and starts coming for its citizens, well, no gun of any type is going to help you period.

Yip, just a disguise to outright ban semi-automatics.

But I prefer to stay in the reality of the argument and not the fantasy of the "what ifs"...

404 Reality not found

 

[monovillage]

No I am just not buying into the "lunacy" of some of these arguments, and most of American's aren't either. It is just a matter of time when these type of weapons are finally made illegal permanently. Each state can make these laws on their own and don't need the federal government to help them, if such laws can't get by the Senate and House. That is what some of these states are doing, is taking matters into their own hands.

I'm just tired of seeing lies spouted out by the ignorant. How many times have we seen Schumer or Feinstein or Biden or some other piece of shit waving an AR-15 or another rifle and say "derp,derp, no one hunts with these! derp-a-derp When in fact tens of thousands of people, if not millions hunt with them.

Fine, you don't like guns. I don't care. Don't expect me to treat your opinion with respect if you don't treat my opinion with respect and I'll tell you my opinion is a hell of a lot better informed on the subject then yours is.

 

[Oldgamer]

By the way I think we should set up regulations and law very closely to what these countries do, especially with regard to AR-15's or variants:

Australia

AR-15 rifles, like all semi-automatic rifles, are subject to strong restrictions of ownership in all states and territories in Australia. The only means of legally owning an AR-15/M16-type rifle in Australia today beyond law enforcement is to have a Category D Firearms License (e.g. a professional animal culler), to have a Firearms Collector's License and the firearm deactivated (with the barrel plugged up and the action welded shut), or converted to blank fire if one is a member of a military re-enactment organization.

The heavy restrictions on semi-automatic rifles were introduced in 1996 in response to the Port Arthur massacre – one of the firearms used in the attack was an AR-15. Before 1996, AR-15 rifles were legal to own in a number of Australian states and territories, namely Queensland and Tasmania.
Despite the ban, almost three dozen AR-15 rifles have been manufactured by a small company in Melbourne for sale to licensed buyers and for film production.

Austria

In Austria, semi-automatic centerfire rifles have to be classified as sporting or hunting firearms in order to obtain civilian-legal status. After this classification, they are considered "category B" firearms, which means that holders of gun licenses may own them. These licenses are may-issue items if the applicant specifies a valid reason (self-defense at home for example is considered valid by law in any case), passes a psychological test and attends a gun-basics course. Currently, three AR-15 manufacturers, all producing in Germany have had versions of their AR15 models succesfully classified as class B weapons. These Austrian versions differ slightly from the original design in order to ensure that no military full-auto trigger, bolt and barrel may be installed. Additionally, bayonet lugs and flash hiders are prohibited on semi-automatic rifles while Muzzle brakes and compensators are legal. There is no minimum length for barrels, therefore even barrel lengths as short as 7.5" are possible.

Canada

The Government of Canada classifies the AR-15 (and its variants) as a restricted firearm. For anyone wanting to lawfully own an AR-15, they must obtain a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) valid for restricted firearms and then each acquisition of a restricted class firearm is subject to approval by the Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) of the would-be buyer's province of residence.[19][20] With the introduction of strict gun control measures by former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien (Bill C-68), the AR-15 had originally been intended to be classified as a prohibited firearm, making it all but impossible to privately own one. However, due to the presence of nationwide Service Rifle target shooting competitions, the AR-15 was granted a sporting exception.

As with all Restricted firearms (including most pistols, some shotguns, and some rifles) AR-15s are allowed to be fired only at certified firing ranges since the CFOs of all provinces and territories have agreed to issue ATTs (Authority To Transport) for these guns only to certified ranges. Since owners can't legally take these guns anywhere else that shooting is allowed, they can in effect only shoot them on certain ranges. In order to legally own and transport a Restricted firearm, the firearm must be registered with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canadian Firearms Program and must apply for an Authorization to Transport (or ATT) from the Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) for their province or territory. Additionally, the firearm must be unloaded, deactivated by a trigger or action lock, and be in a locked, opaque container during transport.

The issuance of ATTs varies considerably from province to province, and is generally reflective of a particular province's political and social levels of acceptance toward gun ownership. In Ontario the only way to obtain an ATT for restricted firearms is to become a member of a range, whereas in Alberta, where firearms ownership is widely accepted, generally a single ATT is promptly issued that allows citizens to transport firearms to border crossings, gunsmiths, and shooting ranges. Firearms transfers in provinces such as Quebec can take up to 3 months to process.

United Kingdom

As with all semi-automatic, centerfire rifles, AR-15s are classed as a Section 5 weapon, i.e., a person must provide an exceptional reason and gain permission from the Home Secretary, making ownership all but impossible for a private citizen. However, AR-15s in a manually operated straight pull configuration or semi-automatic AR-15s that are chambered to fire a .22 rimfire cartridge are legal and can be held on a standard Section 1 Firearms Certificate. There are no restrictions on 'assault weapon features' in the UK, and no restrictions on magazine capacity. There are a number of UK manufacturers of "straight-pull" AR-15 variants. Southern Gun Company has tried to introduce a 9mm "self-ejecting" variant for gallery rifle shooting nicknamed the "Unicorn" but, despite numerous units being sold on the understanding that the rifle was a compliant Section 1 firearm, the rifles were seized and subjected to stringent testing by the UK Forensic Science Service (FSS). A small number of pre-production models were found to be non-compliant with section 1 status. However, later models were deemed Section 1 compliant and were returned to their owners.

------------------------

I don't think I will ever agree with the gun nuts on the issue of restricting, or making certain types of weapons (and high capacity mags) illegal. Nor will I agree with the uses they claim.

So we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Oldgamer]

I'm just tired of seeing lies spouted out by the ignorant. How many times have we seen Schumer or Feinstein or Biden or some other piece of shit waving an AR-15 or another rifle and say "derp,derp, no one hunts with these! derp-a-derp When in fact tens of thousands of people, if not millions hunt with them.

Fine, you don't like guns. I don't care. Don't expect me to treat your opinion with respect if you don't treat my opinion with respect and I'll tell you my opinion is a hell of a lot better informed on the subject then yours is.

If you are really that tired of all the carrying on by the anti-gun advocates then you should be strongly in favor of strict regulations and registration of said weapons. And only, I mean only certain people who could pass the registration process, and if necessary a mental psych test for them should have a right to carry them, or possess them.

As it stands now, any nut job out there can get there hands on these weapons. The regulations in place now are very piss poor. There is absolutely no real tracking or database information on any of these weapons, thanks to the good ole NRA stopping that from happening. Oh yea, because the "Gubment might come to your house if your on the list and take your guns away". This is the lunacy and the "fantasy land" thinking that is out there.

 

[zinfamous]

AFAIK, there's pretty much two types of criminals doing home invasions: the type who are unarmed and at the sound of ANYTHING they will leave. They try to break in when the home is empty, and if someone stumbles on them they might push you down to run off, but they don't stick around to fight, and don't hold you up. They're rarely armed.

Then there's the type of people doing B&E who will go in when someone is home, and will do harm. This is a case of the latter, when knowledge of high gun ownership likely helps some, but more than that, having a gun to defend yourself is just a good idea. Also, publicizing that some dipshits got shot while attempting a B&E will help deter future people, if they heard about a previous botched attempt.

What you're doing here is pointing to one case of a B&W done by what is likely illegal immigrants with a stolen gun, and saying "look, it doesn't work!" without data to actually back that up.

You're right, it is one case. But SpatiallyAware posted links to a county in GA, that provided several years of data tailored towards this argument:

Look up the statistics behind kennesaw, ga and their gun laws and crime rates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_law

upon further review, 2 studies suggest that data regarding crime in Kennesaw county after the mandatory firearm ownership ordinance show that there was no real effect on reducing home invasions that could be attributed to firearm possession.

so, yeah, there is real data with a decent model that rejects this theory.

 

[monovillage]

If you are really that tired of all the carrying on by the anti-gun advocates then you should be strongly in favor of strict regulations and registration of said weapons. And only, I mean only certain people who could pass the registration process, and if necessary a mental psych test for them should have a right to carry them, or possess them.

As it stands now, any nut job out there can get there hands on these weapons. The regulations in place now are very piss poor. There is absolutely no real tracking or database information on any of these weapons, thanks to the good ole NRA stopping that from happening. Oh yea, because the "Gubment might come to your house if your on the list and take your guns away". This is the lunacy and the "fantasy land" thinking that is out there.

Your ignorance is breathtaking.

 

[f1sherman]

Bold move, but in the end that lady had more luck and balls than skills and brains.


"We wrestled around in my bedroom and he came after me. I had my gun like this. He kneed me in the face. He just jerked the gun right out of my hand and took off," she said.


The mother said her story would have ended much differently if she didn't have her pistol.


So it seems it would have ended by getting robbed, and maybe raped.
Instead she took her chances and decided to gamble with her life, and that of her child.
Granted she couldn't have known if they would kill her later.

Quite often even a stupid decision when executed promptly, is better than taking your time to reach the most rational one.

 

[spidey07]

Also makes the case that you really should have a weapon near you at all times. I'm no more than 2-3 seconds away from one with them strategically located around the house.

What good is that gun in the bedroom if you're watching TV or downstairs?

 

[Zebo]

haha

PS - dog really help with alarm clocking. esp labs who smell shit a mile away even tho they worthless when push come to shove. but pitbulls and rotts eat ur children so you got to compromise

 

[RampantAndroid]

The laws that most are proposing are to ban these type of weapons so that one cannot convert or use it as a automatic weapon period.

I'm not even going to read the rest of your bullshit - you CANNOT convert a civilian AR15 to be fully automatic WITHOUT buying a new lower, or milling out the receiver. Same for the M1A and such. Full auto guns ARE NOT THE PROBLEM.

 

[werepossum]

By the way I think we should set up regulations and law very closely to what these countries do, especially with regard to AR-15's or variants:

Australia

AR-15 rifles, like all semi-automatic rifles, are subject to strong restrictions of ownership in all states and territories in Australia. The only means of legally owning an AR-15/M16-type rifle in Australia today beyond law enforcement is to have a Category D Firearms License (e.g. a professional animal culler), to have a Firearms Collector's License and the firearm deactivated (with the barrel plugged up and the action welded shut), or converted to blank fire if one is a member of a military re-enactment organization.

The heavy restrictions on semi-automatic rifles were introduced in 1996 in response to the Port Arthur massacre – one of the firearms used in the attack was an AR-15. Before 1996, AR-15 rifles were legal to own in a number of Australian states and territories, namely Queensland and Tasmania.
Despite the ban, almost three dozen AR-15 rifles have been manufactured by a small company in Melbourne for sale to licensed buyers and for film production.

Austria

In Austria, semi-automatic centerfire rifles have to be classified as sporting or hunting firearms in order to obtain civilian-legal status. After this classification, they are considered "category B" firearms, which means that holders of gun licenses may own them. These licenses are may-issue items if the applicant specifies a valid reason (self-defense at home for example is considered valid by law in any case), passes a psychological test and attends a gun-basics course. Currently, three AR-15 manufacturers, all producing in Germany have had versions of their AR15 models succesfully classified as class B weapons. These Austrian versions differ slightly from the original design in order to ensure that no military full-auto trigger, bolt and barrel may be installed. Additionally, bayonet lugs and flash hiders are prohibited on semi-automatic rifles while Muzzle brakes and compensators are legal. There is no minimum length for barrels, therefore even barrel lengths as short as 7.5" are possible.

Canada

The Government of Canada classifies the AR-15 (and its variants) as a restricted firearm. For anyone wanting to lawfully own an AR-15, they must obtain a Possession and Acquisition License (PAL) valid for restricted firearms and then each acquisition of a restricted class firearm is subject to approval by the Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) of the would-be buyer's province of residence.[19][20] With the introduction of strict gun control measures by former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien (Bill C-68), the AR-15 had originally been intended to be classified as a prohibited firearm, making it all but impossible to privately own one. However, due to the presence of nationwide Service Rifle target shooting competitions, the AR-15 was granted a sporting exception.

As with all Restricted firearms (including most pistols, some shotguns, and some rifles) AR-15s are allowed to be fired only at certified firing ranges since the CFOs of all provinces and territories have agreed to issue ATTs (Authority To Transport) for these guns only to certified ranges. Since owners can't legally take these guns anywhere else that shooting is allowed, they can in effect only shoot them on certain ranges. In order to legally own and transport a Restricted firearm, the firearm must be registered with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Canadian Firearms Program and must apply for an Authorization to Transport (or ATT) from the Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) for their province or territory. Additionally, the firearm must be unloaded, deactivated by a trigger or action lock, and be in a locked, opaque container during transport.

The issuance of ATTs varies considerably from province to province, and is generally reflective of a particular province's political and social levels of acceptance toward gun ownership. In Ontario the only way to obtain an ATT for restricted firearms is to become a member of a range, whereas in Alberta, where firearms ownership is widely accepted, generally a single ATT is promptly issued that allows citizens to transport firearms to border crossings, gunsmiths, and shooting ranges. Firearms transfers in provinces such as Quebec can take up to 3 months to process.

United Kingdom

As with all semi-automatic, centerfire rifles, AR-15s are classed as a Section 5 weapon, i.e., a person must provide an exceptional reason and gain permission from the Home Secretary, making ownership all but impossible for a private citizen. However, AR-15s in a manually operated straight pull configuration or semi-automatic AR-15s that are chambered to fire a .22 rimfire cartridge are legal and can be held on a standard Section 1 Firearms Certificate. There are no restrictions on 'assault weapon features' in the UK, and no restrictions on magazine capacity. There are a number of UK manufacturers of "straight-pull" AR-15 variants. Southern Gun Company has tried to introduce a 9mm "self-ejecting" variant for gallery rifle shooting nicknamed the "Unicorn" but, despite numerous units being sold on the understanding that the rifle was a compliant Section 1 firearm, the rifles were seized and subjected to stringent testing by the UK Forensic Science Service (FSS). A small number of pre-production models were found to be non-compliant with section 1 status. However, later models were deemed Section 1 compliant and were returned to their owners.

------------------------

I don't think I will ever agree with the gun nuts on the issue of restricting, or making certain types of weapons (and high capacity mags) illegal. Nor will I agree with the uses they claim.

So we will just have to agree to disagree.

Yes, we certainly want to avoid having more freedom than anyone else.

Dumb ass. While we're at it, let's ban video games and violent movies. And who really needs a private automobile? Let's just let government decide what we can have and damn the Constitution - that's for free adults, not people like us who just need to be protected.

Number one fucking problem in this country is the dumb masses who believe that behavior they don't personally value should be banned.

 

[CitizenKain]

Also makes the case that you really should have a weapon near you at all times. I'm no more than 2-3 seconds away from one with them strategically located around the house.

What good is that gun in the bedroom if you're watching TV or downstairs?

I wonder what being scared all the time is like. So terrified of life that you must be armed at all times simply to have enough courage to go outside.

 

[OCGuy]

If you have children in the house, and your plan for protecting them if you hear the glass break downstairs is to call 911 and grab a bat, you are a terrible parent.

Police are generally too late to stop a crime in progress. They get there to investigate. There is a reason that bank robbers get away with it so many times before being caught.

The odds are against ever needing to use your weapon to defend yourself. But they are above 0%. If you want to rely on a police officer to save the day, go ahead. As of now it only takes me 3 seconds from break-in to being armed. Once I have children, it will take 6-10 seconds due to the primary home defensive tool being in a safe.

It isn't about being scared, it is about preparation. I don't use a seatbelt because I am scared shitless of a car accident. Even here in Socal, I have never been in one.

I don't have smoke/CO detectors because it keeps me up at night thinking I am going to suffocate or burn, but you can damn well bet that if the roulette ball of chance falls into my number, I am going to have taken precautions that all responsible citizens should.

The stance of Obama and the (D) party platform is that the 2nd gurantees personal firearm ownership. If that scares YOU, then you are the one with the problem, not me.

 

[OCGuy]

*BS*

Good luck, there isn't anyone with any sort of power calling for your fringe view on the 2nd, which is only behind the right for you to express your fringe view that is against the constitution of the US without censorship or penalty.

 

[monovillage]

If you have children in the house, and your plan for protecting them if you hear the glass break downstairs is to call 911 and grab a bat, you are a terrible parent.

Police are generally too late to stop a crime in progress. They get there to investigate. There is a reason that bank robbers get away with it so many times before being caught.

The odds are against ever needing to use your weapon to defend yourself. But they are above 0%. If you want to rely on a police officer to save the day, go ahead. As of now it only takes me 3 seconds from break-in to being armed. Once I have children, it will take 6-10 seconds due to the primary home defensive tool being in a safe.

It isn't about being scared, it is about preparation. I don't use a seatbelt because I am scared shitless of a car accident. Even here in Socal, I have never been in one.

I don't have smoke/CO detectors because it keeps me up at night thinking I am going to suffocate or burn, but you can damn well bet that if the roulette ball of chance falls into my number, I am going to have taken precautions that all responsible citizens should.

The stance of Obama and the (D) party platform is that the 2nd guarantees personal firearm ownership. If that scares YOU, then you are the one with the problem, not me.

Very well said.

It's also why I have food, water, a generator, fuel etc. in case of an earthquake or bad storm. It's why I get vaccinated and get a flu shot. It's why I had an arborist check a few trees and cut down the ones that were diseased or a threat if they fell. I can understand if someone doesn't want to do it, but it perpetually amazes me that they hate,hate,hate the idea of someone else taking those precautions.

 

[Matt1970]

What hand guns did they take from you? Please link your source. What type of magazine was he trying to get?

You are leaving quite a bit out.

I have 4 handguns that have magazines that carry more than 7 rounds. They were all manufactured before 1994 so I have to sell all the magazines for them out of NY state. If the manufacturer decides to not make a 7 round magazine for them, they have effectively been taken away from me. What exactly do you need me to link to?

 

[Modular]

...what, a DA was also gunned down in Texas, in public? criminal didn't assume that the DA was armed, or people in public were armed? ...or did, but obviously didn't care?

You seem to be avoiding the real issue here. It doesn't matter if people are deterred from doing the crime initially or not. These basest of animals were going to do this either way.

If she hadn't had a gun, what do you think the outcome would have been? They were going to rape her, and planned on it the whole time. They entered through her bedroom with duct tape. What would you say their intention was?

Stop neglecting to see the good in the situation just to fuel your own stance on gun rights and ownership.

 

[spidey07]

I wonder what being scared all the time is like. So terrified of life that you must be armed at all times simply to have enough courage to go outside.

Not scared at all. Just prepared, same as having fire extinguishers and flashlights nearby. If I need a flashlight, or fire extinguisher or gun quickly I can grab one.

 

[WackyDan]

I wonder what being scared all the time is like. So terrified of life that you must be armed at all times simply to have enough courage to go outside.

Dunno. I'm armed near all the time. I wonder though what being victimized feels like? Surely being the victim of a violent crime is just a momentary feeling right? Life goes back to complete normalcy afterward?

I have a clue for you. I have both experiences and I prefer now to be armed. Fuck off.

 

[Lithium381]

I'm still confused as to why they're focusing on cosmetic features of guns that are used in around 200 deaths per year, when handguns kill more than 50 times more per year..?

Oh that's right, it's not part of the agenda. I'm annoyed at the media and their portrayal and spreading of mis-information, either on purpose so the sheep lap it up, or because of their own ignorance... journalism has simply become a tool for those in power on the left to spread their agenda... sick really.

I've found that people don't even know what they're against just because they're soo ignorant about it they just go along with the TV... sad.