(01-02-2016, 11:51 AM)GMDino Wrote: What if the rapists pulls his gun first?

Do we have to wait for a third person with a gun and hope they are a good guy?  What if TWO people show up?!?!

Do we hope they just have a stand off and everyone backs away slowly?

Or is a gun like a bible?  Magical in its ability to help the good and defeat evil? 

(01-03-2016, 12:37 AM)Vlad Wrote: You can use your imagination to create an infinate amount of irrelevant hypotheticals if you like, but the fact remains that only 3% of rapes are committed at gunpoint and most all rapes involve 1 perp and his victim, and that's the scenario that meme depicts.

(01-02-2016, 09:20 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: X2

I have never seen anyone on this board or the old one that has been against a homeowner's rights in a scenario like this.

(01-03-2016, 12:50 AM)bfine32 Wrote: You might want to look through this thread a little closer and get back to us.

(01-03-2016, 12:59 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I still see no one saying the homeowner did not have the right to self defense in this case.

(01-03-2016, 12:40 AM)GMDino Wrote: So if the perp gets the victim's gun does that percentage that you made up out of thin air go up?

(01-03-2016, 01:33 AM)Vlad Wrote: Liberals. The more right you are, the more outlandish their rebuttals become.

% that I made up out of thin air?
https://rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders

(01-02-2016, 08:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I suspected. I was more focused on the right to own firearms being a 1st Amendment thing.

(01-03-2016, 01:33 AM)Vlad Wrote: Liberals. The more right you are, the more outlandish their rebuttals become.

% that I made up out of thin air?
https://rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders

• Quote:In 2001, 11% of rapes involved the use of a weapon — 3% used a gun, 6% used a knife, and 2 % used another form of weapon.2

  
  
  

(01-03-2016, 01:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yes.  One year.






I found that link right away.

So I repeat, if the attacker does not have a gun and get the gun from the victim does that rate go up?

(01-03-2016, 10:19 PM)Vlad Wrote: If you had the ability to reason, you would have come to the conlusion that in 2015 the statistics would not have varied much.

(01-03-2016, 11:09 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: No, that is not the ability to reason. That is jumping to conclusions. Statistically speaking there is far from enough evidence to conclude that the numbers in 2015 would not have varied much from 2011 based on just the data from 2011. It's rather absurd to make such a claim.

(01-03-2016, 11:11 PM)GMDino Wrote: Data from 2001.

(01-02-2016, 07:37 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I'm pretty sure nearly everyone supports a homeowner's right to defend their home from someone who breaks in and shoots at them.

(01-05-2016, 06:05 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: IMO the intruder doesnt even have to shoot or have a weapon they still would be dead.

If you break into someones home you are a walking target.  I dont care if you are armed or not  As the homeowner i would not know you intentions outside that you are intruding and im not taking any chances.

Quote:A masked man burst into a 7-Eleven near Seattle early Sunday morning, swinging a hatchet and slicing the store clerk.
Before the masked man could seriously hurt anyone, though, a customer who was drinking his morning coffee pulled out a concealed weapon and fatally shot the attacker.

(03-15-2016, 01:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I wish I had remembered this thread yesterday when I saw an article about toddlers killing more people than terrorists in the U.S. I'll have to see if I can find that again.

(03-15-2016, 01:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I wish I had remembered this thread yesterday when I saw an article about toddlers killing more people than terrorists in the U.S. I'll have to see if I can find that again.