| |
Posts: 9914
 Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:04 pm
No one will be trying to steal from that ranch any time soon. Good on the hand!
|
Posts: 35259
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:21 pm
We all know how this will end. The ranch hand will probably spend more time behind bars than the thief. 
|
andyt
CKA Uber
Posts: 33492
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:42 pm
Didn't know we had any ranches in MR. It's a horse camp and retreat center.
|
Posts: 2372
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:52 pm
You can't use more force than is necessary to stop a crime on your property period! I think starting with a firearm kind of skips a few options.
Now having your house firebombed IMO justifies a firearm.
|
Posts: 8851
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:03 pm
Shoot, shovel & shut up. Problem solved!
|
Posts: 65472
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:30 am
Benn Benn: You can't use more force than is necessary to stop a crime on your property period! Wimpy, idiotic thinking that places the onus of responsibility on the victim and not the criminal. Why not say that you're not allowed to commit a crime on anyone else's property, period? Pull that sh*t in 40 US states and if the homeowner blasts your butt with a howitzer then the law is 100% on his side. Which is exactly the way it should be. Criminals should enjoy NO PROTECTION when they're committing crimes. Period.
|
Posts: 658
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:45 am
Yogi Yogi: Shoot, shovel & shut up. Problem solved! Agree
|
Posts: 8851
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:56 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson: Benn Benn: You can't use more force than is necessary to stop a crime on your property period! Wimpy, idiotic thinking that places the onus of responsibility on the victim and not the criminal. Why not say that you're not allowed to commit a crime on anyone else's property, period? Pull that sh*t in 40 US states and if the homeowner blasts your butt with a howitzer then the law is 100% on his side. Which is exactly the way it should be. Criminals should enjoy NO PROTECTION when they're committing crimes. Period. I'm with you Bart!  A thief would be well advised to consider whether any of my material possessions is worth his/her life.
|
Posts: 14139
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:14 am
Yogi Yogi: BartSimpson BartSimpson: Benn Benn: You can't use more force than is necessary to stop a crime on your property period! Wimpy, idiotic thinking that places the onus of responsibility on the victim and not the criminal. Why not say that you're not allowed to commit a crime on anyone else's property, period? Pull that sh*t in 40 US states and if the homeowner blasts your butt with a howitzer then the law is 100% on his side. Which is exactly the way it should be. Criminals should enjoy NO PROTECTION when they're committing crimes. Period. I'm with you Bart! A thief would be well advised to consider whether any of my material possessions is worth his/her life. I think more importantly is to consider whether "stuff" is worth a human life, even if it's a low-life I am deeply disturbed by the number of people that think murder or aggravated assault is a lesser crime than theft. Shooting someone stealing stuff outside of your house just because you're too lazy or stupid to make sure it's locked up and/or secured is ridiculous. Shooting home invaders on the other hand should not only be legal in Canada, it should be encouraged!
|
Posts: 8851
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:26 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9: Yogi Yogi: BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Wimpy, idiotic thinking that places the onus of responsibility on the victim and not the criminal.
Why not say that you're not allowed to commit a crime on anyone else's property, period?
Pull that sh*t in 40 US states and if the homeowner blasts your butt with a howitzer then the law is 100% on his side.
Which is exactly the way it should be.
Criminals should enjoy NO PROTECTION when they're committing crimes. Period.
I'm with you Bart! A thief would be well advised to consider whether any of my material possessions is worth his/her life. I think more importantly is to consider whether "stuff" is worth a human life, even if it's a low-life I am deeply disturbed by the number of people that think murder or aggravated assault is a lesser crime than theft. Shooting someone stealing stuff outside of your house just because you're too lazy or stupid to make sure it's locked up and/or secured is ridiculous. Shooting home invaders on the other hand should not only be legal in Canada, it should be encouraged! You know, PA, I think I come by my attitude towards 'lowlifes' quite justifiabley so. I'll try to explain, but unless you have actually experienced this, it would be akin to a woman trying to make a man understand exactly what it feels like to be pregnant and give birth! To wake up one morning, and reach for your pants to get dressed for work, and they are not there! WTF??? I [i]know[/i] that I layed them on the chair beside my bed! Get up and go look around for them. Ah, there they are, laying on the livingroom floor! WTF? I know damn well I didn't undress in the LR last night! Hey! WTF is my wallet??? WTF is the TV?? WTF is the stereo??? Now I start screaming and hollering! My wife is screaming "WTF is my purse"??? Our roomy is hollering "WTF are my truck keys and wallet"?? Once we all realized that some 'lowlife' had not only violated our sanctuary, but had stood beside our beds,perhaps hovering right over us, watching us sleep, did the fear, the anger, and then the rage set in!
|
Posts: 52027
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:28 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson: Benn Benn: You can't use more force than is necessary to stop a crime on your property period! Wimpy, idiotic thinking that places the onus of responsibility on the victim and not the criminal. Why not say that you're not allowed to commit a crime on anyone else's property, period? Pull that sh*t in 40 US states and if the homeowner blasts your butt with a howitzer then the law is 100% on his side. Which is exactly the way it should be. Criminals should enjoy NO PROTECTION when they're committing crimes. Period. +2. Good thing they weren't in Alberta, and the thieves were stealing tools not ATVs. Then there would be a huge outcry about how badly the poor disadvantaged thief was treated by the big bad victim.
|
Posts: 14139
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:45 am
Yogi Yogi: PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9: I think more importantly is to consider whether "stuff" is worth a human life, even if it's a low-life
I am deeply disturbed by the number of people that think murder or aggravated assault is a lesser crime than theft.
Shooting someone stealing stuff outside of your house just because you're too lazy or stupid to make sure it's locked up and/or secured is ridiculous.
Shooting home invaders on the other hand should not only be legal in Canada, it should be encouraged! You know, PA, I think I come by my attitude towards 'lowlifes' quite justifiabley so. I'll try to explain, but unless you have actually experienced this, it would be akin to a woman trying to make a man understand exactly what it feels like to be pregnant and give birth! To wake up one morning, and reach for your pants to get dressed for work, and they are not there! WTF??? I [i]know[/i] that I layed them on the chair beside my bed! Get up and go look around for them. Ah, there they are, laying on the livingroom floor! WTF? I know damn well I didn't undress in the LR last night! Hey! WTF is my wallet??? WTF is the TV?? WTF is the stereo??? Now I start screaming and hollering! My wife is screaming "WTF is my purse"??? Our roomy is hollering "WTF are my truck keys and wallet"?? Once we all realized that some 'lowlife' had not only violated our sanctuary, but had stood beside our beds,perhaps hovering right over us, watching us sleep, did the fear, the anger, and then the rage set in! Which is why I said that once they are IN your house, it should be encouraged to shoot them. This is always something I've been very clear about. If someone is on your property outside of your house, shooting them should not be the first resort. But, if someone is IN your house, then they are fair game.
|
Posts: 8851
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:57 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9: Yogi Yogi: PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9: I think more importantly is to consider whether "stuff" is worth a human life, even if it's a low-life
I am deeply disturbed by the number of people that think murder or aggravated assault is a lesser crime than theft.
Shooting someone stealing stuff outside of your house just because you're too lazy or stupid to make sure it's locked up and/or secured is ridiculous.
Shooting home invaders on the other hand should not only be legal in Canada, it should be encouraged! You know, PA, I think I come by my attitude towards 'lowlifes' quite justifiabley so. I'll try to explain, but unless you have actually experienced this, it would be akin to a woman trying to make a man understand exactly what it feels like to be pregnant and give birth! To wake up one morning, and reach for your pants to get dressed for work, and they are not there! WTF??? I [i]know[/i] that I layed them on the chair beside my bed! Get up and go look around for them. Ah, there they are, laying on the livingroom floor! WTF? I know damn well I didn't undress in the LR last night! Hey! WTF is my wallet??? WTF is the TV?? WTF is the stereo??? Now I start screaming and hollering! My wife is screaming "WTF is my purse"??? Our roomy is hollering "WTF are my truck keys and wallet"?? Once we all realized that some 'lowlife' had not only violated our sanctuary, but had stood beside our beds,perhaps hovering right over us, watching us sleep, did the fear, the anger, and then the rage set in! Which is why I said that once they are IN your house, it should be encouraged to shoot them. This is always something I've been very clear about. If someone is on your property outside of your house, shooting them should not be the first resort. But, if someone is IN your house, then they are fair game.
I prefer to think of my methods as 'preventative maintenance'!
|
Posts: 52027
Posted: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:59 am
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9: Which is why I said that once they are IN your house, it should be encouraged to shoot them. This is always something I've been very clear about. If someone is on your property outside of your house, shooting them should not be the first resort. But, if someone is IN your house, then they are fair game. What is the difference between; 'in your house', 'in your garage', 'in your barn', 'in your yard' if they are uninvited and stealing your stuff?
|
 
|
Page 1 of 3
|
[ 34 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests |
|
|
Site Admin 
CKA Moderator 
CKA Moderator 