What is Digg?129 Comments
- Kent4jmj, on 10/24/2007, -6/+153God Bless America and the Second Ammendment. A well armed citizenry deters crime and protects the citizen!!
- unicronband, on 10/21/2007, -3/+85"And while you're down there, I've got a knob that needs polished..."
- theblooms, on 10/26/2007, -7/+84That is so ***** cool!
- thechr0nic, on 10/20/2007, -0/+62FTA:
"This man had the nerve to raise sand about us making him clean up the mess he made in my house," she said. "The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead."
----
I guess this naturally would have been better than making him clean it up... and then shooting him. /shrug - tehbored, on 10/24/2007, -3/+61Yeah, seriously. I mean, I'm more or less a liberal. Socialistic (slightly) beliefs and all. But I do support the second amendment. If we let the the government disarm us, we leave ourselves helpless.
- uknowwhoibe, on 10/20/2007, -1/+45Not to mention, no one was physically harmed. Justice tastes delicious!
- Shigglyboo, on 10/21/2007, -4/+44now that thief got owned!
*notice, not pwned. - Bukowsky, on 10/20/2007, -0/+39good for them.
- theblooms, on 10/20/2007, -3/+32I do. So does my wife. I NEVER leave the house without a pistol, and if you live in one of the 39 states that has a Shall Issue law, legally you can too so long as you aren't a criminal.
- doktorzee, on 10/20/2007, -0/+28Man! That's how it should be!
My favourite part: "The police officer laughed at him when he complained and said anybody else would have shot him dead." - fuzzmeister, on 10/20/2007, -4/+28That is a good example of what should happen if there is an unarmed criminal in your house. By all means, use a gun to get him under control, but there is no reason to shoot the guy unless he is armed. If he is armed, though, and not actively running away from your home, go for it.
- jcaino, on 10/20/2007, -0/+23And these are southerners who are typically sterotyped as willing to shoot at anything. i think they handled the situation very poetically. had the homeowner not been armed, who would have know if the outcome would have been as light-hearted. oh, and for you gun control nuts: do you think theives give a crap about gun laws? they'll get 'em anyway. better make sure you have the right to arm yourself.
- inactive, on 10/21/2007, -6/+28Before you get all happy with glee, realize how ***** up our justice system is: the burglar CAN press charges against them for kidnapping.
Yep, not what ya wanna hear, but there you have it. A great example of how ***** up things are! - Campog, on 10/20/2007, -2/+21If that had taken place in England the police officer would have arrested the man being robbed, let the burglar go, and maybe even given him $5 to buy lunch. At least some cops still have some common sense,
- DteK, on 10/20/2007, -1/+16A criminal in my house, unarmed or not is reason to shoot. Who is taking the time to find out if the intruder is armed or not? Especially when your family is there. Home invasion has to be one of the most terrifying things to go through. This guys was extremely lucky on his choice of who to attempt to rob!!
- DaceDiath, on 10/20/2007, -0/+14yeah but who is going to clean up that mess?
- dylan420, on 10/20/2007, -0/+13I'm from montgomery, and I will agree: everyone else would have shot the dude.
- likeyehokwhatev, on 10/20/2007, -0/+12Maid service at gunpoint... now why didn't I think of that?
- norman619, on 10/20/2007, -1/+13That gem was one I was taught in my firearms training class for my permit. It was off the record obviously but sage advice.
- Akintunde, on 10/21/2007, -0/+12Looks like someone should've rolled a higher initiative check...
- MrMischiefVIP, on 10/20/2007, -1/+13I am not going to take the time to ask if someone is armed or not.
- yaryarhumphump, on 10/20/2007, -1/+13Now he will prolly sue the family for the wages they didn't pay him as a domestic sanitation engineer.
- thedonutofdoom, on 10/20/2007, -4/+16So does the family just travel with guns?
- inactive, on 10/19/2007, -3/+14Unless you're a smart one, like myself, who realize that our 2nd amendment, the right to bear arms, is REALLY for the public to overthrow a corrupt government... hey, much like the one we have now!
Doesn't have anything to do with liberal/conservative, but the ideals on which the constitution was founded upon: freedom. - geometry, on 10/20/2007, -2/+13I agree. I would have made him clean the house, wash my car, then shot him.
- blake182, on 10/20/2007, -0/+11"A well armed citizenry deters crime and protects the citizen!!"
And cleans your house, apparently. - evaburrito, on 10/20/2007, -0/+10Wow, you're daft - "the only good reason" ? seriously, what about the damn article you just read?
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/21/2007, -1/+11They should have made him make dinner and wash the dishes too
- Mononuclear, on 10/20/2007, -0/+10You name the "so many things wrong with that" and after I will list all of the good reasons and not one of them will be "Because I can"
- fromonesource, on 10/20/2007, -3/+12+1 for the second amendment
http://ronpaul2008.com - Mononuclear, on 10/20/2007, -0/+9It depends on when he called the police. If you hold him for a long time before even calling the police then yes. If you call the police right away and then make him clean while you wait for them to come then you have every right to hold him until the police arrive and you can't be charged with assault, false imprisonment, kidnapping, etc.
- Tenlow, on 10/20/2007, -0/+9Keep in mind some states have provisions for open carry without a permit too.
- sensoukami, on 10/19/2007, -1/+10Well, that put a smile on my face!
- inactive, on 10/22/2007, -4/+12That's why he complained; their kind doesn't like to work.
- johnfritz, on 10/20/2007, -2/+10Ah, good. Another story I can show my wife to try and make her understand why I have a snub-nose .357 on my right hip at all times.
Happy ending optional of course, but useful to also illustrate that my weapon is primarily intended as a deterrent and that I would prefer not to shoot anyone. - REBELinBLUE, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9wooo, my ***** detected just exploded.
- norman619, on 10/20/2007, -2/+10With a last name of Bullock? Sorry not asian.
- bjs3171, on 10/20/2007, -1/+9i would have made the guy clean up the mess, and THEN shot him.
- mourne, on 10/20/2007, -0/+8did you not read the article? That's one good reason beyond, "because I can".
- RockStrongo1, on 10/20/2007, -0/+7Just because you are incapable of handling a firearm, it doesn't mean someone else is. I am glad you would never think of owning a pistol or any gun. You are one of the retards that would do something wrong with it. I appreciate that you realize that, and will not give the rest of the law abiding people that do own guns a bad name.
- mdraper, on 10/19/2007, -0/+6Get some!
- XFDRaven, on 10/19/2007, -0/+6I want to buy this home owner lunch. They demonstrated incredible restraint and provided proper gun owners a shining role model from which we can refer. They stood up for their property rights, and did not commit a cruel and unusual punishment though torture or torment. If the guy could make the mess, he could clean it up.
- brjndr, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6Stupid California. For concealed carry permits County sheriffs average a denial rate of over 99% in California. Open Carry with a permit is permitted in California, so long as you are in an area with a population of less than 200,000.
- theblooms, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6"There are just so many things wrong with that"
Really? Like what? Seriously, name something wrong with it.
Do you know what percentage of people who have CWP's commit crimes? I bet you think it a lot, huh? Fact is, it is statistically NONEXISTANT. A far larger percentage of cops are arrested for illegal activities than people who have CWP's.
Each and every time a new state goes to pass a Shall Issue law, all the anti's rant and rave about the "Wild West Showdowns" and how people will get shot over fender benders and parking spaces. And of course, it never happens. 39 states, man. And yet you still NEVER hear of a person with a CWP going on any kind of rampage. Think about that. - Mattintosh, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6Since they called the police, it was a citizen's arrest, not false imprisonment. Citizen's arrest allows you to detain someone until the police arrive, and trespassing laws provide the point-gun-at-intruder part.
- DyDx, on 10/20/2007, -0/+6The victims would have been arrested simply because guns are basically outlawed in the UK, but that doesn't mean the robber would have gotten off you twit.
- ravage86, on 10/20/2007, -2/+8This issue was already settled on "The People's Court". You don't get married, you don't get the ring.
- theblooms, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5Not to mention that AK and VT have concealed carry without a permit.
- sanman, on 10/20/2007, -1/+6"B-b-but, you can't make me do this! I got CIVIL RIGHTS!"
- bjs3171, on 10/20/2007, -0/+5oh! well he made the mess! who else is going to clean it up! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is