Man fatally shoots son-in-law amid a birthday surprise

[conan]

@WuWei

Or maybe just don’t ■■■■ with old men.

Should be the moral of the story.

[WuWei]

@LeroyBrown

@W_and_C

Well, according to many ammosexuals, “moar careful” translates into arming yourself to the teeth anytime you walk down to your mailbox, so…

No, it means getting training so you don’t accidentally gun down people shouting surprise! when it’s your birthday.

[WuWei]

@Olya

Strange reason.

How so?

[WildRose]

Because he’s a law abiding American with the inherent right to do so.

[Demon]

But I didn’t say that he didn’t have a heart attack because he had a means to defend himself.

[WuWei]

@Demon

But I didn’t say that he didn’t have a heart attack because he had a means to defend himself.

Prove that’s not why.

[LucyLou]

I just don’t think I would hide in the bushes and jump out and scare an old person late at night. Something bad could happen.

I also wouldn’t use this family tragedy to score points one way or the other.

[Smyrna]

@WuWei

What “triggered” him?

The previous knock on the front door from a couple of hours earlier and then firm knock at 11:30 at night on the back door, that he concluded was more of the same.

[WildRose]

Nothing strange about it at all, it is our right to do so and to defend our homes, lives, families with them.

[W_and_C]

@WildRose

Incorrect, you don’t need to panic raising your stress levels through the roof if you have a way to deal with an oncoming threat particularly if you’ve had any competent training.

So carrying may have saved him from a heart attack caused by a birthday surprise by his son-in-law. Oh wow.

[Demon]

I don’t have to prove anything. You’re the one stating he didn’t have a heart attack because he had the means of defending himself. You prove that.

[WildRose]

If you’ll learn to use the reply function it will be a whole lot easier to figure out who you are replying to.

[Smyrna]

@WildRose

You can argue there might have been better ways to handle the situation but it was completely lawful and totally understandable.

That is…all I’m saying. He made a mistake so…first off…his approach was NOT perfect.

[WildRose]

Scaring people in the dark is a good way to end up dead or cause an unintentional death.

The older the person being scared the higher the likelihood of both.

[WildRose]

Darwinism in practice.

[WuWei]

@Smyrna

@WuWei

What “triggered” him?

The previous knock on the front door from a couple of hours earlier and then firm knock at 11:30 at night on the back door, that he concluded was more of the same.

Supposition. I’ll buy the son-in-law knock. Somebody bangs on your door at 11:30, you go look, nobody there. What happens next?

[WuWei]

@Olya

Hello you may have guns because you are American. Surprise! Dead son in law.

Congratulations to America?

Surprise dead guy hiding in the bushes growling.

[W_and_C]

@WildRose

Scaring people in the dark is a good way to end up dead or cause an unintentional death.

The older the person being scared the higher the likelihood of both.

Well then, even if we allow the possibility that the old man would’ve ended up with a heart attack had he not had a gun (sounds ridiculous, but let’s go along with it) it still likely would have been a better outcome than what happened here.

[WuWei]

@Olya

Most of world understands correct choice in gun argument.

The world is full of sheep.

[Smyrna]

@Olya

Hello you may have guns because you are American. Surprise! Dead son in law.

Congratulations to America?

There’s more involved here regarding guns…the United States…and this one incident. If you focus on this one time it went wrong, do you then totally ignore all the lives that have been saved by a good guy with a gun, who was there when a bad guy came to do harm with a gun?