tailgater - Page 3

JunkyardDog · 05-15-2010, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flitecontrol

Hopefully, European drivers are more aware of motorcycle riders than drivers in the U.S. On average, I have a riding encounter that could have ended badly about 3-4 times a year.

Had some guys break into my house (the geniuses kicked in the front door) and wake me up. They thought the house was empty. My shotgun was in the bedroom closet. Fortunately for them, I didn't realize what was going on until I saw them in the living room. The overwhelming urge to immediately do them serious bodily injury with my hands clouded my judgement and I never even thought about going to the closet and getting my gun. We exchanged some words, they left as fast as their legs could carry them, and the police caught them a few days later with my help.

Everybody that I have talked to that has knowledge on the subject says most European drivers are 10 times better than most U.S. drivers. It is a lot harder to get a drivers license and a motorcycle license there than it is here. You have to prove you know something.

If someone breaks into my house and wakes me up, and I find them in my house, they are dead if I can get to my gun in time. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. I keep a loaded 9mm 10" away from my bed, and a loaded Mossberg 12 gauge pump next to the bedroom door. And I am a good shot, I have had a lot of practice at our local police departments indoor shooting range. No way someone breaks into my house and lives if I have my way. Once you give in to criminals, they will completely take over. They almost have already. Jerry.

**Fridgitator** · 05-15-2010, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch

Even though this thread has become somewhat off topic, I find it very interesting how 'you Americans' look upon the right to own and use a gun. To me (and probably about 90% of the people over here) it's really hard to try and imagine what it's like to actually have a gun around the house (or concealed on you, or in your car). The only people over here owning a gun are police, army and criminals. Hence, the difficulty for me to place myself in 'your' shoes.

Please don't take this thread as being representative of gun ownership in the U.S. The vast majority of gun owners here never level their weapon at another human being, and even fewer would actually attempt to shoot at a motorist while riding a motorcycle. And for the record, While Texas law allows use of firearms to defend one's life and property under circumstances that other states do not, it does not allow anyone to shoot people simply for being on your property. There a few other conditions that must be met to justify deadly force.

JunkyardDog · 05-15-2010, 05:16 AM

In most cases, the use of deadly force, gun or any other deadly weapon, is allowed only in self defense. You can't after all have people going around shooting each other all over the place. Fortunately, AZ law allows use of deadly force against anyone who has broken into a persons house, without any other conditions, and that is as it should be. A persons home is something they have an inherent right to defend. You don't have to question the criminals. "excuse me sir, do you have a gun? do you intend to shoot me?" You shoot them if you have the chance, and worry about the rest later. In AZ, if they broke into your home, and you shot them while they are in your home, you are legally safe, and as far as I am concerned, morally correct. In AZ, breaking into someones home while they are there is considered "home invasion" and is far more serious than something like "burglary", or "breaking and entering".

But understand this. I have no wish to kill someone. However, there are totally different scenarios here. If I ran over and killed a kid that ran out in front of me from behind a car, it might not be my fault, but it would cause me serious problems for the rest of my life. It would be a difficult thing to live with, and my life would never be the same again.

On the other hand, if I killed someone who broke into my house in the middle of the night, I would be more concerned about how to clean up the mess than anything else. Killing them would cause me no issues at all. There would be no decision to make, that decision was made a long time ago. I would jut be glad that I'm the one who came out of it alive.

The difference? The kid was innocent, and did nothing wrong. They did not have any intent to harm anyone. They had a life ahead of them that was taken away. Even though it was technically not my fault, that really wouldn't make much difference in my feelings.

But someone who breaks into your house definitely has criminal intentions. They gave up their right to live when they made the decision to do what they did. They asked for what they got, and got what they deserved. I would consider it a minor annoyance, repair the damage they did, and go on with my life as usual.

My feelings on this are not going to change, I have felt this way all my life, with good reason. Hopefully I got my feelings across this time, because quite frankly, this is not a subject I feel comfortable discussing.

If the time ever comes, I will do what has to be done. Hopefully that will never happen. Now I would like to get back to my normal life. Thank you. Jerry.

**Dutch** · 05-16-2010, 04:33 PM

In some cases I wish we would have some of the liberties you've got over there. But on the other hand, we hear a lot of gang related violence over here coming from The States. THAT'S the kind of thing that firghtens me somewaht: gangbangers without any sense of reality or without any respect for a person's life. We seem to be getting into that a bit over here as well. Even though the only thing I've ever heard or seen on tv is about Bloods and Crips, but unfortunately we've got some idiots over here copying them and thinking they need to protect their turf etc.

Ok, I'm going even more off topic, but I do like hearing about how some things work over there and telling you guys how it is over here. IF you're interested of course.

**flitecontrol** · 05-16-2010, 11:36 PM

There is a bumper sticker here that reads: WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED, ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS. Which seems to be applicable to what you have said about gun ownership in your country. Most of my guns are for hunting or target shooting. When I was doing law enforcement, I was issued a pistol, but did not own one until recently. I think that many folks who buy a gun for self defense, hope to never have to use it. But they would rather have one and not need it than need it and not have it.

**Fridgitator** · 05-17-2010, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch

In some cases I wish we would have some of the liberties you've got over there. But on the other hand, we hear a lot of gang related violence over here coming from The States. THAT'S the kind of thing that firghtens me somewaht: gangbangers without any sense of reality or without any respect for a person's life. We seem to be getting into that a bit over here as well. Even though the only thing I've ever heard or seen on tv is about Bloods and Crips, but unfortunately we've got some idiots over here copying them and thinking they need to protect their turf etc.

Ok, I'm going even more off topic, but I do like hearing about how some things work over there and telling you guys how it is over here. IF you're interested of course.

I appreciate hearing your perspective. Like anything else, it's the events that make the news that everyone hears about around the world. Many of us don't own any guns, and among those that do, most only shoot them while hunting or on a range. I have a couple shotguns, and a cap and ball revolver that I take to a range once in awhile. If I had to, I could use any of them to defend my home, but I seriously doubt I ever will. I keep them unloaded and locked away. Unless someone stands out front of my house and gives me a countdown before they break in, I wouldn't be likely to get at them, load one, and be ready to shoot. Here in Texas, I could shoot at someone breaking into my cage or tool shed if it was dark and probably not be charged. Personally, I'd be more likely to call the cops and shoot them with my wristrocket before turning my dog loose on them. If I lived in a remote area, things might be different.

**Dutch** · 05-17-2010, 05:21 AM

I understand where you are coming from (at least I think I understand), but the pro's and cons on gun ownership will probably always stay that way: guns don't kill people, people do. But without those guns, people wouldn't kill people (we'd probably find another way to do so, because it seems to be in our nature to cause conflict). I truely feel that protecting your properties and family / loved ones should be a constitutional right for everybody. The problem is with the liberty of owning a gun, as with many other liberties, people tend to misuse/abuse that liberty. And the effects of the latter will be on display and magnified in the media. Thus feeding the pro and con discussion.

However, from my limited knowledge about The States, I do get the feeling that the gun industry (ranging from handguns to weapons of mass destruction) is a very powerfull one and is influential in many other industries, governments etc. So it's nearly impossible to ever change the laws on gun ownership in such a way that it will become a lot harder for people to ever own a gun, or maybe even impossible.

**twocoolgliders** · 05-17-2010, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch

I understand where you are coming from (at least I think I understand), but the pro's and cons on gun ownership will probably always stay that way: guns don't kill people, people do. But without those guns, people wouldn't kill people (we'd probably find another way to do so, because it seems to be in our nature to cause conflict). I truely feel that protecting your properties and family / loved ones should be a constitutional right for everybody. The problem is with the liberty of owning a gun, as with many other liberties, people tend to misuse/abuse that liberty. And the effects of the latter will be on display and magnified in the media. Thus feeding the pro and con discussion.

However, from my limited knowledge about The States, I do get the feeling that the gun industry (ranging from handguns to weapons of mass destruction) is a very powerfull one and is influential in many other industries, governments etc. So it's nearly impossible to ever change the laws on gun ownership in such a way that it will become a lot harder for people to ever own a gun, or maybe even impossible.

Here is the way I see it.........

No matter how many gun laws you make, the crooks will have guns. They are crooks, they don't follow the laws. Heck, If I were a crook I could MAKE MY OWN GUN RIGHT IN MY SHOP!

Crooks always take the "easy way"......so if they have a gun, and you don't, they feel free and easy to break into your house and steal your stuff.

If the crook KNEW you had a gun, and KNEW that you would most likely USE THAT GUN, and most likely THEY would get shot and killed, they would not break into your house..........it is plain and simple.

I want all the law abiding people to have the guns, and all the crooks to get shot! LOL

BTW I do not own any guns........in my neighborhood, crime is not bad, at least the type of crime I am talking about. A lot more crime has to do with political corruption etc.....but that's another topic.

Cookie

**Dutch** · 05-17-2010, 09:32 AM

@ Cookie: you wrote: If the crook KNEW you had a gun, and KNEW that you would most likely USE THAT GUN, and most likely THEY would get shot and killed, they would not break into your house..........it is plain and simple.

What is your view on the following: crooks are willing to take more risk when stealing / breaking in, because they know that whoever they are trying to harm might have a gun as well. Hence, they will probably use theirs faster, to avoid being shot themselves. The same goes for penalties on doing illegal stuff; if those penalties are very severe, whoever breaks the law might want to take more risk, shoot faster to avoid facing those severe penalties. In a country where owning a gun is legal this means that every (potential) crook is way more dangerous than in countries without those free laws on guns.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not trying to criticise you, or any other Americans. it's just something that is talked about over here and I'd like to know how you guys feel about that.

Nice discussion!

**flitecontrol** · 05-17-2010, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dutch

I understand where you are coming from (at least I think I understand), but the pro's and cons on gun ownership will probably always stay that way: guns don't kill people, people do. But without those guns, people wouldn't kill people (we'd probably find another way to do so, because it seems to be in our nature to cause conflict). I truely feel that protecting your properties and family / loved ones should be a constitutional right for everybody. The problem is with the liberty of owning a gun, as with many other liberties, people tend to misuse/abuse that liberty. And the effects of the latter will be on display and magnified in the media. Thus feeding the pro and con discussion.

True, but people kill themselves and others (usually accidentally, but not always) with cars all the time, and no one is lobbying to control car ownership. In third word countries, and parts of American society, edged weapons are the weapon of choice. Look at how many Africans, Haitians, Indians, etc., have been killed or maimed with machetes or swords. I'm not supporting violence, and wish people would truly learn to treat others as they would like to be treated, but there has to be some balance and perspective. Look at it this way, there are an estimated 223 million guns in the U.S. Obviously, some of those guns are in the hands of criminals, just as they are in any country. But if the average American was resorting to using a gun to resolve personal disputes, the funeral industry couldn't keep up with demand, and there would be a negative population trend. That simply isn't the case. The facts indicate that, many criminals do not hesitate to use a gun to hurt others and the average gun owner is never going to fire their gun at a human.

Anyone who has been found guilty of a felony cannot legally purchase or posess a gun in the U.S. Yet criminals never seem to run out of guns. If they can't purchase them through the black market, they will steal them. Remember the gangsters of the 1930's? They got most of their firepower (Thompson machine guns, Browning automatic rifles, etc.) by breaking into National Guard armories.

However, from my limited knowledge about The States, I do get the feeling that the gun industry (ranging from handguns to weapons of mass destruction) is a very powerfull one and is influential in many other industries, governments etc. So it's nearly impossible to ever change the laws on gun ownership in such a way that it will become a lot harder for people to ever own a gun, or maybe even impossible.

Not sure what weapons of mass destruction you are referring to. If it's atomic weapons, those are pretty much in the government's hands. What the world needs to be concerned about is the nations that support terrorism developing the capability to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction.

I doubt Remington, Winchester, Colt, Smith and Wesson, and other U.S. gun makers carry that much political clout. But the folks who own their products form a very large part of American society, and are therefore a political group with considerable influence. But that group is made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents, so they don't always vote the same way on non-gun issues. See above for existing (ineffective) laws on gun ownership. Criminals are not going to give up their guns. Some law abiding citizens may. But outlawing gun ownership in the U. S. would only serve to make a large portion of the population law breakers.

Our Communities

Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Marine Communities

Honda Rebel News Delivered to your Email!