Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is it time to arm ourselves with weapons?

Options
24567…14

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    BabyMonkeyy
    Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭BabyMonkeyy


    The general population should not have a right to arm themselves with a gun. All you have to do is look at America. People can not be trusted with one.


  • Options
    #33
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    BabyMonkeyy wrote: »
    The general population should not have a right to arm themselves with a gun. All you have to do is look at America. People can not be trusted with one.

    and religion shouldn't be allowed, just look at the Westboro baptist church:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #34
    Gummy Panda
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,919 ✭✭✭✭Gummy Panda


    We should commission an ED-209 program.


  • Options
    #35
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    guns? its hard to get a license knives though:D

    in all seriousness don't go killing lads tis a bit harsh


  • Options
    #36
    leonidas83
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭leonidas83


    laoch na mona wrote: »
    guns? its hard to get a license knives though:D

    in all seriousness don't go killing lads tis a bit harsh

    Maybe you can tell violent thieves when they enter your home that their being a bit 'harsh'


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Boombastic wrote: »

    In many cases the justice system has failed the people. How many convictions does someone need to be taken off the streets? All the time we hear of crimes committed by people with 50+ convictions

    all that shows is that prisons don't work we need to come up with a better way to tackle crime all we do is label criminals which makes them criminals for life


  • Options
    #38
    Buford Tannen
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭Buford Tannen


    intellectual dosser wrote: »
    I cannot agree that the punishment for trespassing/burglary is death.

    But rape is ok?

    intellectual dosser wrote: »
    Find the criminals involved in the burglaries and throw them in a cell with some big baldy bull qu**r for 5 years.


  • Options
    #39
    mahonykid
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭mahonykid


    You have to look at both sides of the spectrum here. With people arming themselves with guns, chances are the thief coming into your home will now be armed with one too, instead of the usual Stanley knife or screwdriver


  • Options
    #40
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    I'm not sure at what point your right to protect some aribtrary piece of property trumps someone else's right to life.

    Protect yourself and your family, fine, but I see no logic in allowing someone to use lethal force to protect property. It's just stuff.

    In any case, weapons which are held for home defence are more likely to be used on the homeowner than an intruder.

    I agree that there seems to be an increase in violent burglaries, but having a weapon at home just means the burglars will kill you with your own gun instead of just beating the ****e out of you. Or that your child or another family member will accidentally or otherwise use the weapon on themselves or on you.


  • Options
    #41
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    seamus wrote: »
    I'm not sure at what point your right to protect some aribtrary piece of property trumps someone else's right to life.

    Protect yourself and your family, fine, but I see no logic in allowing someone to use lethal force to protect property. It's just stuff.

    In any case, weapons which are held for home defence are more likely to be used on the homeowner than an intruder.

    I agree that there seems to be an increase in violent burglaries, but having a weapon at home just means the burglars will kill you with your own gun instead of just beating the ****e out of you. Or that your child or another family member will accidentally or otherwise use the weapon on themselves or on you.

    While agree about the property in itself not being worth loosing a life over, but if the property is in your bedroom/house and you are sleeping? While they might only be there to take the property, they have invaded your space and threatened the safety of your home/family. How are you supposed to know what exactly their motives are (and using violence seems to be their trademark) until afterwards?


    Burglars are using peoples own kettles, threatening to scald them...Should this weapon also be banned as intruders are more likely to use it against the residents than the residents against the burglars?

    Obviously guns should be kept out of reach of children? Surely than can happen with currently legally held guns too?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    wendell borton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,336 ✭✭✭wendell borton


    Does a hurley count?


  • Options
    #43
    Uriel.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    I think anyone who is in or on your property with the intention of robbery and/or to do you harm is fair game to be blasted away. There's a very simple solution for the "victim" of such a death... Do not go out robbing / harming others.

    Nally is a legend in my books. You can ****e on about shooting the guy in the back but they shouldn't have been on Nallys property at that hour of the night and it would seem it wasn't their first time to be sniffing around. Nally obviously thought to himself feck it I'm not living in this kinda fear. What happens next time they come around. Well there was no next time and Nally made sure of that. I have no sympathy for Ward whatsoever.

    That being said i do not agree with arming the general populous. More guns is a bad thing and we don't need to be like the US. I do believe in arming more (not all) gardai


  • Options
    #44
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Boombastic wrote: »
    threatened the safety of your family
    That's all that matters.
    The safety of your property is irrelevant. If someone is in your bedroom while you're asleep, even if they're only looking for property, you have reasonable cause for fearing for your safety.

    If someone is downstairs trying to take your TV, then by all means confront them if you think you can get them to drop the TV and leave. But you can't justify killing them on the basis of protecting some trinkets.
    Obviously guns should be kept out of reach of children? Surely than can happen with currently legally held guns too?
    Yep, and it does.


  • Options
    #45
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    wendell borton wrote: »
    Does a hurley count?

    Mine doesn't but it knows the alphabet:D


  • Options
    #46
    Gulliver
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Gulliver


    AFAIK the Nally case was special in that he had been repeatedly terrorised in his own home/property. Possibly by the person he ended up shooting.

    There are a lot of people on here that seem to think that someone who breaks into your home with a weapon has no intention of using it. "Shure if ye let them pull away at it and don't try to stop them ye'll be fine".

    Yeah. There are so many ways a situation can go bad -
    • you accidentally see their faces
    • you recognise their voice (lotta locals commit the robberies)
    • they fall out with each other and start into your family as well
    • they think "this is going so well... he's not resisting... look at his daughter, I think I'll have a go of that"
    • they think you have other money and start torturing you to tell them
    • etc

    Now if you have the opportunity to stop them before the situation gets out of hand, knowing that there is a slight possibility that these are honourable guys and won't hurt you, or a greater possibility it would get worse - would you do whatever needs to be done?


  • Options
    #47
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    intellectual dosser wrote: »
    Like how the punishment for burglary is death? Why wouldn't it surprise me with some of the inbalances in sentences being given out in this country.

    No the risk of carrying out burglaries is death, and well it should be.


  • Options
    #48
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    leonidas83 wrote: »
    Maybe you can tell violent thieves when they enter your home that their being a bit 'harsh'

    there is nothing wrong with self defense but murder is murder you don't get to decide if someone else lives or dies not saying you can't touch them but if you kill them face the consequences a court would hear that they were trying to rob you and it wouldn't be the same as stabbing a lad outside a pub


  • Options
    #49
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    [QUOTE=seamus;82608728
    In any case, weapons which are held for home defence are more likely to be used on the homeowner than an intruder.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd love to see the research behind that.


  • Options
    #50
    mahonykid
    Registered Users Posts: 107 ✭✭mahonykid


    Gulliver wrote: »
    AFAIK the Nally case was special in that he had been repeatedly terrorised in his own home/property. Possibly by the person he ended up shooting.

    Agreed, i think it had gotten to the stage where he had taken to staying up all night in his shed because he was afraid of staying in his own home


  • Options
    #51
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    seamus wrote: »
    That's all that matters.
    The safety of your property is irrelevant. If someone is in your bedroom while you're asleep, even if they're only looking for property, you have reasonable cause for fearing for your safety.

    If someone is downstairs trying to take your TV, then by all means confront them if you think you can get them to drop the TV and leave. But you can't justify killing them on the basis of protecting some trinkets.

    Yep, and it does.

    It's a difficult thing to quantify though isn't it? Are my family really in danger if someone is downstairs?

    They could be coming upstairs and you're missing out on your chance to sneak up on them etc...

    The law could say, just aim low?:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Rasheed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,117 ✭✭✭Rasheed


    I'd be in favour of arming people if they so wished to be.

    The mental torture of living in fear that some scummer will burst in and do, god knows what is horrific.

    As regards letting them take your property, that they are only things, I completely disagree.

    A thief around a farm could destroy a farmer by taking vital tools that are very expensive to replace. Also there was a spate of cattle robberies around here. Thousands of euro of stock taken overnight.

    If a gun gives someone piece of mind, best of luck to them. They should educate themselves in gun safety and be aware to take consequences if they had the misfortune to have to use the gun.


  • Options
    #53
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Gulliver wrote: »
    AFAIK the Nally case was special in that he had been repeatedly terrorised in his own home/property. Possibly by the person he ended up shooting.

    There are a lot of people on here that seem to think that someone who breaks into your home with a weapon has no intention of using it. "Shure if ye let them pull away at it and don't try to stop them ye'll be fine".

    Yeah. There are so many ways a situation can go bad -
    • you accidentally see their faces
    • you recognise their voice (lotta locals commit the robberies)
    • they fall out with each other and start into your family as well
    • they think "this is going so well... he's not resisting... look at his daughter, I think I'll have a go of that"
    • they think you have other money and start torturing you to tell them
    • etc

    Now if you have the opportunity to stop them before the situation gets out of hand, knowing that there is a slight possibility that these are honourable guys and won't hurt you, or a greater possibility it would get worse - would you do whatever needs to be done?

    all burglars are rapists? thats some deep psychological understanding you got there:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #54
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    laoch na mona wrote: »
    all burglars are rapists? thats some deep psychological understanding you got there:rolleyes:

    No, but that doesn't equal no rapists are burglars


  • Options
    #55
    Uriel.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    laoch na mona wrote: »

    there is nothing wrong with self defense but murder is murder you don't get to decide if someone else lives or dies not saying you can't touch them but if you kill them face the consequences a court would hear that they were trying to rob you and it wouldn't be the same as stabbing a lad outside a pub
    The homeowner/resident is not the first person in the process deciding who lives or dies. The would be thief is. He obviously places the chances of successful theft higher than his life


  • Options
    #56
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Gulliver wrote: »
    AFAIK the Nally case was special in that he had been repeatedly terrorised in his own home/property. Possibly by the person he ended up shooting.

    There are a lot of people on here that seem to think that someone who breaks into your home with a weapon has no intention of using it. "Shure if ye let them pull away at it and don't try to stop them ye'll be fine".

    Yeah. There are so many ways a situation can go bad -
    • you accidentally see their faces
    • you recognise their voice (lotta locals commit the robberies)
    • they fall out with each other and start into your family as well
    • they think "this is going so well... he's not resisting... look at his daughter, I think I'll have a go of that"
    • they think you have other money and start torturing you to tell them
    • etc

    Now if you have the opportunity to stop them before the situation gets out of hand, knowing that there is a slight possibility that these are honourable guys and won't hurt you, or a greater possibility it would get worse - would you do whatever needs to be done?
    That's all fine and well and good. However the reality is that murder-burglaries are exceptionally rare. Most of the time there is no confrontation between the property owner and the burglar whatsoever. Even when there is, the property owner is typically caught off-guard.

    The instances of (a) the property owner realising they're being burgled and (b) confronting the burglars, are few and far between. If people are armed, then you may turn them into have-a-go heroes. Or more likely, if people are armed then the burglars won't bother waking you up with a boiled kettle, they'll wake you up with a knife to your throat or a gun to your head.

    I cannot see any benefit to allowing people to arm themselves to protect themselves. It's simply not necessary. We don't live in Sierra Leon with gangs of roaming marauders threatening us every day.


  • Options
    #57
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,295 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Saying guns are bad due, look at the the USA, is like saying alcohol is bad, look at Ireland.

    How abut we look at Switzerland who has a good gun culture? http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/


  • Options
    #58
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Ush1 wrote: »

    The law could say, just aim low?:D
    get em in the balls:P


  • Options
    #59
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Uriel. wrote: »
    The homeowner/resident is not the first person in the process deciding who lives or dies. The would be thief is. He obviously places the chances of successful theft higher than his life
    Exactly. And thief will place his own life above that of the homeowner's.


  • Options
    #60
    Porkchop McGee
    Registered Users Posts: 61 ✭✭Porkchop McGee


    As ever, perspective counts for a lot. If you live in an urban area, assistance can be no more than a few metres away. In rural settings, however, your nearest neighbour might be a few hundred metres away, out of earshot of even the loudest of your screams. Now consider that and the kind of total darkness you get in rural areas at night, factor in that the nearest Garda station might be twenty miles away, how many of you would feel comfortable being defenseless in those circumstances should someone decide to invade your property? Hindsight is wonderful but if someone has decided to intrude into your house at night it is a natural reaction to want to defend your health and your property because there isn't anyone else to do it for you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Gulliver
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭Gulliver


    laoch na mona wrote: »
    all burglars are rapists? thats some deep psychological understanding you got there:rolleyes:

    Where did I say ALL burglar are rapists? I said these were potential scenarios. And statistically, one scenario could involve rape.

    What a jolly world you live in where someone breaks into your house and you know they DEFINITELY don't want to sexually assault you/your family, because, y'know they're BURGLARS. Did they make an appointment first?

    To the Homeowner

    At 2:30 AM I will be:
    [x]Burgling you with no violence
    [ ]Burgling you with violence
    [ ]Raping You
    [ ]Leaving Chocolate mints on your pillows so they will be stuck to you when you wake up (muahahaha!)

    See you then.


Advertisement