Reply #95: re: Are you trying to tell me the NRA gives a dang about a rape victim

[gravity556]

You're right, Hoyt, most people who carry daily take it seriously and take it upon themselves to learn the laws on defensive gun use. If only the pro-criminal safety people (that's you!)would likewise educate themselves rather than taking a special interest group's word for it (VPC, Brady, Handgun Control Inc.), maybe there would be intelligent discussion. Rather than the pro-criminal safety side simply yammering "Ew, guns are icky! I don't like them, so nobody would have them. And if we took them all away, everyone would be happy and sing songs around the campfire..." Maybe if you and the monosyllabic wonder read the laws, you'd know that no state's castle doctrine or stand your ground law permits shooting someone in the back outside as they run away.

Also, at least in AZ, there are situations where deadly force is permitted in defense of third party. Rape, sexual molestation of a minor and arson of an occupied structure (or a structure that the shooter believes to be occupied) are the ones that come to mind at the moment. Or should the armed individual wait until the rapist/molester/arsonist is done and then wait for the police? Should someone have to wait until the individual who just kicked in his door actually shoots someone before he defends himself? Or comply, hope that the criminal doesn't beat him up too bad or kill him, and then call the cops afterward? Serious question.

And the preemption of lawsuits being filed by the criminal or his family over injuries he sustained while robbing/raping/mugging/assaulting a victim is also a good thing. I would imagine someone who has endured the trauma of the crime doesn't need to be further victimized by his assailant, though in some states without SYG/CD laws, Johnny Scumbag is free to sue his victim for any injuries that little Johnny sustained while engaged in a criminal act.

Though I can see how that would upset the pro-criminal safety folks. I mean, hell, it's a tough existence using violence to take shit that isn't yours, but to actually have to deal with someone who not only refused to let him steal the TV and maybe rape the wife but actually shot poor Johnny? That's just barbaric! And think of the lost income for Johnny's family-they were planning to watch the big game on that TV, maybe buy a surround sound system with fenced property! Totally understandable that they'd want to sue, right? And then those mean old gun owners insisting that they have the right to defend themselves and their home.... Positively distressing to both criminals and the pro-criminal safety folks. Why should crooks and murderers and rapists have to work in unsafe conditions like that-the possibility that you might break into a house one night for some stress relieving sex and get beaten up or even killed? It must be horrible.

Back in the real world, however, more and more people are deciding that they don't want to provide a safe work environment for thugs. They don't want to be sued by Johnny's mom for shooting Johnny after he pulled a knife and demanded money. They don't want to be sued by Johnny when he breaks into their house and threatens them and their family and gets his head half bashed in with a baseball bat. And poor Johnny is simply shit out of luck these days. The only people who have any concern for a criminal's safety when he's menacing innocent people are Johnny himself and the pro-criminal safety folks. The PCS people couch their arguments in bullshit and distorted truths (you're more likely to be shot when there's a gun in the house! really? a gun needs to be present for someone to be shot?! zounds! oh...usually the shooter brings the gun with him while he's breaking in, you say? oh...much less a revelation then..), saying that they want guns banned for the good of the public! Of course, they close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears and yell "LA LA LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" when it's pointed out that criminals tend to have little regard for the law.

Or the ever popular "Well, *I've* never needed a gun, why should anyone else anywhere feel the need to carry one? Or any of a thousand other inane arguments to support their pro-criminal safety stance (Oh, the police will protect you! Just call 911 and they'll be there in a few minutes), all the while ignoring the the fact that it matters not a whit what they "feel" about anything. A right is a RIGHT.