Do you own a gun?

[manker]

Keep your talk of skirts to yourself, girly-man.

I don't know where you get your idea.

If I choose to defend my "realm" with deadly force, I am, by law, allowed.

That I opt to do so obviously bothers you, at least to the extent you cannot manage your urge to berate and belittle my choice.

I have not at any time in this thread rejoiced that I am constitutionally enabled to defend myself with a gun; rather, I have evinced a fitting and proper cynicism for the circumstances which require such a choice.

I have not recommended this strategy for anyone else.

I find your expressions of moral relativism and claims of enlightenment intolerant and oppressive.

You accord the burglar more credit and freedom, indeed, legitimacy-than me.

Well done.

Yet you still dance a merry jig around the issue without actually adressing it.

Why on earth would intellect matter when a burglar has a gun trained upon you. Which he would do since you choose to advertise your gun therefore any burglar with the audacity to break in while you're there would no doubt be ready for a shooting match, whereas in all likelyhood all you'd be ready for is supper.

In fact, while the signs may be a deterrent to some, what you're doing in effect is ensuring that any intruder will come prepared and probably not alone. It could also serve to entice an intruder ... 'what is he protecting'.

I may be berating your choice but I do not seek to belittle it. You can do as you please, I am seeking only to point out the folly I believe to be inherent with that choice. I also don't feel morally superior nor more enlightened.

I merely feel lucky that I am not scared of the society I live in such that I feel the need to arm myself with a weapon.

[Snee]

How?

[Snee]

Yes, but how will his lower intelligence give you an advantage?

How will it affect what proceeds from there on? As you put it.

[GepperRankins]

If I have to explain that to you, SnnY, you might feel insulted, as I do at the moment.

seriously. we need it explaining. firing a gun requires no intelligence, so you don't have an advantage there. as far as i know intelligence has no sway on reaction times either, so theres no advantage there.

unless maybe your house is the crystal maze, then they'd need some intelligence. you might have an advantage there, but i doubt it

[GepperRankins]

My bad.

I had forgotten it was as simple as pulling the trigger.

BTW-

Is our prospective burglar walking about with his gun drawn and aimed (sideways)?

breaking into someone else's property, i would presume they have it ready.

[Snee]

If I have to explain that to you, SnnY, you might feel insulted, as I do at the moment.

How so? I'd just like to know how your bigger brain is going to give you the upper hand when you happen to be standing face to face with an armed burglar, is that so hard to answer.

I don't mean to put you down, but as has been said, unless there's a major malfunction in someone's head, firing a gun, at relatively close range, isn't that hard.



I think being smart comes into play when you show the foresight to get an alarm, and things like that.

This because an idiot wouldn't think of buying an alarm, but in an immediate, face-to-face situation I'm a tad perplexed as to how you have an obvious advantage.

[manker]

breaking into someone else's property, i would presume they have it ready.

It's a fairly safe bet.

With, and this is a conservative estimate, twenty five signs saying 'ENTER ILLEGALLY AT YOUR PERIL; THE OCCUPANTS OF THIS DOMICILE ARE TRAINED KILLERS, AND WELL-ARMED' dotted around on every window and door - I would say that any intruder is definitely going to be, ahem, alert. Not to mention the fact that he'll probably be with one or more of his equally circumspect mates.



As an aside, I don't know why you would feel insulted, j2, I am merely disagreeing with what you do. I presuppose that you think I'm quite mad for suggesting that you'd be better off without the gun yet I find the notion far from insulting - it's actually quite reasuring

[JPaul]

It would appear that, if you have signage advertising that you have a guard dog, which then attacks a burglar (the dog, not the sign), then you may get sued.

If however your family pet attacks an intruder then they have less comeback.

Is there any truth in this or did I make it up myself, perhaps in a dream-like state.

[manker]

It would appear that, if you have signage advertising that you have a guard dog, which then attacks a burglar (the dog, not the sign), then you may get sued.

If however your family pet attacks an intruder then they have less comeback.

Is there any truth in this or did I make it up myself, perhaps in a dream-like state.

I Cayce what you're on about, Edgar. However, a good lawyer could argue a case either way. If you buy a sabre toothed Japanese fighting wolf then the likelyhood of it injuring an intruder is easily foreseeable. Signs or no signs.

Not that I'm advocating suing dog-owners whose pet may thwart an illegal intruder - just that lawyers can be sneaky like that.

[JPaul]

Did you just call me a mentalist, at all.