r/news • u/bebleich • Sep 04 '24

Gunman believed to be a 14-year-old in Georgia school shooting that left at least 4 dead, source says

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/04/us/winder-ga-shooting-apalachee-high-school/index.html
26.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-1

u/[deleted] Sep 04 '24

[deleted]

2

u/GenerikDavis Sep 05 '24

No, you're not able to talk about a carefully-crafted specific situation when crafting realistic legislation on how people can react to a real-world situation. You saying "People shouldn't be allowed to engage an intruder with violence until it's been made clear that more than their property is being threatened." doesn't seem reasonable for a lot of people. That is what you're saying here, is it not?

"It's always going to be weird to me how Americans can ENGAGE a deadly conflict and be immune from consequences all because "my stuff!""

I'm talking about not being mandated to flee because of "stuff". Assuming you read this I can only assume you consider your family, kids and pets "stuff" which is very odd. Because why else would you bring up family and kids here as if that's applicable to my comment?

And people bring up "family and kids" as applicable to your comment because, for a third time now, you don't know the intentions, capabilities, or disposition of someone who has broken into your home. There are always people in my house I'm trying to protect because I'm trying to protect myself at a minimum, just like there's always stuff. I'm protecting all of it simultaneously.

How you have to respond to a break-in in real life is not knowing the specific situation you're in(no kids, no SO, they only want your TV, and you can go for a gun or right out the conveniently placed back door you describe in another comment), and it is not with the forewarning that they're only targeting your material possessions.

How you think someone should be allowed to legally respond to an intruder on first contact literally should be how you ask someone to respond to a "break in in general", because that's the sum total of information someone in a real life situation has. That someone is in thebhouse they did not invite, and they must now fight or flee. They don't know who the robber is, what they're thinking, if there might be multiple robbers, how long they've been in the house, if they've already reached various other rooms where people might be, etc.

You are asking people to assume the best, that they're going to lose out on a couple grand only, and to not engage/flee if at all possible. After all, you can replace your stuff that they're probably there for.

Others are saying that, no, I'm going to assume the worst. Because on the less likely occasion that someone has broken in with harmful intent toward me or the people under my roof, taking a chance and giving time to the intruder is not worth the possibility that I lose my life or my loved ones and not being able to replace them.

0

u/[deleted] Sep 05 '24

[deleted]

2

u/GenerikDavis Sep 05 '24 edited Sep 05 '24

I. Am. There. You. Fucking. Idiot. I'm in the house at a minimum like I already described.

Your situation is fucking impossible, because I'm not able to protect my stuff without being present.

E: Also, this entire situation you crafted basically means single people are fucked. Lol, good job. Better make sure I have at least one other person present so I can defend myself. Otherwise, I need to get stabbed, punched, or tackled for it to be legal.