Mom protecting children shoots intruder 5 times, MSNBC calls her "trigger happy"

[Jack T. Cross]

didnt know that.  probably only for a tool to use during the break in.

Without a single other consideration, can you see the problem developing?

nope. but i would ask her to only use as much force as necessary.
 

As necessary to do what, bro?

Think about it.  Your heart is in the right place, but you haven't gone the distance with this one.

[Jack T. Cross]

And anyone who would be quick to call this woman "trigger happy" should consider the fact that she attempted to hide in a closet, when she could have easily chosen to open full bore upon his crossing the threshold.

[240 is Back]

Setting aside all the other idiocy, the pissing on the constitution etc

Haha this guy thinks that a .410 and a .22 are all you need to hunt with?

some politicians like to go "varminting".

[Montague]

And anyone who would be quick to call this woman "trigger happy" should consider the fact that she attempted to hide in a closet, when she could have easily chosen to open full bore upon his crossing the threshold.

No. You, I, and everyone else in this thread are wrong. Tbomz is the only one who's right; it's just that NONE of us are smart enough to "comprehend" his stance.

[tu_holmes]

No. You, I, and everyone else in this thread are wrong. Tbomz is the only one who's right; it's just that NONE of us are smart enough to "comprehend" his stance.

Good sarcasm, but in this instance, I can't even go along with that, bombz has just gone stupid in this one.

[Emmortal]

lol.. untrained with guns and emptying an entire clip with accuracy within a few seconds of time..    i guess its "possible" ...    and that would be one TRIGGER HAPPY mofo if it did

I didn't say untrained with guns, I said "untrained".  Meaning, COMBAT TRAINING.  Being able to shoot a gun doesn't mean you are in no way ready for a combat situation.

It has nothing to do with trigger happiness, it's an automatic reaction to someone who doesn't have combat training.  This is something that can take years of training to overcome, that automatic response.

You know nothing of this subject so I'd suggest you keep your idiotic opinions to yourself.  You've never even had your life threatened by another individual so you shouldn't even be commenting on this at all.

[WOOO]

And anyone who would be quick to call this woman "trigger happy" should consider the fact that she attempted to hide in a closet, when she could have easily chosen to open full bore upon his crossing the threshold.

This is a fair point.

[a_ahmed]

America is a police state, hope that helps.

Freedom is a theoretical fantasy of Americans.

The land of the free.

Oh and good luck.

[Montague]

And anyone who would be quick to call this woman "trigger happy" should consider the fact that she attempted to hide in a closet, when she could have easily chosen to open full bore upon his crossing the threshold.

Again, good point.
Some people (media, especially) are speaking as though she was "in position" at her bedroom window with a sniper-rifle just waiting for the guy to step over her property line.

[Archer77]

Again, good point.
Some people (media, especially) are speaking as though she was "in position" at her bedroom window with a sniper-rifle just waiting for the guy to step over her property line.

Anti-gun groups are scrambling to find examples to justify new legislation

[tbombz]

so wooo posts the 911 video that proves she kept on firing at the guy after he was already down and was asking her to stop.           do i get any apologies from anybody??   no, "im sorry tbombz for attacking you but you were right in your assumption" ??        

You act like the mother should have got the short end of the stick.

This guy broke into her house an for all she knew would kill them. Do you not understand that?

a stick can be broken into equal halfs 

Without a single other consideration, can you see the problem developing?

As necessary to do what, bro?

Think about it.  Your heart is in the right place, but you haven't gone the distance with this one.

go back and read my posts man.  i think your just assuming that i said what others are claiming i said.

No. You, I, and everyone else in this thread are wrong. Tbomz is the only one who's right; it's just that NONE of us are smart enough to "comprehend" his stance.

thats usually the case    (in all seriousness though, i tend to fail at communicating because i like to be confrontational in an intellectual way.. comprehension errors are due to my encoding errors)

[Montague]

Anti-gun groups are scrambling to find examples to justify new legislation

And, they are exploiting a tragedy to push through their agenda.

[Montague]

thats usually the case    (in all seriousness though, i tend to fail at communicating because i like to be confrontational in an intellectual way.. comprehension errors are due to my encoding errors)

Your "encoding" has enabled us ALL to surmise that you lack intellect regarding this topic.

[tbombz]

Your "encoding" has enabled us ALL to surmise that you lack intellect regarding this topic.

you think you know something of value? 

[Soul Crusher]

you think you know something of value? 

you know why i laugh at you on this?  You speak as a juiced bodybuilder who can handle an average guy. 

A smaller weaker mother of three can not and the only equalizer is a gun in that situation. 

Too bad leftists and liberals dont grasp that.   

[Montague]

you think you know something of value? 

As has become standard in this thread, I have no idea what point you're driving at in your above post (or, if there even is a point).

I'm just with everyone else here who is confounded by your ramblings. Instead of attempting to be intellectual, why don't you speak in terms you are capable of and set us all straight?

[Montague]

you know why i laugh at you on this?  You speak as a juiced bodybuilder who can handle an average guy.

I have doubts. Tbombs is a good dude, but he's too passive and naive; he would get his ass handed to him in some fashion in any kind of real altercation. Can you imagine what would happen to him in a home-invasion?

Again, good guy - not a mean bone in his body. And, as someone else said: his heart is in the right place.
But, as for "handling" himself? He can't even handle a grocery list!

[tu_holmes]

Hell no you're not "right in your assumption"

Your assumption said that he wasn't trying to hurt her. You don't know this.
Your assumption was that if she answered her door he would have left. You don't know this.

And if you roll into my house... I'll unload a clip on your ass.

Everyone would beg to not be shot anymore, but fuck that... You walked into HER place.

You are seriously loco.

[tbombz]

you know why i laugh at you on this?  You speak as a juiced bodybuilder who can handle an average guy. 

A smaller weaker mother of three can not and the only equalizer is a gun in that situation. 

Too bad leftists and liberals dont grasp that.   

you think i dont know that?  the point of my postings was not to say she shouldnt have shot the guy. i never even hinted at that. go back to the first page of this thread and look at the first 5-10 comments or so. how tommy is calling the media outlet "disgusting", and blah blah blah. because they titled the story "trigger happy woman.. ".    what the fuck was the title of the story supposed to be? mans face is local hotspot for bullet hangout?  she shot the dude 5 fucking times in the face. yes, the story there is the amount of shots fired. home break ins, robbers getting shot. that sort of thing isnt really news worthy. the local town newspaper might throw up a small paragraph about it. what made that story news worthy was the 5 BULLETS TO THE FACE. how do you title a story like that?  yupp... "trigger happy".   and now the facts confirm the assumption, she kepton shooting the dude even after she had downed him.

As has become standard in this thread, I have no idea what point you're driving at in your above post (or, if there even is a point).

I'm just with everyone else here who is confounded by your ramblings. Instead of attempting to be intellectual, why don't you speak in terms you are capable of and set us all straight?

SIMPLE QUESTION.. DO YOU THINK YOU KNOW SOMETHING OF VALUE? MISTER CALLING-OTHER-PEOPLE-STUPID ??  if you dont understand the question maybe you should be more familiar with the philosophy of knowledge..

I have doubts. Tbombs is a good dude, but he's too passive and naive; he would get his ass handed to him in some fashion in any kind of real altercation. Can you imagine what would happen to him in a home-invasion?

Again, good guy - not a mean bone in his body. And, as someone said: his heart is in the right place.
But, as for "handling" himself? He can't even handle a grocery list!

LOL..  home slice.. LMAO...    my pics are up for everyone to see.. go ahead and post yours up and let everyone decide who could handle who 

Hell no you're not "right in your assumption"

Your assumption said that he wasn't trying to hurt her. You don't know this.
never assumed that, just said it was a possibility
Your assumption was that if she answered her door he would have left. You don't know this.
never assumed that, just said it was a possibility
And if you roll into my house... I'll unload a clip on your ass.

Everyone would beg to not be shot anymore, but fuck that... You walked into HER place.

You are seriously loco.

my assumption was that she kept firing on the dude even after she had grounded him. and the 911 tape confirmed that. 

[tu_holmes]

my assumption was that she kept firing on the dude even after she had grounded him. and the 911 tape confirmed that. 

So what? How is that even relevant?

[Montague]

This is why people should have to pass a test before being allowed to vote.

Current events...
Basic economics...
Coloring while staying inside the lines...

[tbombz]

So what? How is that even relevant?

how is it relevant? its the only fucking thing that i care about.  and its the only reason why she shot him so many times. and its the only reason why the story wwas news worthy. and its the only reason why the story was titled "trigger happy woman..".

the only thing i wanted to do in this thread was get tommy, you, and others who had posted on the first page acting all disgusted and high-and-mighty because the paper titled the story the way it did  to realize that the title of the story was perfectly fitting.  calling her trigger happy doesnt diminish her right to shoot the guy. it doesnt make her evil. it doesnt mean we should take guns away from everybody. it just means she shot more than she had to.  and the story being reported on wasnt that she shot the dude, it was that she shot the dude 5 times in the face. she shot him once, twice, three times, didnt stop there but hit him again, and once more for good measure. he was already down, and she shot him again.  no reason for that whatsoever. TRIGGER HAPPY. thats the story.  nothing disgusting about reporting it.   it would be disgusting if the media was celebrating the fact she shot him.

[tbombz]

This is why people should have to pass a test before being allowed to vote.

Current events...
Basic economics...
Coloring while staying inside the lines...

pass a test before voting huh?    go ahead and prove you can pass your own test, teach me some basic economics real quick. just a few lines, enough to prove you know what your talking about and not something so simple that anybody could have said it.  .. im waiting..   

[Montague]

pass a test before voting huh?    go ahead and prove you can pass your own test, teach me some basic economics real quick. just a few lines, enough to prove you know what your talking about and not something so simple that anybody could have said it.  .. im waiting..   

Bump your thread from several months ago in which you asked for help in budgeting a grocery list.
We'll start there.

[Archer77]

A news outlet calling someone trigger happy is clearly a form of judgement and condemnation.

Below is the definition of trigger happy according to websters. It's completely unfair to label a woman defending herself and her children in these terms.  

1 : irresponsible in the use of firearms; especially : inclined to shoot before clearly identifying the target
2 a : inclined to be irresponsible in matters that might precipitate war
   b : aggressively belligerent in attitude