Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What leads you to conclude that defending yourself with up to/including deadly force against an intruder with unknown (but quite reasonably presumed to be criminal) intent is unreasonable?

Breaking into an occupied residence is a quite serious crime and I don't think it's reasonable to require the inhabitants to sit down over tea and find out what the invader's intentions are before mounting a defense.

Don't want to get shot after breaking into someone's house? It seems like there's a pretty straightforward way to avoid exposing yourself to that risk.



There was a gun in the house when I was a kid. Explicitly to protect the family against intruders.

Number of times intrusions occurred: 0

Number of times the gun went off by accident: 2

Number of times a drunken adult gave the gun, loaded, to a kid: 1


Irresponsibility and negligence are certainly sad but not very good reasons why people should be stripped of the ability to defend themself and their loved ones


They are precisely the best of reasons why people should be stripped of such dangerous things. We don't let average people fly airplanes, neither should we let average people shoot firearms.

Right after evil, incompetence is the next worst thing for handling dangerous tools.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: