Current Events > Do you believe in the Castle Doctrine?

(+) Yeah! (+)

TonyKojima posted...

So people should just let others rob their homes?

No. But if someone breaks into your house and you get up, they hear you and start to run, you have no grounds to shoot them in the back as they flee posing no threat.

Are you a monster?

Sega9599 posted...

No. But if someone breaks into your house and you get up, they hear you and start to run, you have no grounds to shoot them in the back as they flee posing no threat.

Are you a monster?

Nobody said otherwise?

Sega9599 posted...

No. But if someone breaks into your house and you get up, they hear you and start to run, you have no grounds to shoot them in the back as they flee posing no threat.

Are you a monster?

If they have something that belongs to me, yes, I would.

Sega9599 posted...

No. But if someone breaks into your house and you get up, they hear you and start to run, you have no grounds to shoot them in the back as they flee posing no threat.

Are you a monster?

So in this hypothetical, we have no idea if they were breaking into homes with the intent to assault someone, and are fleeing because they won't be able to assault you.

They might be fleeing to try somewhere else

Yes I believe in castle doctrine but I understand that some states take it way to far, You should be legally allowed to defend yourself from anything a reasonable person would perceive as a threat period.

Yes I would hope people try to give verbal warning to scare the person of and/or try to assess the situation before taking action but in the real world that may not be something that can be done 100% of the time and I am also aware of that. Shooting someone in the back even after breaking into your house should imo not be something protected by any kind of self Def, or castle doctrine protections.

Anyone trying to get into my home, or that has already gotten into my home with some sort of theoretical good intention like saving me from a fire I would expect to make that very loudly and clearly known well before they have a chance to get themselves shot.

TonyKojima posted...

Nobody said otherwise?

Stop, multiple people have said just that... you guys have been saying it all weekend in here

zado19 posted...

Stop, multiple people have said just that... you guys have been saying it all weekend in here

Basically you are saying everyone needs to cower in the corner while they are robbed blind. This is where the right gets their ammo from, nonsense thinking like this.

TonyKojima posted...

Basically you are saying everyone needs to cower in the corner while they are robbed blind. This is where the right gets their ammo from, nonsense thinking like this.

Reminder to CE that Tony had a reputation on 261 for being a MAGA's liberal caricature

Will_VIIII posted...

So in this hypothetical, we have no idea if they were breaking into homes with the intent to assault someone, and are fleeing because they won't be able to assault you.

They might be fleeing to try somewhere else

Best to kill them to make sure eh? They could have been looking to sell you into the sex slave trade. Any person who breaks into another home forfeits the right to life.

shiby_with_it posted...

If they have something that belongs to me, yes, I would.

Yes. And when it's a load of bread....maybe you drag em downstairs. Tie em up. They're on your property, and now you own them. If it's a female, breed em up.

TonyKojima posted...

Basically you are saying everyone needs to cower in the corner while they are robbed blind. This is where the right gets their ammo from, nonsense thinking like this.

Once an intruder is on your property, anything you want to do to them is nice and legal. You could even lure them in and then just say they broke in. You're the man!

Sega9599 posted...

Best to kill them to make sure eh? They could have been looking to sell you into the sex slave trade. Any person who breaks into another home forfeits the right to life.

Yes. And when it's a load of bread....maybe you drag em downstairs. Tie em up. They're on your property, and now you own them. If it's a female, breed em up.

Once an intruder is on your property, anything you want to do to them is nice and legal. You could even lure them in and then just say they broke in. You're the man!

You want people to cower while they are robbed blind.

TonyKojima posted...

Basically you are saying everyone needs to cower in the corner while they are robbed blind. This is where the right gets their ammo from, nonsense thinking like this.

Yep, keep moving that goalpost tony. And lol with "the right" some of us see your bs.

tb333 posted...

Yep, keep moving that goalpost tony. And lol with "the right" some of us see your bs.

I moved nothing you did.

TonyKojima posted...

You want people to cower while they are robbed blind.

You want kids lured into a mans house, to be kept prisoner for 'trespassing'.

Sega9599 posted...

You want kids lured into a mans house, to be kept prisoner for 'trespassing'.

wut

Sega9599 posted...

You want kids lured into a mans house, to be kept prisoner for 'trespassing'.

Can you point out where anyone even said anything like that? All we're saying is that if someone breaks into your house, they made a choice to risk their life for whatever it is they want. You're the one who keeps implying that it's just to steal something, but we can't read their mind.

So unless you can quote where anyone said people should be able to do literally anything to the trespasser, kindly shut the fuck up.

I believe in Rottweiler-hybrid Doctrine

gmanthebest posted...

Can you point out where anyone even said anything like that? All we're saying is that if someone breaks into your house, they made a choice to risk their life for whatever it is they want. You're the one who keeps implying that it's just to steal something, but we can't read their mind.

So unless you can quote where anyone said people should be able to do literally anything to the trespasser, kindly shut up.

Go do one. You defend Tony stretching my words about what I said. You ignore where I said earlier the intruder is risking their life. I never said people should cower while someone comes to rob them.

But when i do the same tactic back to him, you defend him like you're his bro.

You're a joke. absolute sickening to try that tactic. Put your flaming mouth shut. NOW.

the only castle doctrine i believe in is the one that lets you underpromote a pawn to a rook and then castle-telefrag using it

Sega9599 posted...

Go do one. You defend Tony stretching my words about what I said. You ignore where I said earlier the intruder is risking their life. I never said people should cower while someone comes to rob them.

But when i do the same tactic back to him, you defend him like you're his bro.

You're a joke. absolute sickening to try that tactic. Put your flaming mouth shut. NOW.

Yes, you're both making shit up that no one has said. You're just taking it to a whole other level with saying that we think it's ok to do more than shoot someone who is a threat.

So again, kindly shut the fuck up.

If memory serves, Sega9599 also had a history over on 261

gmanthebest posted...

Yes, you're both making s*** up that no one has said

gmanthebest posted...

You're just taking it to a whole other level

Oh so it's ok for him, because he's on 'your side', but not for me, because I'm exaggerating in a way against "your side'? Despite me saying at the start that the intruder brings a certain level of risk of injury and even death onto themselves? But obviously 'not wishing' to see intruders automatically killed?

Go soak your head. Put your metaphorical gun down. Now you can take this as an insult and focus on this instead of the truth of the matter. Disgusting.

Dark_Arbron posted...

If memory serves, Sega9599 also had a history over on 261

Yes, the same thing happened there, where people couldn't be reasonable on gun ownership.
I don't see how it's reasonable to want to kill any intruder automatically. That should be an unfortunate consequence, not the 'yee ha! Got another one!' gung ho cowboy sentiment expressed here.

But that board was VERY left. So left in fact that they would argue against gun ownership a lot more, with equally ridiculous hyperbole.

I'll call it out and use the same where I see it. Even against you Dark Arbron.

I guess reading isn't your strong suit. The most that Kojima lied about is that you want us to huddle in a corner while being robbed. While you lie about us wanting to rape a woman who broke in to steal a loaf of bread.

So yeah, if you can't see how obviously over the line your lie (sorry sorry, "exaggeration") was, that's on you

gmanthebest posted...

I guess reading isn't your strong suit. The most that Kojima lied about is that you want us to huddle in a corner while being robbed. While you lie about us wanting to rape a woman who broke in to steal a loaf of bread.

So yeah, if you can't see how obviously over the line your lie (sorry sorry, "exaggeration") was, that's on you

I exaggerated and yes that was hyperbole. However I do not understand this anti home defense attitude.

Dark_Arbron posted...

If memory serves, Sega9599 also had a history over on 261

Yeah, one of the MAGAs

Will_VIIII posted...

Yeah, one of the MAGAs

Nah, that's just your head canon. I'm sure you dont even think I voted for Trump or some rubbish, instead you just say whatever to dismiss the truth - you need to be responsible when discharging your firearm. It's not responsible to say it's ok for all and any intruders onto your property to be killed.

gmanthebest posted...

I guess reading isn't your strong suit. The most that Kojima lied about is that you want us to huddle in a corner while being robbed. While you lie about us wanting to rape a woman who broke in to steal a loaf of bread.

So yeah, if you can't see how obviously over the line your lie (sorry sorry, "exaggeration") was, that's on you

Translation "what he said was just against you personally, silly talk. But you said something about all of US! To attack US and our whole SIDE! "

You'd have done better to just say you were tired of the hyperbole rather than this pathetic 'band of brothers' nonsense. I was correct in saying that you see this as sides and so, interpret any attack on one hyperbolic troll as an attack on all responsible gun owners.

Wait, I said to the other guy that he has his own 'head canon'. Will you swoop in, o white knight and defend his honour too? Please do! I want to see more of this fictional barrister act!

I should start doing what the far left progressives and far right fascists do is begin to block people for disagreeing. Gamefaqs should do away with block. Its the antithesis to a message board.

TonyKojima posted...

I should start doing what the far left progressives and far right fascists do is begin to block people for disagreeing. Gamefaqs should do away with block. Its the antithesis to a message board.

Ok

bump