Why does literally every White guy out there fantasize about someone breaking into their house just so they can legally shoot them?
Let me carve the following onto your skinI shall only to be rid of you
>>82571537Because it's cool especially if the thieves don't have any weapons on them
Honestly I think it would be funnier to just absolutely humiliate a would-be home invader with less-lethal like a pepperball launcher or beanbag shotgun. Just fucking stunlock them until the cops show up.
>>82571537Well why would someone enter your house without your consent?Think about it lil buddy
The Boy is a Canadian parody cartoon about a special ed student who gets taken out of class so his peers can take their prestigious Human Sexuality lesson in not getting pushed around by their psychosocial impulses
>>82571537Why shouldn't I? There are much worse things to fantasize about
>>82571537Why worry about it unless you are planning to break into their home weirdo?
>>82571537100 years of NRA propaganda. Using fear to sell guns. People have been convinced someone is going to break in and kill their family since we rode horses.
>>82571581Op is clearly a nigger
>>82571537Literally my nightmare as a britbong. If someone breaks into my property, the law allows me to use reasonable force to protect myself or others, even preemptively. But if they are physically larger or carrying a weapon which are both probable, what do I do?
>>82571554Kek, it's more illegal to use less than lethal than to just kill the intruder. I am not making that up. In court it can be argued that you used "too much force" or "falsely imprisoned" etc. whereas if you simply shoot to kill then you can argue you feared for your life and had to kill. The idea is that>If he's a threat, less than lethal means you had the time to consider whether to kill>If it was your only option, you might use too much force>If he's not a threat, then you used too much force>If you injured him, you're liable because you KNEW you didn't need lethal force>If he's injured, you can't engage in any more force unless you know he's not a threat>The perpetrator is alive and so he can argue in court his intentions, whether he was a threat, etcWhatever happens, it's a massive headache and better to just kill them outright. Big self-defense instructors say the same thing. Do not use your weapon until you are absolutely certain you need to kill, and once you do, you must kill them. Shooting the legs will get you charged because it means you had time to consider whether or not to kill, and that means you put someone's life at risk when you could have taken other actions (like running away). They showed video recaps of cases where people involved in self-defense got hard prison time for non-lethal shots, even when being chases by an armed perpetrator. The only caveat to this is that you are never supposed to execute someone, so if you approach someone you shot down and calmly shoot them again, that becomes illegal.If you ever wonder why Americans spray fire and unload an entire magazine, this is why. The legal system is completely fucked and protects criminals from undue harm.
>>82571537>Why does literally every White guy out there fantasize about someone breaking into their house just so they can legally shoot them?HA-HA! HO-LEE SHIT!!!
>>82571537You wouldn't get it. It's a civilized person thing. Killing barbarians legally is just in the nature of civilized people.
>>82571537Because blacks fantasize about breaking into someone's house and killing them.
Because a large portion of the country fantasizes about this
I don't have this fantasy?Then again I'm not a conservative, and live in an apartment anyway
because the foodcunt can't help himself sadly
>>82571537They just really want to kill someone and feel good doing it. To be the hero, you have to have bad guys to defeat. It's a power dynamic thing. Makes them feel big.
>>82571537Go look at home invasions. What's your problem with someone wanting to defend themselves?
>>82571537The cult of hypermasculinity that is simultaneously (performatively) bloodthirsty and cowardly. They want to kill another human to show their dominance and worth in the eyes of others but they also only want to do it in the circumstances where it is legally and morally permissible to do so. Ironically this leads to actual murders where a paranoid redneck shoots a lost sorority girl or a lost amazon delivery guy who committed the sin of wandering on their property and knocking on their door to ask directions or even just pulling into their driveway.It's a very strange fear based mindset that is feminine and cowardly.
>>82572134>but they also only want to do it in the circumstances where it is legally and morally permissible to do so.This is an atrocious pseudointellectual analysis. The jump from a wanting to do something legal and morally permissible to cowardliness fails to account for the much more obvious two answers:>1. That if they only want to psychopathically kill, doing so legally and in a morally permissible manner allows them to gain the benefits of pleasure and escape the punishment of doing so legally.>2. They just don't want to do something evil.Whether you like it or not, avoiding a bad outcome isn't cowardly, it's rational. It is "foolhardy" to go out and exterminate bystanders just out of an interest to kill, if they have the greater interest of being free and capable of pleasuring themselves in other ways.Keep your pseudointellectual babbling to things that are sensible or, at the very least, plausible and interesting.
>>82572175You feel personally attacked because you identify with the hypothetical paranoid redneck and likely have your own fantasy of killing a home invader. So instead of offering a rebuttal to my claims using logic you resort to emotionally charged insults and anecdotes.No I do not think you will silence me since someone needs to give you and your kind a reality check and show you that you arent half as big and bad as you think you are.
>>82571628That's retarded. If someone is on your property without permission you should be allowed to do some Home Alone type shit to their goofy ass.
>>82572206No, I just find these kinds of pseudointellectual diatribes ridiculously cringe (which you have graciously added bad reddit armchair psychology to).
>>82572206ironically there is a logical refutation. why did you ignore it?
>>82571537Because they have an ancient Aryan bloodlust because Sanjeet Patel on X told me so
It will not be a problem unless you are looking to rob or burglar someone's house. I think it comes from the same place really. The thief is excited about breaking the law and doing something unforgivable that hurts someone. The not-gonna-be-a-victim is excited about upholding justice and making the world a better place. Both involve hurting someone, kind of. But you can't really consider thieves as human. Could also be like coyotes. I sure do hate them coming around, but it is kind of fun shooting them. A country boy can survive.On some level you must realize your question is ridiculous. Why are guns cool? If you have to ask there's probably something wrong with you.
Killing invaders is perfectly rational you gay idiot
>>82571537It's the only way you can kill someone and legally get away with it.
I wish we had self defense or castleaw in canada. We had a guy get executed in front of his family in a home invasion. And a different guy who's in jail for stabbing a guy who broke in with a crossbow. I don't get why we don't have laws that protect the people. Also, the lack of self defense laws I feel make women at such a disadvantage not having a pistol or pepper spray or a taser. Like they legally can't carry anything for self defense. If you were a mass rapist or murderer I'd go to Canada it's easy pickings. Fkn retarded liberal laws
>>82571537The problem with these retards is that they rely on the police too much and consider them their "friends"
>>82571613use your gun and shoot them.
