<< FLUSHED WITH LUST ~ MAIN ~ WONDERFULLY DOOMED >>

JUST LET YOURSELF BE ROBBED

Our dear old friend Lindsay Beyerstein reveals her Democrat defence strategy:

If you’re already getting burglarized, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting a desperate criminal with your own loaded weapon?

Posted by Tim B. on 03/14/2007 at 09:36 AM
  1. Hell yes! I definitely don’t want to add getting buggerised to my list of problems.

    Posted by CO² max on 2007 03 14 at 09:46 AM • permalink

  2. I would say I’ll be adding to his problems, not mine.

    Posted by Mr. Bingley on 2007 03 14 at 09:54 AM • permalink

  3. I’m just noting that strung-out junkies at gunpoint are at least as likely to do something stupid as your average person.

    In my home, if they’re at gunpoint, and do something stupid, then they’re down with a hole in them.  My bigger worry is cleaning their blood off my new carpet. 

    The cardinal rule of self-defense: if you pull a weapon, any weapon, use it.  Waving a pistol around like a fan is worse than not having one. The intruder will know you won’t fire….and take it from you.

    Seriously.  Beyerstein has a point, but it’s ass backwards.  If you don’t want a weapon in your home for self defense, don’t get one, and take other measures.  If you do want or have one, expect to shoot someone.  It’s that simple. 

    Weapons are not amulets that ward off criminals (which is what Beyerstein seems to think), they are a tool which must be used properly. 

    But Beyerstein is too clueless to realize this.  And she prefers to roll over when attacked.  I hope would-be burglars don’t read her posts, and realize that they just found some easy meat.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 09:57 AM • permalink

  4. Twit. According to her I don’t need a gun, I just need insurance. Has anyone ever heard of this Resurrection Insurance she seems to allude to?
    I’m with TRJS, if you own a weapon learn how to use it properly and be prepared to use it when necessary. I too subscribe to the old adage that the only reason you point a firearm at someone is when you intend to kill them.
    And remember, ALWAYS double-tap on the objective.

    Posted by Texas Bob on 2007 03 14 at 10:04 AM • permalink

  5. And then tap that “on” button on the wood chipper.

    Posted by yojimbo on 2007 03 14 at 10:10 AM • permalink

  6. The cardinal rule of self-defense: if you pull a weapon, any weapon, use it.  Waving a pistol around like a fan is worse than not having one. The intruder will know you won’t fire….and take it from you.

    1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction, even if he has just broken into your house. You usually don’t have a duty to retreat, but you are obliged not to act as judge and executioner. Most unarmed burglars when confronted with a weapon will back off and try to flee.

    2. Unless you’re extremely close to the intruder, the odds of his taking the weapon from you are small—except in the movies. Don’t let him get that close.

    3. If you’re “Waving a pistol around like a fan” you’re a menace to yourself and others and shouldn’t own one.

    Posted by Bruce Rheinstein on 2007 03 14 at 10:13 AM • permalink

  7. If you’re already getting burglarized, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting a desperate criminal with your own loaded weapon?

    ... God, sometimes I just can’t stand the left.

    I wonder how this author would feel about the saying, “If you’re going to be raped, just lie back and enjoy it.”  Don’t fight back! You might make the rapist angry and he’ll kill you instead of just assaulting you.

    Posted by Fatmouse on 2007 03 14 at 10:13 AM • permalink

  8. I pretty much agree.  Said person is in line to become a Yojimbo BFTA.  (blunt force trauma awardee)

    Posted by yojimbo on 2007 03 14 at 10:14 AM • permalink

  9. Bruce.

    1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction,

    Bull. Shit.  If he’s twice your size and you wake up to find him standing at the foot of your bed, it’s self defence.

    Don’t let him get that close.

    How? By shooting him? Murderer!

    Posted by Fatmouse on 2007 03 14 at 10:18 AM • permalink

  10. If the crook is ‘desperate’, I sure as hell don’t want to rely on his better nature(as if he had one) to keep him from adding assault/murder/etc. to burglary.  Something of an appropriate caliber definately helps out there.

    You could say it reduces the problem somewhat.

    Posted by Firehand on 2007 03 14 at 10:20 AM • permalink

  11. WTF? How does handing the bastard a lead sandwich make my problems worse?

    Weird.

    Posted by SoberHT on 2007 03 14 at 10:25 AM • permalink

  12. #6 Bruce 1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction, even if he has just broken into your house. You usually don’t have a duty to retreat, but you are obliged not to act as judge and executioner. Most unarmed burglars when confronted with a weapon will back off and try to flee.

    I thank God I don’t live where ever it is that you live. If Mr Numbnutz Home Intruder makes the conscious decision to break into my home, I am completely within my rights to defend my home, whether he is armed or not. And I won’t hesitate to do so.  This individual accepted this risk the moment he broke inside my home.  There is no such thing as duty to retreat when it comes to home defense where I come from.

    Posted by Texas Bob on 2007 03 14 at 10:26 AM • permalink

  13. Fortunately where I live the law allows you to assume someone who has forcibly broken into your home is not there to sell magazine subscriptions.  Chasing them *out* of your home and gunning them down in the street is still considered a social faux pas and frowned on.

    I took a very good handgun class which (in addition to target drills) went over the legal aspects.  An attackers intent, ability, opportunity and what a Reasonable and Prudent Person (tm)would think if on the receiving end made up the burden of proof. Self-defense is not murder.

    Posted by bad cat robot on 2007 03 14 at 10:36 AM • permalink

  14. If you’re already getting burglarized, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting a desperate criminal with your own loaded weapon?

    Obviously Ms. Beyerstein hasn’t considered the possibility that the burglar (already proven to be violent by his propensity to break into occupied homes) might be looking at his third strike (life in prison) and might just kill you to avoid being identified.  I’d rather explain myself to the police than be lying dead on the floor.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2007 03 14 at 10:45 AM • permalink

  15. Well here in gun-free Australia we don’t have as many options.  Kept the bayonet, though.

    Posted by Olrence on 2007 03 14 at 10:49 AM • permalink

  16. Or as the old saying goes, “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”  If someone breaks into my house, I presume they’re not there to sell Girl Scout cookies, and I’ll give them one fair warning (rack a shell into the chamber) before I kill them. 

    Period. 

    Elizabeth
    Imperial Keeper

    Posted by Elizabeth Imperial Keeper on 2007 03 14 at 10:49 AM • permalink

  17. “I was in fear of of my life, Constable”

    “I want to co-operate, Detective, but I was in fear of my life, and I don’t think I should say anything until I speak with a lawyer”

    “I was in fear of my life, Your Honour”

    Case dismissed.

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2007 03 14 at 10:51 AM • permalink

  18. If you’re already getting burglarized, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting a desperate criminal with your own loaded weapon?
    Is this a trick question?

    Mr. Rheinstein, I don’t know where you live, but pretty much everywhere here in the good ol’ U.S. of A., that scenario isn’t murder.  It is called self-defense.
    1) I have no idea if the burglar is armed with any sort of weapon, and I’m not going to wait or ask politely to find out.
    2) I do have a right to protect me & mine—even unto including “stuff.”  I have worked for it and for someone to just come in and take it is no different than him coming in and stealing my labor.

    Posted by rbj1 on 2007 03 14 at 10:58 AM • permalink

  19. #15 “gun free Australia”

    Bwahahahahahaha.

    Sorry Olrence, nothing personal, just back from Queensland :-)

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2007 03 14 at 10:59 AM • permalink

  20. The law does vary according to jurisdiction. In England right now you have no right to defend yourself with a gun, no matter what.
    This is a poor idea (he said with understatement).
    In normal parts of the world if someone breaks into your house you can use deadly force to stop him. If the cops find him slumped over dead halfway through the broken window there will be more of an investigation, a lot more questions.
    If you invite someone in your house, then get into an argument with him and end up shooting him - which occurs more often than you’d think - then there will be a big investigation and possible jail time.

    Posted by Merlin on 2007 03 14 at 11:03 AM • permalink

  21. There is really no way of telling what the intentions are of someone who breaks into your house while you are at home.  Most burglars prefer empty houses, to avoid confrontations with the resident.  If a burglar enters an occupied home, all bets are off.  Does the burglar intend harm to you or your family members?  Is he there just to steal, or would he rape, murder or otherwise terrorize people in the home?  Do you really want to depend upon the goodwill of someone who breaks into your home?

    Posted by Mystery Meat on 2007 03 14 at 11:11 AM • permalink

  22. Lindsey is what’s known as free rider. She lives in relative safety because many would not act as she recommends. I’ve captured a burglar with my shotgun, stopped a beatdown outside my house with a baseball bat, and run over a bicycle thief with my truck, but that’s just how we roll in east Dallas.

    Bruce,
    Texas Bob is right. I don’t know where you live, but don’t break into a house in Texas unless you’re willing to risk being shot.

    Posted by paulris on 2007 03 14 at 11:16 AM • permalink

  23. #19. So QLD is teeming with brigands with unlicenced weapons?  Some company you keep.
    I know of one person of my acquaintance now who has a gun, a Glock of all things.

    Everyone else found the permits and storage requirements to be not worth the candle.

    But they’ve still got their bayonets too.

    Posted by Olrence on 2007 03 14 at 11:23 AM • permalink

  24. Ah, man.  Now I’m homesick for Texas. :(

    Posted by tabitharuth on 2007 03 14 at 11:26 AM • permalink

  25. Aim true and make sure the Bozo’s dead. If he lives, he’ll sue!

    Posted by nofixedabode on 2007 03 14 at 11:30 AM • permalink

  26. Home invasion is almost unheard of here (rural south). I suspect from a burglars’ point of view it would be somewhat like playing russian roulete with 4 or 5 loaded chambers. Not surprisingly, most people have very good manners.

    Posted by greene on 2007 03 14 at 11:31 AM • permalink

  27. Olrence and Pedro,

    How’s that gun thing working in OZ??  Stopped all the gun crime yet?

    Posted by Old Tanker on 2007 03 14 at 11:46 AM • permalink

  28. In the great gun grab after Port Arthur, Queensland was found to be one of the states that strangely did not seem to wish to comply with the new law that all “weapons of mass destruction” such as self loading pea rifles and 50 year old pump shotguns be surrendered to the police and compensated with a nominal sum of dollars.
    The main reason appeared to be that unlike most of the other states, Queenslanders were not required to register their firearms by type and serial number, and consequently those who felt that this was not the greatest law ever passed through Parliament, respectfully declined to surrender their firearms and started digging holes in the back paddock.
    There comes a time when stupid laws are ignored by law abiding citizens.

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2007 03 14 at 11:47 AM • permalink

  29. Naturally, Old Tanker, the Men of No Appearance and other assorted criminals are totally disarmed and the number of reported incidents of armed robbery etc. has been drastically reduced since the implementation of restricted ownership of guns. A total success, and a model for the rest of the world.

    Somebody forgot to tell the criminals, however.

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2007 03 14 at 11:59 AM • permalink

  30. #17—case closed unless you live in Great Britian.

    Posted by Room 237 on 2007 03 14 at 12:07 PM • permalink

  31. “If you’re really getting raped, do you really want to add to your problems by annoying a desperate criminal with your own protestations?”

    Ol’ Lindsay probably thinks those old ladies in Queens who got mugged must have done something to deserve it.

    Posted by Jim Treacher on 2007 03 14 at 12:13 PM • permalink

  32. Don’t forget suicide and mass slaughter pedro.

    Posted by Srekwah on 2007 03 14 at 12:19 PM • permalink

  33. #30

    Exactly - if you live here in Britain you can add a new last line to #17:

    “But Bubba, I was in fear of my life! No Bubba, don’t! AAARRGGHH!”

    Graphic, but with an element of truthiness.

    Posted by Don Charleone on 2007 03 14 at 12:35 PM • permalink

  34. Another example of beating-loving Fisk Philosophy.

    Posted by Patricia on 2007 03 14 at 12:36 PM • permalink

  35. The point made above about risk is exactly right. British criminals have almost no disincentive to rob houses, even if someone’s at home.

    I was burgled a few weeks ago while out of the country. They may have noticed that my lights hadn’t come on for a while, or they may have just decided to chance it anyway. Let’s face it, why wouldn’t they?

    Best case scenario they get some good stuff. My particular visitor only got some change and a couple of expired credit cards, since my door was dead-locked and they had to exit back out through the window.

    Worst-case scenario they get beaten up, do some community service, and sue the now-imprisoned householder for their injuries.

    Posted by Don Charleone on 2007 03 14 at 12:41 PM • permalink

  36. What I’d like is for Lindsay Beyerstein not to make that choice for me.

    Posted by Mark V. on 2007 03 14 at 12:46 PM • permalink

  37. Although I quite agree with our armed & secure members, we should also note that “no knock” warrants have become problematic for the practical selection of expedient home protection.  There will have to be a choice of either unannounced police entries or home weapons;  I’m not siding with the former.

    Posted by Apostic on 2007 03 14 at 12:48 PM • permalink

  38. American Rifleman magazine has a monthly page of incidents where armed citizens have squelched robbery, rape and mayhem.

    Many are burglaries, and in most cases the perp is captured and turns out to be on drugs and/or parole.

    Lindsay The Forgetful might mis-place her gun, but I have practiced getting mine in pitch darkness, and I never fail to find it first try.

    Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2007 03 14 at 12:48 PM • permalink

  39. “Keeping a gun at home to protect against robbers seems like an especially silly idea in a big city where the police can arrive at the scene in less time than it takes to open your gun safe, load your gun, and confront the burglar.

    Either her arthritis keeps her from opening her gun safe in less than 20 minutes or she lives inside the local police precinct.

    Posted by JohnO on 2007 03 14 at 12:51 PM • permalink

  40. If you’ve already got a malignant tumor, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting it with a surgeon’s scalpel?

    Posted by Dave S. on 2007 03 14 at 12:54 PM • permalink

  41. “Texas Bob is right. I don’t know where you live, but don’t break into a house in Texas unless you’re willing to risk being shot.”

    Same thing in California.  At least it’s the same thing at my house.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2007 03 14 at 12:54 PM • permalink

  42. 1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction, even if he has just broken into your house. You usually don’t have a duty to retreat, but you are obliged not to act as judge and executioner. Most unarmed burglars when confronted with a weapon will back off and try to flee.

    What jurisdictions are you talking about? What country?

    Posted by TomB on 2007 03 14 at 01:37 PM • permalink

  43. Most US States have what is called the “Castle Doctrine” - as in a person’s home is his/her castle and may be defended. Here in FL we’ve moved to a “Stand Your Ground Doctrine” - which basically means that even outside the home, a citizen is under no obligation to attempt to retreat before using lethal force in self-defense. Now if we could only get Louisiana’s civilized liquor laws, it would be paradise.

    Posted by brett_l on 2007 03 14 at 01:56 PM • permalink

  44. #42, Adjustment of the Rheinstein (#6) Reality Rules
    Rule 1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction, even if he has just broken into your house. You usually don’t have a duty to retreat, but you are obliged not to act as judge and executioner.

    Rule 2. Unless you’re extremely close to the intruder, the odds of his taking the weapon from you are small…. Don’t let him get that close.

    Rule 3. To Keep him from getting that(?) close, ignore Rule 1 and execute the Bastard.

    Posted by stats on 2007 03 14 at 02:03 PM • permalink


  45. The Rules (my daddy taught me):
    1.  Never point a gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot him.
    2.  Never shoot at anyone unless you intend to kill him.
    3.  If you shoot the bad guy coming in the window and he falls back outside, drag him in.

    The End

    Posted by texasred on 2007 03 14 at 02:14 PM • permalink

  46. “Here in FL we’ve moved to a “Stand Your Ground Doctrine” - which basically means that even outside the home, a citizen is under no obligation to attempt to retreat before using lethal force in self-defense.”

    Maybe that’s why FL is the only state to have its own special Fark tag.

    “Now if we could only get Louisiana’s civilized liquor laws, it would be paradise.”

    As a reader of Fark, I’m all for this too. Especially since I don’t live there.

    Seriously, though, I can see requiring people to at least try to de-escalate before resorting to lethal force. For me, yelling “HANDS UP! I GOT A GUN!” counts. It doesn’t take much time or effort to yell it, and if the guy does anything other than put his hands up or run like hell (including turning to see where I’m at), they get to eat lead. Like better folks than me have said, better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.

    Posted by Tatterdemalian on 2007 03 14 at 02:25 PM • permalink

  47. #47 Tatterdemalian;

    “Here in FL we’ve moved to a “Stand Your Ground Doctrine” - which basically means that even outside the home, a citizen is under no obligation to attempt to retreat before using lethal force in self-defense.”

    Maybe that’s why FL is the only state to have its own special Fark tag.”

    Which implies what, other than a chance for some Fark-ish humor?

    The fact that Florida’s violent crime rates dropped, and faster than the rest of the country, after they adopted their current CCW permit system doesn’t seem like a bad thing.

    Seriously, though, I can see requiring people to at least try to de-escalate before resorting to lethal force. For me, yelling “HANDS UP! I GOT A GUN!” counts. It doesn’t take much time or effort to yell it,

    Which is pretty much what you get, repeatedly, as part of the curriculum of CCW permit classes in those states that allow them.

    Beats believing anything you learn from tv and the movies.

    I agree that “12 is better than 6”, but expect to be financially ruined in the legal aftermath, particularly after the civil suit later brought against you by the “innocent” ex-criminal’s “bereaved” family. Even so, beats being dead.

    Posted by steveH on 2007 03 14 at 02:44 PM • permalink

  48. #47 TD:
    Heh. To each his own, I guess.

    Posted by brett_l on 2007 03 14 at 02:49 PM • permalink

  49. I just found out that in Roanoke, Virginia some moron named Christian Trejbal published a “Sunshine” article last weekend that had a database of every concealed carry holder here. 

    Go to Misha’s site for the full info.  I’m boiling.  Thank heavens I haven’t gone for mine yet. 

    Elizabeth
    Imperial Keeper

    Posted by Elizabeth Imperial Keeper on 2007 03 14 at 02:51 PM • permalink

  50. Keeping a gun at home to protect against robbers seems like an especially silly idea in a big city where the police can arrive at the scene in less time than it takes to open your gun safe, load your gun, and confront the burglar.

    So, in Lindsay’s big city, the police arrive just as you’re hanging up from your 911 call? What city is this, because that is a flat-out amazing response time. I should think that most people who need to protect themselves from B&E don’t sleep with their guns locked in the gun safe. Silly twat.

    Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2007 03 14 at 02:57 PM • permalink

  51. Beyerstein lives in Los Angeles, in the Jack Bauer universe.

    Posted by Jim Treacher on 2007 03 14 at 03:13 PM • permalink

  52. This illustrates my precise problem with the left.  They lecture the rest of us on security policy and standing up against the elites, yet when push comes to shove against tyrants and criminals they cave.

    Posted by tdw77 on 2007 03 14 at 03:18 PM • permalink

  53. Things to Do in London When You’re Defenceless…


    Just lie back and think of England Dear!

    Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2007 03 14 at 03:25 PM • permalink

  54. This Lindsey However’s idea of “the best photo” of the war” seems off too.
    Michael Yon’s is better

    Posted by docweasel on 2007 03 14 at 03:28 PM • permalink

  55. Apologies to The Eagles,

    Long Distance Dedication to L. Beaverstein.

    To the tune of “Victim of Love”


    “I heard about you and that man
    There’s just one thing I don’t understand
    Your situation is dire and you show him your ire
    How come he’s still got his gun in his hand?

    Victim of crime, I see a bleeding heart
    You got your stories to tell
    Victim of crime, its such an easy part
    And you know how to play it so well”

    Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2007 03 14 at 03:36 PM • permalink

  56. You guys are so mean!  Don’t you even care how that gun would make a poor desperate criminal feel?  He’s barely making ends meet by stealing your stuff already, and now you want to scare him!?

    Heartless.  Simply heartless.

    Posted by blogagog on 2007 03 14 at 03:38 PM • permalink

  57. I can retrieve a loaded gun in my home faster than I can speed-dial 911, let alone wait for the po-po to arrive.

    Sounds like the philosopher needs some practice with emperical results.

    Posted by Ernst Blofeld on 2007 03 14 at 03:49 PM • permalink

  58. Near-instantaneous police response is guaranteed if you move next to a donut shop.

    Posted by Crispytoast on 2007 03 14 at 03:54 PM • permalink

  59. #50 Elizabeth,

    The IDIOT in Roanoke likened it to having a public sex offender registry.  Never mind that sex offenders are CONVICTED F@#ING FELONS…..

    The paper took the online database down.  Some people complained that they had to move several times already because of violent former spouses (also why they have the gun) and now they would have to move again.  Christian was, of course, unapologetic….go figure….

    Posted by Old Tanker on 2007 03 14 at 03:59 PM • permalink

  60. This is what Texas Bob speaks of.

    Posted by jetson on 2007 03 14 at 04:01 PM • permalink

  61. Found it, the Roanoke IDIOT I wonder if his address is public?

    Posted by Old Tanker on 2007 03 14 at 04:09 PM • permalink

  62. Hey, criminals! Want to make money fast? Follow these easy steps!

    1. Find out where Lindsay Beyerstein lives.
    2. Kick her door down, rush in and tie her up. **No resistance, guaranteed!**
    3. Take whatever you would like. She’s probably got lots of cool stuff.
    4. PROFIT!

    However, if like most asshole lefties she lives in a secure high-rise with armed doormen, you’ll need to wait until she leaves her apartment and settle for her wallet.

    Posted by Fatmouse on 2007 03 14 at 04:09 PM • permalink

  63. Old Tanker:  Yeah, I know.  I hope there’s a class action suit against the moron and the paper.  I read the comments; at least two women have had to pack up and run again to get away from abusive ex’s.  Made me livid at the callousness of dear Christian, because I have had personal experience. 

    I had my ex threaten to kill me in front of witnesses; he even tried to start something when I was sitting in a courtroom with armed deputies watching him.  When his lawyer pushed him away and told him to sit down I told the lawyer, “I have a gun.  I will protect myself.”  Not a threat, just statements of fact. 

    Later that same year we had to be in the same place at the same time; the idiot showed up wearing a bullet-proof vest.  Which proved to me that he was nothing but a cowardly bully, and he hasn’t bothered me since. 

    Elizabeth
    Imperial Keeper

    Posted by Elizabeth Imperial Keeper on 2007 03 14 at 04:13 PM • permalink

  64. Why do I want a gun? Well, living in the Police State of Brackistan it’s a no-brainer that any crooks will be let off with nary a slap on the wrist.

    One of my neighbours was recently sconned by a couple of druggies while out sitting on his front porch.

    He heard a noise, stuck his head around the corner and was clocked with a shovel. He ended up in hospital, and then had a heart attack.

    He’s still in hospital.

    And the druggies? Well, the cops caught them, and let them go a few hours later.

    They live around the corner from me, and while I’m not surprised, I’m seriously pissed off.

    As I said* to my nextdoor neighbour when he complained about it, “why on earth would the police do something like charge them? They’d get a judge who will just bleat on about how the poor druggies are suffering from substance abuse and let them off anyway. There is so much red tape to get through, so much paperwork, when we all know they’re going to walk that it’s not worth the time and effort to even attempt to jail them.”

    And how much did they steal?

    $50.

    A man is in hospital for fifty farking dollars, while those that put him there wander my streets at will.

    Yeah, the gun buyback was a great idea.


    *Polite paraphrase. I wasn’t very happy that day.

    Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2007 03 14 at 04:26 PM • permalink

  65. As for the idiot posting the list of those with a CCW in the name of the public’s “right to know”, whatever happened to John Q Public’s “right to privacy”?

    Or is that just a stupid question?

    Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2007 03 14 at 04:29 PM • permalink

  66. The idiot who published the list is
    Christian Trejbal
    2502 Fairway Dr
    Roanoke VA, 24015

    If you live in Roanoke, don’t own the means of self defense, and get mugged, sue for damages based on his having provided your attacker with targetting information.

    Posted by triticale on 2007 03 14 at 04:38 PM • permalink

  67. whatever happened to John Q Public’s “right to privacy”?

    Funny thing the U.S. Constitution, the right to privacy isn’t in it….just “implied” which means only implied when it suits a lefty. 

    The right to bear arms however is black and white, which means it’s inconvenient for lefties…......

    Posted by Old Tanker on 2007 03 14 at 04:58 PM • permalink

  68. The house breaker didn’t ask my permission before breaking into my house, so I’m not gonna ask his permission to shoot him.

    Escalation of force here means first round is #9 and rock salt mix. Each round after that is #00.

    And in regards to yelling something at the idjit before firing? All that does is make the target jumpy.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2007 03 14 at 05:04 PM • permalink

  69. Some wag hereabouts was giving away stickers for the front door that said “Gun Free Home”.

    Almost none of them appeared on “Gun Free” homes, but a few turned up on well-armed homes, LOL.

    Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2007 03 14 at 05:06 PM • permalink

  70. 1. Shooting an unarmed man in cold blood is murder in nearly every jurisdiction, even if he has just broken into your house.

    Bruce, other people have addressed this, but that’s generally not the case in the USA; there are exceptions, I believe, but only exceptions.  I’m not sure where you live, but if it’s in the USA, better check again.

    You usually don’t have a duty to retreat, but you are obliged not to act as judge and executioner.

    Huh?  I thought shooting a burglar was murder.  And where does this “duty to retreat” come from?  Do you live in France?

    Most unarmed burglars when confronted with a weapon will back off and try to flee.

    I agree that this is possible.  But I will not bet my life on it, which is pretty much what you are suggesting here.  Should you care to live in my home as a full time guard, at no expense to me, I’ll consider that approach.

    Until then, the only warning an intruder gets from me is the sound of a round being chambered into my shotgun.  If said intruder gets stupid (i.e., fails to run like hell or does not fall on the floor in abject terror), that’s his or her problem. 

    And that’s within the laws of the state I live in.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 05:08 PM • permalink

  71. Things to Do in London When You’re Defenceless…

    1. Bend over and put your head between your knees.

    2. Kiss your ass goodbye.

    And, I sincerely hope Mr. Trejbal gets many, many visits from interesting people.  Perhaps signs could be put up around Roanoke giving his address and that he doesn’t believe in CCW?

    Also, I see no reason not to put online anything interesting that can be learned about him, since he apparently thinks such is okay.  Wonder if he has had any tickets or civil cases or brushes with the law in his past?

    Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2007 03 14 at 05:13 PM • permalink

  72. Oz Gun Buyback:

    NSW was pretty non-compliant to, registration had only been introduced a few years before and most people had the sense to leave a few things “of the list”.

    The good thing is I don’t think another Gunbuyback will work here.  Following the 1996 Buyback the Handgun Buyback in 2002 nearly stalled, it ended up getting extended twice by significant time spans. 

    The reason was that owners coordinated fairly well so that they would only hand in during the last week.  With one week to run on the first deadline the Police had only collected 10% of what they expected to.  Not wishing to find out whether they were up against mass civil disobedience or just tardiness the Government extended the deadline.  This happened twice. 

    So, with a bit more organisation, coordination and solidarity it would seem possible to stall any Gun Buyback almost indefinitely.

    Posted by rickw on 2007 03 14 at 05:18 PM • permalink

  73. This illustrates my precise problem with the left.  They lecture the rest of us on security policy and standing up against the elites, yet when push comes to shove against tyrants and criminals they cave.

    That leads to an interesting thought experiment - I wonder what Lindsey would do if she could identify the burglar as a Republican. (I know, that latter notion is pretty preposterous.)

    Posted by PW on 2007 03 14 at 05:40 PM • permalink

  74. Oops, I forgot to comment on this one as well:

    3. If you’re “Waving a pistol around like a fan” you’re a menace to yourself and others and shouldn’t own one.

    The full context of what I said was:

    Waving a pistol around like a fan is worse than not having one.

    I certainly implied that weapon wavers shouldn’t own a weapon, and I clearly said so in the next paragraph:

    Seriously.  Beyerstein has a point, but it’s ass backwards.  If you don’t want a weapon in your home for self defense, don’t get one, and take other measures.  If you do want or have one, expect to shoot someone.  It’s that simple. 

    FWIW, I agree with your statement, such as it is. 

    (Yes, I’m being pendatic, but if you are going to cherry pick, I’m going to be pendatic.)

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 06:08 PM • permalink

  75. PW, if Lindsey identified her intruder as a Republican, she’d blame Bush…..after surrendering all her valuables.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 06:09 PM • permalink

  76. As for the idiot posting the list of those with a CCW in the name of the public’s “right to know”, whatever happened to John Q Public’s “right to privacy”?

    Doesn’t apply to people doing things not approved by the Anointed.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2007 03 14 at 06:09 PM • permalink

  77. The idiot who published the list is
    Christian Trejbal
    2502 Fairway Dr
    Roanoke VA, 24015

    Normally I would object to publishing someone’s address online, but in this case, this smug, self-righteous little pansy was just asking for it.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2007 03 14 at 06:11 PM • permalink

  78. I think it’s worth pointing out that the widely shared fantasy of confronting an armed intruder with one’s own firearm is rarely realized.  Most burglaries occur when occupants are away.

    And yet ... when criminals know you’re not armed—and the only way they know that is if the law says so, and you’re a law-abiding citizen—then the odds of a “hot” burglary rise sharply.

    There would be less violence as more homeowners armed.  So, arguments for arming the populace should make sense even to liberals.

    That is, if liberals were genuinely concerned about violence, rather than about aggregating state power.

    Posted by Rittenhouse on 2007 03 14 at 06:18 PM • permalink

  79. Don’t have a gun.

    Got a full-sized replica of the Hobbit short-sword “Sting”, however, and some serious delusions of swordsmanship. So watch out!

    (Weird how it shines blue whenever I turn on the ABC).

    Posted by Dminor on 2007 03 14 at 06:45 PM • permalink

  80. Don’t have a gun.

    Got a full-sized replica of the Hobbit short-sword “Sting”, however

    Ever see Raiders of the Lost Ark?

    Never bring a sword to a gunfight.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2007 03 14 at 06:48 PM • permalink

  81. I would cheerfully confront some of Iowahawk’s Hoosegow Honeys with a loaded weapon.

    Posted by anthony_r on 2007 03 14 at 06:55 PM • permalink

  82. Ah, but they don’t like the cold steel.  They don’t like it up ‘em at all, suh!

    Posted by Olrence on 2007 03 14 at 07:01 PM • permalink

  83. #81 Dave S.

    Ever see Kill Bill?

    You’re right, of course. I’ll also need a shield. And a scary helmet.

    Posted by Dminor on 2007 03 14 at 07:17 PM • permalink

  84. #21 Mystery Meat: 

    Most burglars prefer empty houses, to avoid confrontations with the resident. 


    Sadly this is no longer so in my area. The drug-crazed punks that do most of the robberies prefer occupied houses in daylight.
    Aged friends who live in expensive real estate on the klongs behind Surface Paradise, were recently robbed at 2 pm. Dad was noisily mowing the front lawn while Mum was upstairs ironing.
    The coppers explained that this was the new trend because the thugs could expect unarmed residents, unlocked doors, and alarms turned off during daylight hours.
    Most of these canal properties have fortress-like defences to the street, but have open lawns down to the canal shore at the back of the house. Guess where the robbers come in.

    Posted by Skeeter on 2007 03 14 at 07:21 PM • permalink

  85. ‘an especially silly idea in a big city where the police can arrive at the scene in less time than it takes to open your gun safe, load your gun, and confront the burglar.’

    I live in Balmain, Sydney, Australia. Some time ago a neighbour arrived home during the day and realised that here house was being burgled. Living just down the road from the local police station she ran there and informed the duty officer that the burglars were still in the house.  She went back to stand outside her house.  Twenty minutes later the burglards emerged with her valuables. 45 minutes later the police arrived.  They only had to travel 600 metres. Lindsay and I sure live in different worlds.

    Posted by allan on 2007 03 14 at 07:36 PM • permalink

  86. Once I used my handgun to stop a robbery I walked in on.  They saw me and walked toward me.

    I didn’t say a word.  I just thumbed back the hammer on my revolver.

    You can’t imagine how loud that sounded.

    Both robbers immediately sat down and put their hands on their heads, again without a word from me.  They knew the drill.

    I don’t really believe in jawin’.  If they are where they should not be, they know it.  It’s not my job to talk to them nicely.

    Posted by trainer on 2007 03 14 at 07:39 PM • permalink

  87. Actually, I’d think we’d all be a little safer if Lindsay stays unarmed. She is clearly happy to give her stuff away if “asked” forcibly enough; she’d probably also give away The Gun if she had one.

    Posted by jdm on 2007 03 14 at 07:54 PM • permalink

  88. The Democrats, unless they wake up, are a threat to the security of the USA, and subsequently many other countries. In effect they are assisting those they will not confront. The enemy, whose nature they deny, is now on the inside as well as the outside.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2007 03 14 at 07:56 PM • permalink

  89. #82 - I’m with you. Swedish Netball Team ever break into my bedroom, they’re copping a loaded weapon. After a cigarette and about 15 mins, they’ll cop it again. Rough justice.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 03 14 at 08:00 PM • permalink

  90. #85

    “Surface Paradise”

    Is that the above-ground, bio-domed section of Geothermia?

    Posted by hayesy on 2007 03 14 at 08:02 PM • permalink

  91. For those actually interested in what a total waste of time, effort and money the 1996 Australian gun buy-back scheme was, please see HERE, where the Sporting Shooter’s Association has recentl;y addressed the issue. The SSAA said in 96 that it would not work for logical and valid reasons, and has assisted in long term studies since which prove the point beyond doubt.

    Of course, the point is intuitive in any case, criminals did not obey the new law. Who’d have thought that criminals would act in such a manner?  I mean… like… well… criminals.

    To our US cousins, get hold of the Australian Institute of Criminology report linked at the SSAA site and read it. It will provide you with very useful ammunition the next time someone in your jurisdiction comes up with this sort of stupidity.

    BTW, it is still perfectly possible to own decent firearms in Australia, although the bureacratic impediments to doing so are annoying. You see, the people who drafted the legislation did not know firearms very well, so lever actions are still perfectly legal, so are .50 cal rifles (bolt action) and all forms of bolt action guns.

    An unfortunate side effect of the 1996 Act has been a BIG expansion in the black market for guns, especially pistols like Glocks and Browning 9mm.

    Still, a mate in New Zealand has it better. Each household can legally and openly own one still, and only full-blooded semi auto rifles WITH a pistol grip rate as Class A firearms! SMG do too, as do MG, of course.

    Might move….

    MarkL
    Canberra

    Posted by MarkL on 2007 03 14 at 08:12 PM • permalink

  92. Talk about a freaky image of Jesus . Click the image if you’re game.

    I’m wondering if they’ll photograph Mo the prophet as a transexual next?

    Posted by 1.618 on 2007 03 14 at 08:13 PM • permalink

  93. Apologies, that link has changed to a newspaper article (??) see HERE for the AIC report, and HERE for teh AIC publications on gun-related matters.

    MarkL
    Canberra

    Posted by MarkL on 2007 03 14 at 08:20 PM • permalink

  94. However, if like most asshole lefties she lives in a secure high-rise with armed doormen, you’ll need to wait until she leaves her apartment and settle for her wallet.

    Shades of Rosie O’Donnell. She, a full-throated loud-mouthed advocate for banning individual ownership of firearms (2nd Amendment be damned), hired armed security guards to “protect her children”. She denied hypocrisy because the guns were not allowed in her home and used only to guard the “perimeter”. So, in Rosieland, personal fire power is okay as long as it’s hired and confined to the “perimeter” (and of course, you know, she’s a celebrity and has needs beyond those of mere mortals, needs demanding special consideration). But the poor guy with a family to protect in East LA who can’t shell out for a hired gun and, in any event, doesn’t even have a “perimeter” is SOL. This lefty elitist attitude has become a cliche.

    The most interesting people, I thought, in MM’s Roger & Me were the gun shop owners. They advised people who wanted protection against home invasion to get a pump shotgun. No great skill required to hit your target and the sound of the pump alone is enough to make most intruders turn tail. Sounded like good advice to me.

    That’s quite a story, Elizabeth. Smug, self-righteous little pansy accurately sums up Mr. Trejbal, I think.

    Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2007 03 14 at 08:23 PM • permalink

  95. null

    this one.

    Posted by 1.618 on 2007 03 14 at 08:24 PM • permalink

  96. #91 Surface Paradise? Yeah. Heaven on earth.
    It’s actually more like a high-rise hell on earth these days and locals will drive miles out of their way to a avoid going through it.

    Posted by Skeeter on 2007 03 14 at 09:02 PM • permalink

  97. “If you’re already getting burglarized, do you really want to add to your problems by confronting a desperate criminal with your own loaded weapon? “

    Yes.

    My intention is to add to his problems.

    Posted by Michael Lonie on 2007 03 14 at 09:04 PM • permalink

  98. #95 Kyda, Rosie O’Donnell could talk an intruder to death.

    Posted by anthony_r on 2007 03 14 at 09:25 PM • permalink

  99. Most burglaries occur when occupants are away.

    Most, yes.  I’m one of the exceptions.  It was a early morning burglarly.  Fortunately, the jerk spooked when I woke up (I heard a noise, and made one as well), and bugged out, so I never laid eyes on him. 

    I have reason to believe he cased my house through a “friend”, and likely knew I was armed.  So give him high marks for balls and reaction.

    And what did the character risk his life for?  A cheap CD player, a palmtop computer, my wallet, and a VCR.  I killed the credit cards, wrote off the cash, and had the losses covered by my home owner’s insurance.  I even got my wallet back, contents (less cash) intact; the character dumped it, and the finder called me.

    So I hear where Beyerstein is coming from.  I just don’t care to support a criminal class. 

    And I think I was very lucky; the house I was in had no air conditioning, and I had left a window open for air (yes, very stupid of me, but the area was very quiet, crime wise, and I was young and ignorant). 

    The window had a solid screen metal mesh on it, which had been cut in a nice, clean, straight line, very quietly, along two sides, and folded back.  The sort of cut a very good knife would make. 

    I don’t care to see if I get lucky a second time.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 09:36 PM • permalink

  100. #95 Kyda, Rosie O’Donnell could talk an intruder to death.

    Talk?  Her mere presence causes heart attacks.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 14 at 09:37 PM • permalink

  101. MarkL #92. In fact what John “I hate guns” Howard’s 1996 laws were designed to do was harass shooters with pettifogging regulations designed to discourage honest people from owning firearms. Shooters in this country are treated worse than pedophiles with their personal details on the national police database, “crimtrac”. Think about that for a moment: Which other group of law-abiding citizens are recorded into a database alongside criminals?

    And let’s not forget it was at his insistence that self defence is not considered a valid reason to own a firearm. He is an avowed centralist and conservative in name only.

    Read the articles here for a run-down on the effects of Australia’s gun laws.

    Posted by hipower on 2007 03 14 at 09:41 PM • permalink

  102. O/T Khalid Sheik Mohammed has just confessed to masterminding 29 terrorist acts including 9/11 and the Bali bombings.

    But this is not good enough for ABC radio. They are already asking whether KSM made these confessions ‘under duress’.

    Posted by CO² max on 2007 03 14 at 10:00 PM • permalink

  103. They are already asking whether KSM made these confessions ‘under duress’.

    Gawd, I hope so.

    Posted by Vanguard of the Commentariat on 2007 03 14 at 10:14 PM • permalink

  104. O/T, but relevant in terms of self-help remedies.

    The front page of the Qld daily rag the Courier Mail is running the front page story of a former porn king currently serving time for assault and torture attended a Liberal lunch where JWH was speaking.

    The assault and torture he was convicted of occured after his house was robbed. He then tracked down the culprits, tied them up, took them back to his house, gave them a mild kicking and then dropped them off to the nearest police station where they duly confessed to the B&E. Naturally the outcome was that they walked and he is doing time.

    I’m not saying that I’m unhappy about him being in the can - he’s not a nice person - nor do I agree with this, but all Australian readers should know that no matter how morally right you feel, the law does not look kindly on self help remedies.

    Posted by anonymous guest on 2007 03 14 at 10:16 PM • permalink

  105. Lindsay: “Or, maybe you’ll panic and shoot them.”

    Not really expecting it to be the result of panic so much as planned action.

    Posted by Ernst Blofeld on 2007 03 14 at 10:17 PM • permalink

  106. ....the law does not look kindly on self help remedies.

    Not just the law, I’m on the shitlist at home at the moment because I described Oprah as Springer for subnormal suburban socialists; couldn’t help it.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 14 at 10:22 PM • permalink

  107. BTW, if you’re looking for the segue’, Oprah is really big (snicker snicker) on self help.

    Usually she helps herself to the contents of dim housebound females purses.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 14 at 10:24 PM • permalink

  108. If some prick is inside my house without the dog attached to him, then the dog is probably dead.  I think that is enough reason for the intruder to suffer from fast acting lead poisoning.

    And if you don’t die and want ot sue - go ahead.  I own nothing for professional asset protection reasons.

    Posted by Razor on 2007 03 14 at 11:19 PM • permalink

  109. Thank God I’m a Texan.  We have a “make my day” law here. Kill an intruder in your home? No problemo: No murder, no manslaughter, no nothing.  They call it “justifiable homicide.”  The perps kin can’t even bring civil charges and have a snowball’s chance.

    Posted by Hucbald on 2007 03 14 at 11:41 PM • permalink

  110. #3, I think you’re spot on.

    At the risk of being the lone voice of dissent on this post (particularly risky as a relatively new poster), I don’t have a gun precisely because I’m broadly not willing to shoot an intruder. It’s just a personal choice, not something that I think makes me a better person. It’s also based on an assessment that I live in a high rise apartment in the city with a doorman, have hatred levels from ex-girlfriends roughly below the murder level, and own nothing worth stealing. If I got a stalker or moved to a rough neighborhood, that calculation would probably change.

    On the other hand, I think that Bayerstein is kidding herself if she believes the cops will turn up on time and save her. If you don’t own a gun, you take the chance that the intruder you have might be willing to do serious violence to you, and that’s your fate. I’m willing to take that chance, but I don’t hold it against anyone who is willing to shoot to protect themselves or their family.

    Posted by Behemoth on 2007 03 14 at 11:59 PM • permalink

  111. Keeping a gun at home to protect against robbers seems like an especially silly idea in a big city where the police can arrive at the scene in less time than it takes to open your gun safe, load your gun, and confront the burglar.

    Lindsay, dearie, the gun safe is where you keep your guns when you’re not home.

    Posted by Achillea on 2007 03 15 at 12:01 AM • permalink

  112. MarkL #92

    BTW, it is still perfectly possible to own decent firearms in Australia, although the bureacratic impediments to doing so are annoying. You see, the people who drafted the legislation did not know firearms very well, so lever actions are still perfectly legal, so are .50 cal rifles (bolt action) and all forms of bolt action guns.

    Mark, the laws differ State by State (so much for uniform gun laws!).

    You have NO chance here in WA of getting a .50 cal licensed (unless it’s a blackpowder).

    As for shooting intruders, the attitude here goes something like this:

    To shoot an intruder, you must be in fear that your life (or that of your loved ones) is in immediate danger. Therefore, if you have time to retrieve, assemble, load and use a firearm, your life (or that of your yada yada) was obviously NOT in immediate danger; therefore, you are guilty as sin and going to meet a very friendly man named Bubba. If your firearm was NOT locked away, disassembled, with the ammo locked away separately, you are obviously a dangerous psychopath and criminal to boot; therefore, you will be fined, lose your licence and firearms ... and get to meet a veryfriendly man named Bubba. Similarly, if you have a knife, baton (oops, sorry, illegal here), cricket bat etc. beside your bed “just in case”—and you use it—bingo! You have broken the law by being armed ... which is a no-no. (As an aside, I got told by a copper at a random breath test to take a screwdriver out of my car (it was holding open a broken air vent) and leave it at home, and if he saw me with it in the car again, he’d have me up on weapons charges.)

    Official police advice in the case of home invasion/burglary is to run away and leave everything to the nice burglars.

    Posted by BIWOZ on 2007 03 15 at 12:10 AM • permalink

  113. Of course, Mz. Lindsay Beyerstein is spot on.

    In my experience, meth addicts breaking into your home at 3am, proclaiming they are “spawned from the ass of a jackal to undertake satans work” are some of the most rational beings on the planet. My advice is offer them a cup of chamomile tea. Ask them some “root cause” questions. And if all else fails, hug them.

    Kumbaya, my Lord! Kumbaya…

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 03 15 at 12:12 AM • permalink

  114. just because:  shooters chair

    Posted by eeniemeenie on 2007 03 15 at 12:25 AM • permalink

  115. #111, Behemoth, not at all, you made a reasoned choice with a decent risk analysis, and with suitable alternative strategies. 

    Not everyone is willing or able to commit violent acts, even in self-defense.  This is not a bad thing, if you make the decision in advance and with knowledge of the possible consequences. 

    Lindsay does neither, and her post encourages people to be equally scatter brained.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 03 15 at 12:28 AM • permalink

  116. #113 BIWOZ

    Glad I am presently in Canberra, then. I am thinking of getting a .50, but the price is kinda high.  A friend who is a barrister said that (in ACT and NSW) should one ever have to use a firearm for self-defence inside ones own home, then:
    1. You were unable to sleep and so had arisen from your bed earlier to clean your rifle/shottie/arquebus/whatever. THAT is the only reason you had it out with the bolt handy… and the ammo was a mere one key away. The magazine? You were cleaning that too.

    2. Leave NO survivors - pity, they will not be able to appear in court clad in a suit with a sob storey about their sad, sad lives and what a beastly brute you were for not letting then rape your wife and slit your throat.

    3. Oh, lookie, that all had sharp pointies with their fingerprints on them too, as they were holding the sharp pointies. I picked them up to move them away in case they were only wounded, that would be why my fingerprints (if any) were on them.

    Should you not be able to reach your gun safe in time, collect DECORATIONS.

    Fijian or Papua-New Guinean war clubs makes such a nice decoration for one’s bed-head, or on a wall shelf. A sword (family heirloom of course) looks cool on the wall of your bedroom.

    Scatter some others about the house - see? No weapons at all, just decor.

    Just know how to use them. Practise with them. You know the house, the layout, and the range is close. That tips the odds in your favour.

    And BEFORE the police arrive, call your damned lawyer, and say NOTHING without him being there.

    That was his advice for people in states such as WA. His other one (which I would never do: no need!) was to go and buy a black market 9mm Browning or Glock, learn how to use it, clean it inside routinely so as to have no fingerprints inside it, load the ammo wearing gloves etc: shoot the buggers with it and make damned sure that it has THEIR fingerprints on it. Then call the police, say they came, say that it was like I was standing outside my own body watching it all (the automata defence) we fought, I got the gun, it went off, he died, that is all I remember, where is my lawyer? And then shut the hell up until he gets there.

    None of this is hard, you just have to know how the system works.

    An old friend (dead now) said that the simplest thing to do was to top ‘em and bury the bastards deep, many miles away. He had a very large property in NSW, easy for him to say, I suppose!

    MarkL
    canberra

    Posted by MarkL on 2007 03 15 at 01:02 AM • permalink

  117. All I know is that when I break into houses to feed my ice addiction (which I was driven to through capitalist exploitation), I check out the residence first. Set of wind chimes on the verandah? In I go. Flying the national flag? I Move on.

    Posted by Penguin on 2007 03 15 at 01:58 AM • permalink

  118. #118 - That’s gold, Penguin!

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 03 15 at 02:05 AM • permalink

  119. What if (like my gaff) there’s both?

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 02:26 AM • permalink

  120. Your a nice bloke, Habib. You’d probably just take out his knees.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 03 15 at 02:31 AM • permalink

  121. I lived - albeit briefly - in Rockingham, Western Australia, back in the 1970s. Our next door neighbours consisted of a family of violent criminals who demonstrated to me one night how this could ironically work as a serious deterrent to crime.

    When my family moved in, next door’s head of household was in jail and the police were often seen talking to the mother or one of her three drug dealing and standover merchant sons (who for some reason though all in their late teens or early twenties still lived at home).

    Shortly after the father got out of jail and returned to the brood, there was a commotion late one night. Doors were banging, people were yelling, and I thought there was some kind of family bloodletting taking place. Listening from my bed I heard the mother screaming, “There’s the cunt! Get him! Stab him in the guts! Again!”

    Next day I heard someone had rather foolishly tried to rob the place. While the sons cornered the guy on the roof, the father had gone for the biggest knife he could find and went up after him. It was like fox hunting but more brutal.

    Said robber was stabbed several times but got away; God knows how. Sheer terror I suspect. There was a long trail of blood on the footpath so the guy was clearly hurt.

    The police were never called and the neighbourhood never experienced a burglery for all the time I was there.

    Posted by Hanyu on 2007 03 15 at 03:31 AM • permalink

  122. People,

    A short handled shovel and go for the kneecap, gee constable I use it to keep the weeds down

    Posted by regional on 2007 03 15 at 04:57 AM • permalink

  123. Habib, somehow I suspect that any attempt to purloin something from your house would prove to be an unsound decision leading to lifelong regret. I seem to recall that you have large dogs.

    Posted by Penguin on 2007 03 15 at 05:01 AM • permalink

  124. Re Gun Buyback

    There was a joke going around here in Queensland when weapon surrender was on that you couldn’t buy 6inch pvc storm water pipe for quids. Seems the hardware stores had run short due to gun owners buying up lengths & end caps to make underground storage possible.

    I sold off my S&W .357 Magnum because I thought pistol shooters would get the worst of it. Didn’t quite turn out as bad but the whole business was a cock -up. I met a number of people who refused to surrender their weapons and they stayed where they always kept them, alongside the bed in case of intruders.

    I wonder if statistics show a sizable decrease in murders since gun control. There seems to be constant reports of stabbing deaths in the media so I guess it won’t be long before knives are banned. Should I learn how to eat with chopsticks and buy pre sliced everything?

    Posted by Spag_oz on 2007 03 15 at 08:09 AM • permalink

  125. Ever wonder how Liberals can be both proponents of evolution and the worst examples of survival of the fittest?

    Of course, if they were created by a benevolent god, that would be baffling too.

    Posted by CrankyNeocon on 2007 03 15 at 08:14 AM • permalink

  126. #124, small dogs in fact, Staffies. A pair of rescue hounds; given the usual response from Staffies to exposure to hostile humans, I wouldn’t be relying on the lazy sods for personal defence.

    However, I saw on the WA pet thingo, a staffy kept coming back on some arsehole who had invaded a place, and the WA cops had to remove the bugger from the perpitrator’s body.

    I love staffys.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 09:20 AM • permalink

  127. #127, small dogs are often more feared by burglars than big dogs, because they are usually more nervous, fidgety, and prone to bite, and any dog will fight if it perceives its den is being invaded.  I’ve often heard it said, and believe it, the smaller the dog, the bigger the ego.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2007 03 15 at 01:06 PM • permalink

  128. “And in regards to yelling something at the idjit before firing? All that does is make the target jumpy.”

    It also grants you legal protections you wouldn’t normally have when you shoot an unarmed / lightly armed man, or a man with his back turned to you. Which, in turn, means the difference between a successful self-defense argument in court, and spending time in the clink for defending yourself (great way to gain “NRA cred,” but not worth being Bubba’s butt-buddy, to me at any rate).

    The day I can’t hit a man-sized target, even if it’s hopping around like a CS-tard, is the day I need to hire a bodyguard to shoot my guns for me, before I shoot myself in the foot.

    Posted by Tatterdemalian on 2007 03 15 at 01:39 PM • permalink

  129. #129, Tatter:

    The object is to defend with as little muss and fuss and possible.

    As to what’s said and what was not said and by whom and at what point in the engagement, the dead idjit aint gonna be a real good witness.

    He’s in my house. He’s as armed as I make him out to be before I call the cops.

    I do find it rather hilarious that everyone wants to play lawyer whenever this issue comes up.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2007 03 15 at 03:23 PM • permalink

  130. Beyerstein:

    “It might make sense be armed if you were someone who couldn’t call the cops (e.g., a drug dealer), or if you kept your entire lifesavings in uninsured jewels in a candy dish on the kitchen table. But does anyone really want to risk physical violence to protect their consumer electronics? That’s what insurance is for.”

    This sort of smug disdain for other peoples’ honestly-gained values is simply outrageous.  “Consumer electronics”, huh?  Nevermind that the money that people spend on things that they want from life represents the very time of their life devoted to acquiring these things.  In any case, it’s all disposable to Beyerstein.

    Take a good look at this photograph.  That guitar has been in my family since 1966: my father played it all the time I was growing up, to include the years that he spent teaching me how to play.  He used to tell me that it would be mine someday “after you see that pine box dropping into the ground with my body in it”.  I’ve owned a lot of guitars in my own adult years, but my father died in 2003 and this one is mine, now, just like he said.

    I can’t tell you what that thing is worth to me in terms of family history: it’s priceless.  Nonetheless, the vintage market at large is telling me that its value is running at about fifteen thousand dollars, today.  (It’s a 1962 Gibson ES-355 in Cherry Red, with real PAF pickups and manufactured without stereo output or Varitone.)

    Already, I could hear the likes of Beyerstein moaning, “Well if it’s so valuable, then why don’t you keep it in a safe or something?”  The reason is because it’s a practical value: I actually play the thing every day when I’m home.  I actually have seven guitars in this place, and that ES-335 of my Dad’s is very special even without accounting for the collectible value.  It feels and sounds terrific and it’s not intended to be an investment or museum piece: it’s meant to be played.  So it hangs on the wall or sits on a guitar-stand right at the corner of my desk where I can take it in hand on the merest whim.  This is because it’s mine and that’s how I want it.

    It’s pretty bloody easy for someone like Beyerstein to sit around and crack snide about other peoples’ treasures and “insurance”.  When the context includes the matter of intruders doing manifest harm to innocent people, it’s an unconscionable outrage.

    My position is obvious:

    If it ever came to the choice between that guitar and an intruder intent on taking it, I’ve got 147-grain Hydra-Shoks that say he’s right-now dead on the right-now spot.

    No choice.

    Posted by Billy Beck on 2007 03 15 at 04:00 PM • permalink

  131. Well said, Billy Beck.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2007 03 15 at 06:23 PM • permalink

  132. #61—The Harris County (Houston), TX burglar, shot dead by the home owner linked to, must’ve been one nasty (or stupid) burglar. The story explains that animal handlers had to be summoned, so as to corral the home owner’s four pit bulls, before the detectives could proceed with the investigation.

    Posted by Forbes on 2007 03 15 at 07:26 PM • permalink

  133. #128- they’re only small in stature- about 18” tall, but about the same width. One’s 40 lbs, the other near 50, and they had a visible inch of muscle on either side of their jaws- the buggers can crack macadamia nuts with one bite. I sure wouldn’t want one to latch onto me. They can also jump to head height from a prone position. They love everyone, but I think if some turd broke in and was menacing us it’d be a different story. But then he’d have to dodge a couple of 30.06 rounds before the hounds got a chance to chomp on him.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 07:40 PM • permalink

  134. Well I’m sure as hell not going to confront the criminal with an UNloaded weapon! Actually pistol whipping someone to death takes way too much energy, and you keep finding teeth scattered in your carpet for months.

    Posted by Shaky Barnes on 2007 03 15 at 07:48 PM • permalink

  135. #131- nice ES. If I wasn’t such an upright citizen I’d sneak over and swipe it. There’s nothing else that sounds like those old open body Gibsons (except maybe a like Gretsch). They really crank if you hook them up to a big old valve amp and wind up the volume.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 07:57 PM • permalink

  136. BTW- anyone looking for the ideal round (besides shotgun) for home invadey types, I can highly reccomend the Glaser Safety Slug- can’t buy them legally in Australia unless you’re in law enforcement, but I believe they’re openly available in the US. We used to have them as issue rounds, especially for house raids- they won’t normally travel through an ordinary house wall, so if some idiot lets a round off and misses it won’t hit a friendly. when it does hit anything organic at close range, it’s time to get out the hose- #12 birdshot suspended in liquid teflon, in a polycarb case. Leave a bigger hole than OO buckshot, with the kinetic power and accuracy of a .357 or .44/.45 load.

    Messy.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 08:06 PM • permalink

  137. If you can be arsed you can make your own hydraulic rounds as well- drill out the projectile (or buy hollowpoints), then fill the resevoir with mercury (heavy grade motor oil, about 90wt can be used at a pinch), then solder over the end. The bullet fractures on impact, so you don’t need to be terribly accurate- often handy when in a position of stress. Still, there’s not much that beats a short barrelled shotgun for close range defence. It shits me that pump actions were the ones chosen to be banned- you could have progessive loads, from birdshot to deershot to solids all in the one magazine, which would prove your reasonable nature.
    Far be it from me to reccommend anything illegal or naughty, but a sawnoff 20 gauge is probably the best home defence weapon, and the choice of many of Australia’s premier hoons, thugs and crims. Mind you, one of these would be a hoot if a tad bulky.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 08:22 PM • permalink

  138. Habib: “nice ES.”

    Thank you, sir.  I think so, too.

    “There’s nothing else that sounds like those old open body Gibsons (except maybe a like Gretsch). They really crank if you hook them up to a big old valve amp and wind up the volume.”

    My Dad paid $395 for that 355 in ‘66, when it was four years old.  (I’ve a photograph of the Gibson shipping ledger showing me the date when that axe left the Kalamazoo factory.)  At the time, he was an Air Force staff sargent with five kids.  He saved his pennies for a long time for that guitar.  When he set out to buy it, he wanted to make sure of it, so he played everything in that class that he could find in the Atlanta area.  He almost went with a Gretsch Tennessean.  It was a very close call, but he never regretted the 355.  He played it for thirty-seven years and never looked back.

    These days, I play it through a Marshall 4210, which is a fifty-watt tube combo with a single Celestion 12” speaker.  I play it louder than ever before in its whole life.  (The Ol’ Man would never have stood for this.)  When it’s really rolling at stage-level, the guitar pumps air out of its F-holes.  I can feel it breathing under my right forearm resting on the body: it would blow out a candle.

    It’s a luv, alright.

    Posted by Billy Beck on 2007 03 15 at 09:33 PM • permalink

  139. It’d really sound nice through a 100W Marshall head and 4x12 Celestion box- I’ve got one of the old Hiwatt 100W amps with a 4x12 box, had it for nearly thirty years and I’ve never had to replace a thing on it. Neighbours detest it. I’ve got an open body 12 string Rick I bought in 1979, which sounds wonderful, and I just bought a Spicocaster from the US which is a nice bit of timber, but could do with humbuckers. My awful band is on the verge of reforming, to annoy pissheads at whatever pub is silly enough to book us.

    Posted by Habib on 2007 03 15 at 09:40 PM • permalink

  140. ”...a 100W Marshall head and 4x12 Celestion box.”

    I’ve owned gear like that.  Then; I got old.  Now, I don’t have to haul that stuff around anymore.  These days, the 4210 is my “big rig”: I set it on deck and let the audio guys do their thing.  (Mic it, and run me a mix in my wedge.)  In the practice studio, I run a Fender Blues Jr.: fifteen watts in a box with a ten-inch speaker that weighs like a bowling-ball and sounds marvelous.

    I’m all the way over back-breaking gear.  Been at this way too long for that.

    Good luck with your awful band.  The whole point is to get out there and have a good time, so do it every chance you get, man.

    Posted by Billy Beck on 2007 03 15 at 10:06 PM • permalink

  141. “I do find it rather hilarious that everyone wants to play lawyer whenever this issue comes up.”

    It pays to think ahead. When you’re getting perp-walked to PMITA prison for what shouldn’t have even been a crime, it’s a little too late to come up with a self-defense technique that includes legal defense.

    Posted by Tatterdemalian on 2007 03 16 at 02:05 AM • permalink

  142. Shots fired on the street outside a friend in Sydney’s house last night.

    Police response time?  20 minutes…

    Just a little short of enought time to MAKE a basic gun to defend yourself with.

    Posted by rickw on 2007 03 16 at 02:23 AM • permalink

  143. We’ll just see what Mr Charlton Heston has to say about this question.

    Posted by Hump B Bare on 2007 03 16 at 03:28 AM • permalink

  144. Here’s a good one a friend sent me a while back.

    Question:
    You’re walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner and is running at you while screaming obscenities. In your hand is a .357 Magnum and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.  What do you do?

    Democrat Answer:
    Well, that’s not enough information to answer the question! Does the man look poor or oppressed?  Have I ever done anything to him that is inspiring him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Is it possible he’d be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me or would he just be content to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.


    Republican Answer:
    Shoot the son of a bitch! Then take your family to a baseball game, eat some hot dogs with apple pie, sing the national anthem and enjoy one more day of freedom.

    Posted by Hank Reardon on 2007 03 16 at 11:01 AM • permalink

  145. Hank:  You forgot the Southern Answer: 

    BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

    (Sounds of reloading). 

    BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

    (Son).  Nice grouping, Dad!  Were those the Winchester Silver Tips™? 

    Elizabeth
    Imperial Keeper

    Posted by Elizabeth Imperial Keeper on 2007 03 16 at 12:18 PM • permalink

  146. #142, Tatter:

    Our differences may well spawn from our respective environments.

    For example, the county that I live in has a DA that refused to bring charges against a civilian that shot and killed a man in a bank parking lot. The reason he shot and killed him was due to his suspicion that the man was a bank robber.

    The reason the DA refused to bring charges is because the man, was in fact, a bank robber.

    Even though the county where I live has the slogan “Come on Vactation, Leave on Probation”, the locals are real big on self defense and give no ground to the moronites that infest our state legislature on that issue.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2007 03 16 at 05:22 PM • permalink

  147. Should have read “Come on Vacation, Stay on Probation”.

    PIMF is for the vain.

    Posted by Grimmy on 2007 03 16 at 05:23 PM • permalink

  148. #3

    The cardinal rule of self-defense: if you pull a weapon, any weapon, use it.

    That’s funny. A Google search for that ‘cardinal rule’ resulted in exactly one hit - to this page.

    Others have already dismissed your argument, but whose “cardinal rule” is it anyway? Yours? Err…You don’t actually know what the heck you are talking about, do you?

    Waving a pistol around like a fan is worse than not having one.

    You are quite right. I far prefer these ‘cardinal rules’ and have tremendous respect for their original author, the late Col. Jeff Cooper. Rule II - Never let the muzzle cross anything you do not want destroyed - nicely addresses your concern. Shooting someone, simply to prove that you aren’t kidding around may leave you emotionally devastated, totally financially impoverished, and very likely, physically imprisoned getting cozy with Bubba.

    The intruder will know you won’t fire….and take it from you.

    Wait Let me guess… And then he’ll shove it up your ass and pull the fuckin’ trigger till it goes click? You’ve been watching too much Big Lebowski and not enough firearms training.

    Two words: Reactionary gap. If you have your firearm pointed at an intruder but do not need (or are not lawfully justified) to shoot him, create one. If later required, a bullet can cover quite a bit of distance given the proper motivation.

    Weapons are not amulets that ward off criminals (which is what Beyerstein seems to think), they are a tool which must be used properly.

    Excellent advice. Proper use requires proper training and knowledge. I respectfully suggest you acquire more of both.

    Posted by Dan Lewis on 2007 03 17 at 03:22 AM • permalink

  149. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.