Quote :

"Homeowner Kills, Wounds Burglary Suspects POSTED: 10:55 am EDT August 9, 2006 UPDATED: 11:11 am EDT August 9, 2006 DURHAM, N.C. -- A homeowner killed one suspect and wounded another during an apparent break-in early Wednesday, police said. Residents of 3301 Dearborn Drive told police that two men kicked in their front door at about 1:40 a.m. and entered the house. At least one of the men was carrying a gun, they told police. A man, a woman and a 15-month-old boy were in the home when the incident occurred, police said. One of the adults shot and killed one suspect and wounded the second, police said. The first suspect, who hasn't been identified, was pronounced dead at the scene. The second suspect fled from the house. A short time later, a 19-year-old man showed up at the Duke University Hospital emergency room for treatment of a gunshot wound to his arm. The man was treated at the hospital and released, and police said he is being questioned by investigators. No charges have been filed in the case."

haha wtfpwn.

of course, the liberals would probably pronounce it a tragedy that the family was not bound, raped, robbed, and killed by the intruders.

8/9/2006 11:39:36 AM

good for that guy. If I lived in Durham, you would be sure I'd have a gun.

8/9/2006 11:43:27 AM

anybody who lives in durham should probably have a gun if they dont already which they probably do

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:43 AM. Reason : ^exactly]

8/9/2006 11:43:28 AM

because durham has lots of black people!!!!

they're gonna kill you!

8/9/2006 11:45:06 AM

exactly. they'd probably tie you up and rape you too.

8/9/2006 11:46:28 AM

^^ Why did you bring race into this?

8/9/2006 11:52:54 AM

Why would anyone want to ban guns?!

Oh wait, no one does!

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:56 AM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 11:54:11 AM

^are you serious?

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:58 AM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 11:54:43 AM

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:55 AM. Reason : n/m]

8/9/2006 11:55:09 AM

Quote :

"of course, the liberals would probably pronounce it a tragedy that the family was not bound, raped, robbed, and killed by the intruders."

The burglars get shot at, liberals will whine about how guns are out of control and that burglars are people too.

Had the burglars succeeded (but hopefully without killing anybody), liberals would whine about how guns are out of control and falling into the hands of criminals.

Either way, you just can't win.

8/9/2006 11:56:52 AM

Had anything at all happened, conservatives would have argued against gun-banning strawmen liberals.

you just can't win.

8/9/2006 11:58:07 AM

maybe if liberals didnt want to infringe on the 2nd amendement

8/9/2006 11:58:52 AM

maybe if conservatives didnt use a dated amendment to stroke their manly gun-fantasies

8/9/2006 11:59:48 AM

The second amendment talks about a well-regulated militia. Not a redneck with his peacemaker under his pillow praying that tonight's the night the commies try to come after him.

8/9/2006 12:01:35 PM

a dated amendement? hahaha lets throw out the bill of rights, its dated

the second amendement also talks about the right to bear arms shall not be infringed

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:02 PM. Reason : BOLD]

8/9/2006 12:02:04 PM

not meaning it should be thrown out, but meaning it should be interpreted correctly as has been noted.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:03 PM. Reason : especially within the context of today's society. we've had to add amendments before to correct iss]

8/9/2006 12:03:03 PM

so essentially you want to infringe on my rights selectively as they are convenient for you

8/9/2006 12:03:44 PM

id argue that being selective for EVERYONE's good

8/9/2006 12:04:13 PM

So by "not infringed," you interpret it to mean we can all own M1A2s?

Or are you some kind of gun-hating liberal?

8/9/2006 12:04:57 PM

so now arms = tanks

please gtfo

8/9/2006 12:07:31 PM

I'm just waiting on the article about how the homeowner will get into trouble for shooting the robbers.

8/9/2006 12:08:12 PM

if some activists want to file a civil suit, its quite possible that the homeowner will have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees at minimum for essentially protecting his wife and 15 month old child in his own home

8/9/2006 12:09:22 PM

im not arguing that the homeowner is in the wrong, but i am for gun restriction

8/9/2006 12:10:14 PM

i'm just waiting for the article about how a different homeowner shot his son, either thinking he was invader, or trying to shoot an invader.

i'm also waiting for the article on the percentage of home invasions that actually end with any harm done to the occupant and how many of those are because homeowner brings a gun into the equation.

8/9/2006 12:12:02 PM

^^Wonder what would have happened in this case if the homeowners couldn't have a gun because of some restriction?

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:12 PM. Reason : -]

8/9/2006 12:12:19 PM

Quote :

"so now arms = tanks"

Is it anymore ridiculous than thinking an MP5 is covered by a document guaranteeing the right to own muskets?

And registering = infringement?

Can we all comes to terms that, after 225+ years of weapons development, we need to follow the intent of the 2nd Amendment, rather than its literal wording?

8/9/2006 12:13:55 PM

Quote :

"Another win for gun owners"

im glad these kinds of events, which happen once or twice every year, make up for the people who are shot and killed every day by guns at home

8/9/2006 12:16:19 PM

when fidel makes a full recovery and attacks cuba, you'll be sorry boondocks.

8/9/2006 12:17:03 PM

Quote :

"Can we all comes to terms that, after 225+ years of weapons development, we need to follow the intent of the 2nd Amendment, rather than its literal wording?"

i bet you wouldnt say that about the 1st amendment


^^yeah...people die in homes all the time by accident...however nobody ever breaks into homes

got josh### is the biggest troll on here

8/9/2006 12:17:59 PM

Quote :

"i bet you wouldnt say that about the 1st amendment"

the intent of the first amendment has been called into question so many times.

how about a right to privacy? that wasn't considered a "right" until well into the 20th century when the ussc decided it fell in with the first amendment. the first amendment has to be redefined every time we come up with a new medium for communication. what a ridiculous point you're trying to make.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:21 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 12:20:45 PM

that boonedocks uses double standards

its really not a ridiculous point

8/9/2006 12:21:22 PM

Quote :

"i bet you wouldnt say that about the 1st amendment"

I would say that there aren't practical limitations on the 1st Amendment?

Because I never recall ever saying or thinking that.

8/9/2006 12:21:38 PM

the development of the media and new religions strenghtens the first amendment. the increase in firepower just makes #2 more deadly and more uneeded.

8/9/2006 12:21:48 PM

no you are anti-gun because you think it will lower crime which it wont...you wouldnt mind seeing the amendment get revamped even though its in the bill of rights guaranteed to every american

doesnt matter though...guns wont get banned...wont happen

Quote :

"the development of the media and new religions strenghtens the first amendment"

how about being able to yell fire in a public building...or maybe printing lies about someone or saying lies about someone...ie libel and slander...those strengthen or weaken the 1st amendment?

8/9/2006 12:22:53 PM

Can we factor the 300,000% increase in home invasions per year we would experience if no one was allowed to have a gun into all of these "out of the air" statistics.

8/9/2006 12:23:02 PM

^no because thats not convenient

DONT YOU SEE IF WE BAN GUNS FROM LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, CRIMINALS WONT HAVE ACCESS TO THEM EITHER

8/9/2006 12:24:10 PM

how many robberies occur while ppl are at home or awake anyways and out of those times how often does it result in violence?

8/9/2006 12:24:43 PM

how many gun deaths are there per year in england?
japan?

8/9/2006 12:25:11 PM

One instance that was preventable is enough.

8/9/2006 12:25:14 PM

^^^i dunno

8/9/2006 12:25:20 PM

you could say the exact same thing about someone using a gun in a malicious/accidental way jb.


[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:27 PM. Reason : ^ it isnt that great of an anti-gun point, but it works against his increased home invasion stat]

8/9/2006 12:25:54 PM

If you have a magic machine that can vaporize every gun on the planet, please, by all means, activate it now.

8/9/2006 12:27:33 PM

Wait, did this thread go back to assuming anyone of any significance in this country wants to ban guns?

8/9/2006 12:28:25 PM

I kind of resent people who expect me to let armed robbers into my house to loot all of my belongings if they don't intend to hurt me.

8/9/2006 12:28:54 PM

^^grownups are talking, please leave

8/9/2006 12:29:59 PM

^^you really need to get your priorities straight.
^so why are you still around?

and:

Quote :

"In 1998 (the most recent year for which this data has been compiled), handguns murdered: * 373 people in Germany * 151 people in Canada * 57 people in Australia * 19 people in Japan * 54 people in England and Wales, and * 11,789 people in the United States "

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:30 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 12:30:07 PM

my priority is protecting my life and my family's life

let me just shift that down my priority list since its not important

8/9/2006 12:31:01 PM

and by using a gun, i'd be willing to bet, you're putting your family at risk that the robber is going to freak and actually use the gun he had no intention of using.

(and he mentioned nothing of a family in that post, only losing his precious stuff)

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:33 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 12:31:58 PM

^^^ to be fair we have a helluva lot more people than them.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:33 PM. Reason : but the magic machine argument is dumb. not that i want to get rid of all guns anyways.]

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 12:34 PM. Reason : admittedly not by that % to make that argument valid, but at least somewhat]

8/9/2006 12:33:00 PM

^^if someone breaks into my house with a gun i'm not going to assume they have "no intention of using" it

that would be completely foolish

if i'm at a bar or a bank or something like that and i have a gun and theres a robbery...i'm not going to be stupid and try to be a hero

but to try and tell me that i should just let some fucking robber do what they want in my house because they probably dont have the intention of using a gun is absurd...utterly absurd

8/9/2006 12:34:07 PM