Forums → WEPR → gun controle gone wrong again.
| 100 | 31400 |
(Reuters) - A Connecticut man responding to his sister's call for help during an apparent burglary at her home next door, shot and killed a masked intruder who turned out to be his own teenage son, state police said on Friday.
Tyler Giuliano, 15, was wearing a ski mask and appeared to be armed when he was shot on Thursday by his father, who authorities declined to identify, said Lieutenant J. Paul Vance, a spokesman for the Connecticut State Police.
The father's sister, who lives next door, was home alone before 1 a.m. when she called him to report someone trying to break into her home. The father went over to investigate and was approached by a masked person dressed entirely in black and holding a shiny object, police said in a statement.
"Believing the suspect was armed with a weapon and about to attack him, the (father) discharged his personal handgun at the suspect," police said in the statement.
Giuliano was pronounced dead at the scene.
i was wondering if you guys knew about this. and what your though on it is.
for me it's just clear that this couldn't have happend if gun were not on the public market.
- 100 Replies
Just some insignificant things I'm curious about...
1) Why is the son trying to break into his Aunt's home?
2) They name the son, but not the father so that they can keep his identity anonymous. Wouldn't they think to hide the child's name too? (it'd be pretty easy to find out who the father was with the kid's age and name..)
for me it's just clear that this couldn't have happend if gun were not on the public market.
Yes it could have.
There's a few things you're *ahem* jumping the gun on.
First, people can get whatever if they're willing to try hard enough. No amount of prohibition or laws against something will stop someone who really wants to. Second, not everyone's first action would be to shoot the intruder and as the 'item' that the son was holding never was identified, it's hard to say whether it was a legitimate mistake or an excuse. Third, why would the son be robbing the aunt's home? This makes me suspect family issues to begin with.
There's far too much undisclosed for any of us to say whether stronger gun laws might have prevented this.
They name the son, but not the father
they dont hide it. it's Jeffrey Giuliano a school teacher.
First, people can get whatever if they're willing to try hard enough. No amount of prohibition or laws against something will stop someone who really wants to.
no valid reason in this case.
as the father was not a criminal but a teacher. there would be no reason for him to have a gun if it was illegal.
(this is not 1 of those rampages where you can throw in this card)
Second, not everyone's first action would be to shoot the intruder
but as this case shows. there are people who instantly start shooting when they have the idea, they see a burglar.
so there could be some life spared.
even if it was a real burglar. i still don't see why he should be shot dead for it but w/e.
and as the 'item' that the son was holding never was identified, it's hard to say whether it was a legitimate mistake or an excuse.
it was identified. it was on his body when to police arrived. they just didn't announce what is was yet for the investigations sake. but sofar speculations are pointing at a knife.
someone whit a knife can be unarmed easily whitout a gun aswell. there is no need to shoot someone whit a knife.
Third, why would the son be robbing the aunt's home?
since he is shot dead, we will never know.
who said he was robbing the place? maybe he was just leaving from a visit. the family has to be tight if the all 3 live together in 3 different houses. besidehe to son had no criminal history or anything suspicious yet. (investigation still going on)
There's far too much undisclosed for any of us to say whether stronger gun laws might have prevented this.
i dunno. a honest teacher doesn't kill people who are suspicious of being a burglar, around here. must be a cultural difference then. no?
Wanna hear a secret? when there is a law against guns, people dont have it!
you talk like guns is a thing that every normal man need in his house. in Israel you dont see guns! and people dont get shot because they broke to ther aunt houses! and you dont hear about peoples who kill there crew workers and suicide because they are sad!
You in USA very love to say "if people try hard enough" - people dont. we dont smuggle guns, we dont create our own. this way, even the biggest crime families have less that a pistol.
As i said numeros of time befor, if you get "to the wrong neighberhood" in Tel-aviv, you wont get shot. never. stabbed in the very maximum. in Usa you can get a bullet by looking suspecios to one person eyes.
So now tell me, how is it that in most of the world, people dont have wepones as a normal equipment? and yet we survive. only police mans, who were traind hard for this, carry a pistol. not a carabin.
adn when there is a threat, they do there job, not the citizens. the appachee wont attack your villages i can asure you, since you prisoned all of them in these prisons of land. you dont need to defendd yourself in a modern country. sure, its feel good to know there is a tool you can use in case of emergency, but its not needed!
and about the 'tool' the kid had, am i the only one who start to imagane a MIB or other fantasy/si-fic story lines?
Here in pakistan,
loads and loads of guns but not much of gun violence.
(Not considering Target Killers)
May be we ain't that trigger happy.
as the father was not a criminal but a teacher. there would be no reason for him to have a gun if it was illegal.
Self-defence/gun enthusiest.
but as this case shows. there are people who instantly start shooting when they have the idea, they see a burglar.
Which, if anything, only proves that the requirements for obtaining a gun are lax. Not that people shouldn't be allowed to have guns period.
even if it was a real burglar. i still don't see why he should be shot dead for it but w/e.
If the burglar has a weapon, it's likely going to be a gun or a knife. There's no way to defend yourself adequately against another gun without one yourself, and if they have a knife and you have a gun, so much the better. He shouldn't be killed for it if it can be avoided, but that burglar broke into the house and the residents have a right to defend themselves.
Now, this wasn't the situation -exactly- in the news article you linked, but w/e.
someone whit a knife can be unarmed easily whitout a gun aswell. there is no need to shoot someone whit a knife.
Easy? If you're trained in that sort of thing. There wasn't a reason to shoot in that situation, but again, this only proves that that specific person should not have been allowed a gun.
The inability or mistakes of the few should not affect the many. People who can't swim might drown if they go out on a boat alone. Does this mean we should make it a law that you can't go out alone on a boat? No. Guns are tools, the only fault is the person using it.
a honest teacher doesn't kill people who are suspicious of being a burglar
Perhaps he was involved in something. As I said in my initial post, we don't know. You're making assumption after assumption in order to try and prod your point. All it's doing is making you look foolish.
when there is a law against guns, people dont have it!
When there's a law against guns, law abiding citizens won't have them. The criminals still can.
people dont
Yes, they do.
in Usa you can get a bullet by looking suspecios to one person eyes.
Please. You don't seriously believe this, do you?
? and yet we survive.
I'll bring in some crime statistics later on. Got to go for now.
Burglaries
Assualts
Kidnappings
Rapes
Car Thefts
And to finish it off...Victims
The stats clearly show that in areas of personal assualt/crime, there are countries which have strict firearms prevention codes but still high numbers of these. All having strict firearms laws does is reduce the number of firearms related deaths...obviously. However, it increases the frequency of other crimes because potential victims aren't as likely to be able to defend themselves against an armed criminal, whether they have a knife or a gun.
Further, for the most part the amount of crimes correlates to other factors for cause, not firearms. I'm not going to do a full analysis because that would be an absured amount of time, so if anyone wants to bring in some other things...
Self-defence
not if it was illigal. but i bet you wont accept that.
gun enthusiest.
they belong in the shooting clubs for that. whit some paperwork, no problem.
also wen it's illigal less people will be in contact whit guns. all these people will not become a gun enthusiest as fast as when you see people around you shoot all the time. aka, they never develop the love for guns because they never make contact.
Which, if anything, only proves that the requirements for obtaining a gun are lax. Not that people shouldn't be allowed to have guns period.
making them more strict would be a good 1st step.
glad you think this way.
anyway more strict or not the honest teacher will keep his gun i guess.
If the burglar has a weapon, it's likely going to be a gun or a knife. There's no way to defend yourself adequately against another gun without one yourself, and if they have a knife and you have a gun, so much the better. He shouldn't be killed for it if it can be avoided, but that burglar broke into the house and the residents have a right to defend themselves.
i guess the problem here is that burglars have guns.
burglars are small criminals. where i'm from. most small criminals don't have guns.
and if they do you should co-op whit him and let the police do it's work after. not risk your life in a fire fight.
Now, this wasn't the situation -exactly- in the news article you linked, but w/e.
thats why i said "even if it was a real burglar"
Easy? If you're trained in that sort of thing.
everyone can learn atleast 5 techniques to do so in 1 day. even your grandma or 10 year old brother.
it's what we call self defense. we do it whit our hands not whit a gun. less people are being shot or killed this way. and the hospital bills are also lower for it win-win.
ow and a self defense training is probably allot cheaper then a gun to.
Perhaps he was involved in something. As I said in my initial post, we don't know. You're making assumption after assumption in order to try and prod your point. All it's doing is making you look foolish.
i'm not making a assumption, i'm bringing it back down to the basics what happened there. nothing more, nothing less.
When there's a law against guns, law abiding citizens won't have them. The criminals still can.
-is a teacher a criminal?
-will the teacher still get a gun if it's illigal?
-will the burglar still have to fear of getting people whit a gun against him? when they are illigal.
-will (over time) the small criminal like the burglar. still make the effort of getting a gun himself? or is he going for the cheap knife and rope? (in case he does get seen)
I'll bring in some crime statistics later on. Got to go for now.
i'm just going to tose this in because it's the only 1 i know whitout searching. it's the top 3 homicide rating of 2011 per 100,000 citizens:
1. mexico - 18.3
2. estonia - 5.3
3. usa - 5.0
4. forgot who - 3.7 (or something close (under 4.0 above 3.5))
not if it was illigal. but i bet you wont accept that.
If a person has a gun for self defence, even if it's illegal to have a gun, they still have the gun for self defence...not murder or whatever.
also wen it's illigal less people will be in contact whit guns. all these people will not become a gun enthusiest as fast as when you see people around you shoot all the time. aka, they never develop the love for guns because they never make contact.
While this is true, it's not a reason to heavily restrict/ban guns.
anyway more strict or not the honest teacher will keep his gun i guess.
No matter how strict or illegal you make something it's impossible to completely control it. I'm not saying they can't get most, but there will still be guns around.
burglars are small criminals. where i'm from. most small criminals don't have guns.
and if they do you should co-op whit him and let the police do it's work after. not risk your life in a fire fight.
The police aren't much help in situations like that all the time. If there was a need to defend yourself, and they had a weapon, it wouldn't be too good an outcome for the 'upstanding citizen.'
everyone can learn atleast 5 techniques to do so in 1 day
Learn /= Be able to do so in an actual situation.
i'm not making a assumption, i'm bringing it back down to the basics what happened there. nothing more, nothing less.
The basics are it was a big confusion and jumble and we don't have half the facts. Making a judgement from the givens is just assuming.
-is a teacher a criminal?
-will the teacher still get a gun if it's illigal?
Most wouldn't. I don't know why you're trying to classify all teachers as not being criminals by status of their profession though.
-will the burglar still have to fear of getting people whit a gun against him? when they are illigal.
No. Which is pretty much a reason for a burglar to rob/assualt someone if they have a gun. The other person can't fight back realistically.
i'm just going to tose this in because it's the only 1 i know whitout searching. it's the top 3 homicide rating of 2011 per 100,000 citizens:
Yes, guns result in more deaths. I'm not saying they don't. However, there are less crimes overall in areas of personal assualt because potential victims have means to defend themselves.
Crimes come from people, not guns. Guns are inanimate objects which people can use. While some people may feel more able to commit a crime with a gun, there will be less inhibitions against commiting a crime if they know that their victims won't have one.
i was wondering if you guys knew about this. and what your though on it is.
for me it's just clear that this couldn't have happend if gun were not on the public market.
The same can be said for people who become abusive after they get drunk. They wouldn't have gone on a drunken rage if alcohol was illegal.
I'm sure gun prohibition would have prevented this horrible, heartbreaking, accident. However, it was just that, an accident.
On the flip side, there's a story where a crook broke into a family's house and began to strangle the mother. The daughter grabbed the family pistol (it was sexy pink) and subdued the criminal. She protected her mother from being beaten, and perhaps saved her mother's life.
Link
The father who accidentally shot his own son is a sad story, and it must be horribly heartbreaking, but you have to look at what happened. It was a masked man holding a shiny object (perhaps a weapon?) that was breaking into a family member's home. I don't know why they didn't reveal what the object was.
This wasn't a simple accident, it was a misunderstanding. It was an awkward scenario that rarely happens. Most people who break into homes while wearing ski masks are burglars. What are the chances that the burglar in this case turned out to be the man's son? This is one of those very unrealistic scenarios that rarely happen.
You can't blame the gun when the kid was dressed like a criminal performing a what seemed to be a criminal activity. If it had been criminal, and the father never fired his gun, who knows what would have happened?
but as this case shows. there are people who instantly start shooting when they have the idea, they see a burglar.
so there could be some life spared.
even if it was a real burglar. i still don't see why he should be shot dead for it but w/e.
Furthermore, the father thought the masked man had a weapon and was going to use it. In most situations, when you see a masked man who tried to break into your house walk towards you wit ha weapon, you don't want to hesitate!
i'm just going to tose this in because it's the only 1 i know whitout searching. it's the top 3 homicide rating of 2011 per 100,000 citizens:
1. mexico - 18.3
2. estonia - 5.3
3. usa - 5.0
4. forgot who - 3.7 (or something close (under 4.0 above 3.5))
Looking at countries as a whole can lead to misleading results. When you compare America to other countries where guns are completely outlawed, it seems like America has more violent crimes. However, when you look at cities and states within America, you'll often find that areas with the strictest gun laws have more violent crimes.
Furthermore, you also have to look at the number of crimes committed with guns, not the number of crimes as a whole. Then, you have to determine what kind of crimes those guns were used in. Were they gang related crimes? Were the crimes related to illegal trade, such as black market drugs?
There's just so much more you have to look at.
Yes you can. This thing almost only happen in USA. maybe as partydevil said, its a cultural diffrunce or something.
i just saw a week ago in the news that in kensas, a police man shot and killed a mental illed man, who lost his left hand and leg in a train accident. the officer claimed that this poor man "threat" him and his parthner, and stabbed his parthner with a pen. so he shot him. 2 times.
You in USA live like guns are natural. its not. in places were there are no guns for the mass there are no more crimes than in USA. wher i live, there is no one with gun. no one. and yet, there are no wild west here. the Lakota dont assult us every week, and the rapers dont **** everything that move.
Why its only happen in USA, all of these cases of 'gun saved my life"? why everywher else people go along without guns, and yet can protect themselve?
Its not the wild west peoples! yoo passed it! you dont need to arm yourself against the british! not everyone need a gun in his house!
a civilan guard? sure! this is ok. but when every house have a enough wepones to make a regional militia its not normal to me.
oh, and isnt that iileagal to kill? so why not everyoen kills, even if they realy want? isnt that ileagal to steal? as you say, you cant sstop someone from getting what he want. if you say "no wepones", there will be no more wepones. its take time and corporetion from the citizens, but tis work.
accident happen, sure. but you can stop them.
Yes you can. This thing almost only happen in USA. maybe as partydevil said, its a cultural diffrunce or something.
This thing? What, accidental shootings? Those happen all over the world.
i just saw a week ago in the news that in kensas, a police man shot and killed a mental illed man, who lost his left hand and leg in a train accident. the officer claimed that this poor man "threat" him and his parthner, and stabbed his parthner with a pen. so he shot him. 2 times.
Link please. And again, even from an article, they aren't including everything...
in places were there are no guns for the mass there are no more crimes than in USA.
Yes there are. It depends on the situation inside the country for a great deal of it. Let's see...you were arguing stuff like this doesn't happen in Israel, that there's less crimes? The U.S.A has a population of 311.5 million. Israel has a population of 7.76 million. With each having similar numbers in assualt and Israel having many times more in rapes despite a much larger police force, all in terms of percentages...your argument is invalid. There ARE more crimes of the type that guns prevent occurring in Israel. It's just not focused on by the media.
but when every house have a enough wepones to make a regional militia its not normal to me.
Not every house...not even close. The people who have multiple guns and multiple types of them are not that common except in specific areas.
oh, and isnt that iileagal to kill? so why not everyoen kills, even if they realy want? isnt that ileagal to steal? as you say, you cant sstop someone from getting what he want.
It is illegal. People still kill and steal. You can make laws against things and they still happen. Calling the police isn't going to help every time either, because it takes time for them to respond if you're even able to contact them.
if you say "no wepones", there will be no more wepones
There will always be weapons. Whether someone decides to shave down a table leg or illegaly purchases firearms, if someone really wants to kill someone, they're going to try. All making weapons illegal does is make the law abiding non-crazy citizens unable to have a chance at defending themselves.
accident happen, sure. but you can stop them.
You can try and prevent accidents yes. They still happen.
Cars kill more people a year many times over than guns. Why aren't you arguing that we should all ride bicycles because some people are inept drivers? I know this is a semi red herring, but it's the same logic. Guns are a tool. How they are used is determined by the people who have them. Arguing that guns cause violence is retarded, because guns just sit there unless someone loads a bullet and pulls the trigger.
People cause violence. Not guns. People use guns as means to inact their violence, if they cannot get a hold of a gun they will use something else.
and it also wouldnt of happened if the kid wasnt sneaking around with a ski mask on neither
Yes you can. This thing almost only happen in USA. maybe as partydevil said, its a cultural diffrunce or something.
You mean gun crimes? This is true. If cars were illegal where you lived, then you wouldn't see car accidents either. Heck, if you banned pens, you wouldn't see pen stabbings.
and stabbed his parthner with a pen. so he shot him. 2 times.
Even though the police should have easily been able to subdue him, he did try to stab one of them with a pen.
I'm not saying that guns aren't abused, I've seen plenty of videos where cops do abuse their power (one cop shot a homeless man out of the blue, the homeless man literally did nothing wrong).
You in USA live like guns are natural. its not. in places were there are no guns for the mass there are no more crimes than in USA. wher i live, there is no one with gun. no one. and yet, there are no wild west here.
That's funny, same here! I grew up with guns!!
Its not the wild west peoples! yoo passed it! you dont need to arm yourself against the british! not everyone need a gun in his house!
Accidents happen, and not very often at all (considering the size of our population and number of people who own guns). If you're smart and you know how to handle guns, and you teach your children about gun safety from a young age, you shouldn't really have to worry as long as you keep your guns out of their reach and a clip of ammo hidden elsewhere for good measure.
You're saying accidental deaths wouldn't happen without guns, but you have to look at all the crimes in which guns have been used on criminals. I just linked a video where a daughter saved her mother's life by pulling a gun out on a criminal.
oh, and isnt that iileagal to kill? so why not everyoen kills, even if they realy want? isnt that ileagal to steal? as you say, you cant sstop someone from getting what he want. if you say "no wepones", there will be no more wepones.
This is worded really funny so I might not have understood it properly.
It's already illegal to steal and kill, yet people already do this, DESPITE these activities being illegal. I think you're saying people will still kill with guns, despite murder being illegal. But you need to understand, people will also own guns if they're made illegal as well.
It is illegal. People still kill and steal. You can make laws against things and they still happen. Calling the police isn't going to help every time either, because it takes time for them to respond if you're even able to contact them.
"When seconds count, police are only minutes away."
You must be logged in to post a reply!