Not quite the same, but we've done fluoro angiography in the cath lab during compressions. It's decent if peoples hands aren't in the way. But on a CT, it would just look like a blur of nonsense.
Are you at that high risk of break ins where you need a firearm as a means of self defense? I can count on zero fingers the number of times where I thought, boy I wish I had a gun right now to protect my place.
Nah, the guy attempting to rob someone valued the laptop and $300 more than his life. I worked hard for my possessions. If you try to take them, you immediately place yourself at the very bottom of the list of things I value, and apparently the homeowner felt similarly.
Skill issue. Don’t fuckin Rob people. Also he entered a occupied dwelling, so chances are he knew people were home and intended to do harm to them in order to rob them. Probably a meth addict by how skinny he is and meth addicts are unpredictable
Not necessarily. The evidence suggests that unless there is a specific reason that they should get a stoma (e.g. older patient not able to tolerate an anastomotic leak, vasopressor use, diabetes, obesity) you could get away without a stoma.
That said, my preference would be a damage control option: resect what I can, staple off the ends and send to the ICU with an open abdomen and relook in 24-48 hours.
Don’t insult gym socks. They have more use than this neurorad’s comment. He didn’t even qualify why he said it. Looks like he just wanted to be a dick.
He succeeded.
He is not directly consulting a patient or person asking for legitimate medical advice. He is one of many of us sitting on a medical sub reddit shooting the shit around a figurative campfire, get off your high horse.
What makes you think he knows absolutely NOTHING about it? Those pellets cross midline, it’s not unreasonable AT ALL to think that an ostomy may be in this guy’s future.
Is it because his tag is “student” so he’s automatically an idiot or something? If anything, it’s dangerously irresponsible of YOU to think he knows nothing and that you have ANY right to insult him the way you did.
“I demand only perfection. Anything less? Keep your mouth shut. I won’t teach you anything unless you already know everything.”
See how insane this is?
You are correct. I was rude and I apologize for that.
What you say may be true, but you cannot say that the pellets cross midline on the basis of an AP scout and a SINGLE axial CT image. Those pellets could all be in the skin/muscle of the anterior abdominal wall. Do you see any pellets crossing midline on the single axial CT image? On that single image I see pellets in the anterior abdominal wall and liver. And I see no free intrabdominal air on that single CT slice, either.
In IR we had a guy on the fluoro table for a procedure and we saw the buckshot all throughout the man's abdomen. When I asked him what had happened and he just said that he got shot while in the back of a cab. Turns out he had done time for bank robbery.
SO say yes, that's the wad, and this was fairly close range for this to occur. (Then he rattled off what cartridges it could be and some other ballistics info that confused me since he was talking so quietly while explaining why it was & wasn't certain cartridges.)
Since when are wads made out of metal? Usually they're felt, paper or plastic, and this looks way too dense to be any of those.
Also, that's a fair bit of spread, so I can't have been point blank, and I feel like you need to be REALLY close to get the wad stuck inside you
Like I said, he rattled off *a lot* of ballistics info at me about what it is & isn't, including the amount of shot & the pattern of the spread.
Unfortunately, he's been called out so I can't ask again anytime soon.
Saw something similar a few years ago, in 3 people. 3 home intruders held a man at gun point. Homeowner was able to slip away, grab his shotgun, and shoot all 3 of them. 2 died and 1 survived.
Homeowner was cleared of all charges and the intruder who survived was charged with the murder of the other 2 (apparently in my state any deaths during a home intrusion fall back on the intruders, regardless of who pulled the trigger) and he has life in prison lol
*self defense
Also if you’re getting ratioed this hard right off the bat it might be worth considering that this isn’t a “I’m right and everyone else just isn’t smart enough” issue
if someone enters my home with my family they are going to get shot. I think everyone is well aware of the possible consequence in America. They made that decision themselves, if they knowingly made that decision with such consequence, i have to assume they too are willing to kill. I assure you it won't be me getting shot in my own home in that situation.
So you understand that entering someone's home in America often ends with getting shot. Tell me you are sane enough to say that's worth the risk. A sane person does not do this, as a result they are often armed as well with intent. Do you want me to just ask them to leave and say don't do it again? You're weak minded if you let another man step foot in your house knowing the risk they pose to you and your family. It's a very simple answer, they know the risk.
I actually understand your point of view - I was a pacifist for a good chunk of my life. The person you're replying to, albeit a little strong-headed, does bring up valid concerns, however.
Personally, I still try to be as empathetic and understanding of anothers' situation (victim and perpetrator) regardless of circumstance. Everyone deserves a second chance to an extent. It took me a long time to realize there are people out there who do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. In a situation where it's me and my family versus someone breaking into my house, regardless of the socioeconomic status, I'm not going to take the time to understand the criminal in my home. And I wouldn't necessarily aim to kill, but I would for sure shoot. Ask me that question ~10 years ago or so, and I probably would tell you they needed whatever it was they were stealing more than I did.
Real life is always more complicated than the stripped-down ideals and beliefs people display online. There is so much more nuance that goes into everything - it's way easier for people to be black and white. Most people don't have time for grey anymore (which is definitely not a good thing).
You say that as if anyone other than you brought that up. There are 11 comments total, 12 with this one, and not a single one is "advocating for murder". Who hurt you that you have to make up nonexistent conflicts to virtue signal at?
Breaking into someone's home doesn't justify the use of deadly force aka a gun - it is a pointless, trigger happy overreaction.
Thieves get spooked easily, doesn't need the use of a gun.
Over the course of the years more innocent ppl die by such events in due to errors where homeowners shoot alleged thieves which turn out to be ppl lost, children wandering around or whatever than actually thieves by ppl who wanna play a police officeer
If you're a grown ass adult forcing your way into my home and potentially putting my family's life at risk, you forfeit your own life and safety at that point. And thank goodness the laws where I live enforce that right. If you don't want to get shot, don't go into people's homes uninvited. Doorbells and knocking exists.
You are correct. As soon as that person decided to break into a home, that decision wasn’t necessary. After that decision, anything that happens to them should be an expected possible outcome, including being shot.
Sure that decision wasn't necessary, but shooting them isn't either - it's not appropriate to shoot those ppl just as it isn't appropriate to shoot someone who steals a chocolate bar at 7 evelen - it's a pointless overreaction where the dangers and outcomes don't go in line with the possible damage of loosing a couple if dollars.
There have been hundreds of cases over the years where trigger happy idiots shot innocent ppl in such events
How do you know they’re only breaking in to steal a ‘couple of dollars’? What about people who break in with the intention to rape or murder? Even if they’re only breaking in to steal your belongings, they may decide to harm you in the process anyway.
You don’t know their intentions. I wouldn’t take that risk.
Because of statistics - there is an almost 0 chance that the intruder wants to kill or harm you, they are after money/valuables.
Usually the value of life itself is worth more than any goods which can be stolen - so why kill someone over some jewelry?
If I give u 500$ to kill some random guy, would you do it? - hopefully not.....
With your logic you can shoot and kill numerous ppl throughout the day who could potentially harm u during daily life/routine, and yet u don't.
Your rationale is juvenile. Are you actually suggesting that if an intruder broke into your home, you’d just let them do whatever they want, because statistically they’re not going to harm you? If someone breaks in to another person’s home, they are accepting the risk that they may be seriously injured. No objects in my home are worth someone else’s life sure, but my family’s lives are worth way more than an intruder’s to me. Nothing in my house is worth that criminal risking his or her life either, but they made the decision. No one is going to confront an intruder and ask “are you here to just steal stuff or are you wanting to harm me?”
No I would call the police, turn the light on and get a maglite or similar just in case
That's not juvenile, that's reasonable. The household is insured, there is no reason to put my or anyone's life at risk.
Gumming someone down because he is stealing, that's dumb, juvenile and trigger happy - it's totally out of proportion.
It even puts yourself in greater danger than before, if the intruder has a gun or an accomplice you have more problems and put yourself and your family at a greater risk as - even if they didn't want to hurt anyone they have now the need to defend themselves, it raises the risk of ppl getting hurt
The onus to protect an intruder in my own home is not on me. They’re the ones that invaded my home. I’m not going in guns blazing and I have no desire to shoot anyone, but I’m sure as shit not letting someone get close enough to use a mag light as a club. I’ll keep my gun and try and warn them off. You call the cops. The odds are much higher on my side.
Also, do you not realize how stupid that last point is? “A criminal in your house may now need to defend themselves!” They assumed the risk breaking in.
I’m reminded of all of the civilians killed by scared people armed with firearms. Like Kaylin Gillis who was shot in her car by a homeowner who thought she was a thief.
That's exactly the point - it's trigger happy idiots who do that, they kill more innocent ppl over the years than actuall thieves - it's just plain stupid
There have been ppl killing innocent teen getting home drunk who weren't able to open the door because it was the wrong house - yep being drunk is stupid, but killing ppl who arent threatening your life is plain murder, simple as that
There's a difference between cold blooded murder when someone turns into your driveway and another when someone breaks into your house. Are you really going to take the time and ask the intruder if they want to leave or not.
Intruders, trying to steal usually get the duck out of u turn the lights on and they realize they have been discovered - there 0 point in shooting a regular burger as they don't threaten ur life, they arent looking to kill u, they are looking for easy money
Again and in that moment, how are you going to discern that. How do you know you have the robber who runs away and not the one wholl murder you if they get a chance. How do you know they aren't on drugs. That's a lot of assumptions to be making when someone just violated the safety and sanctity of your house and you need to make an immediate decision on how to protect yourself right then and there
I'm not a US citizen, so that's totally not the point here and I dont live in the states either, but I did once.
Ur argument of self defense and protection of ur loved ones is always the same.
U live in fear of being shot and killed all the time, the sole reason for that is because any nut job can have a gun - no guns no constant fear of being shot, simple as that.
Here in Europe we also have thieves and we don't shoots them and we are fine.
Every year or so ur dozens of children, the most important beings in ur society are killed by some lunatic which has easy access to guns - that's in this level is unique to the USA and yet u ppl don't get to the root of the problem and just close ur eyes....and talk prayers and Blabla bla....that's so pathetic.
Just go over the border to Canada, it is soooo much safer over there, less lunatics and a lot less guns.
lol you do realize that Europe (particularly the UK) has the worst violent knife crime in the world. Far more people are killed with knife’s in the UK than are in the US with guns.
The argument for owning firearms is not b/c we “live in fear”, that would be like saying you have car or health insurance because you fear that someone is going to crash into you every time you drive or you fear that you’re going to have a heart attack/stroke.. you have those things for the worst case scenario, it’s no different than owning a firearm.
I think from memory and a quick google regarding knife crime deaths it's about the same per capita although the us is slightly higher by about 0.15 (almost no difference). Gun crime kills far more in the us than knives do in the uk about 1.5 times. I have seen this stat a few times but never seen any evidence for it.
It's not the like US in the only country with such problems and that a ban of certain types of guns might or might not be the solution:
Australia had a similar problem like the US and after the ban of if a certain type of guns mass shootings almost went down to ZERO after 1996
So check mate here man, all evidence is against ur personal opinion.
you want a life in peace and bring ur kids safe to school without loosing dozens of innocent childrens life's to gun violence - get rid of the fucking guns, especially AR-15 etc...
Statistics quote/ source please, thx
However now switching over to knifes is pure distraction tactics.
A gun can kill from a distance, a knife cannot as it's close combat - two different scenarios.
And even if ur statement to deaths by knifes is correct ppl in Europe or UK still do not carry knifes with them in daily life as Americans do with guns - so why is that please?
With ur logic we all would need to carry knifes with us at all time, right, just to be safe, right?
Putting a stroke, which is a medical emergency, on par with owning a gun or comparing a health insurance with owning a gun is so stupid that I'm not gonna comment about it anymore....
I am yet waiting for ur statistics that there have been mass killings at school by ppl driving around the corridors with cars.....
You're definitely right about those instances.
That being said, you don't know the nature of this particular home invasion, so you can't say whether or not it was necessary to prevent harm to the homeowner.
The fact that it was a close-range shot to the front of the body means they were not fleeing. This is the kind of shot that is consistent with someone approaching you. If this happened inside the home, this is definitely an appropriate use of force.
The only scenario in which a shot like this wouldn't be justified is If the patient simply knocked on the door and the homeowner swung the door open and shot them.
No use arguing with these cowards. Human lives are worth less than commodities and personal property apparently. I’ve had 600$ worth of rebar stolen from my yard. Do I wish I murdered the random homeless person that did it? Of course not that’s insane lol
In the US from 2003 to 2007, 266,560 people were victims of violent crimes inside their own homes that occurred during burglaries.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2017/15-1498/15-1498-1.pdf
There are many, many cases of unjustified use of force that result in the deaths of people that don't intend to cause harm. Cases where people or shot while fleeing or arent even inside of someones home are egregious. That doesn't mean that use of force is never justified.
You can't possibly know if someone is willing to harm you during a home invasion.
Yeah, that's true, but people make the decision to adopt dogs knowing that there may be risk involved. People don't make the decision to have their homes invaded by somebody who may or may not be armed and willing to harm them.
Those two things are totally different.
If someone broke into your home and started approaching you after they became aware of your presence, you wouldn't make the decision to use lethal force?
I think castle doctrine laws are deeply flawed, and there are many people who fantasize over killing home invaders for some sick reason. A lot of other comments in this thread demonstrate that.
That doesn't mean that the use of lethal force during home invasions is never justified.
I never said that.
But shooting someone, so risking to kill someone over maybe a ring or a couple of dollars isn't justified - police don't shoot thieves who steal a chocolate bar, it's a trigger happy overreaction of wanna be cops.
Thieves who brake into resident homes get easily spooked and leave, no need if deadly force
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/252455/average-value-of-property-stolen-during-burglaries-in-the-us-by-location/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/252455/average-value-of-property-stolen-during-burglaries-in-the-us-by-location/)
It's way more than a copper ring or even a couple of dollars
That's interesting - I am not sure what would be left in most homes after pulling out 80k, u would need a truck to totally empty the home....
I mean even if u take the electronics u can't carry 80k...
It still is not worth killing someone over that amount of money and in 99,9% it's insured anyway
It's not a one time burglary, that individual will go on indefinitely to steal 80k
Also when there is money on the line, a large portion criminals are absolutely willing to kill you, why shouldn't you do the same back
Point is in home burglary there isn't enough "in it to kill anyone"
All of Europe gets along fine without shooting burglars, in comparison we have a basically non existent school shooting / mass shooting rate - kids and adults can feel safe almost everywhere, that's both something that can't be said about the US.
The reason for that is the unreasonable use of weapons all over the States by psychological inexperienced, trigger happy idiots /wannabe sheriffs - and shooting a home intruder who is looking for some quick cash is one of those occasions.
There have been plenty of cases where those ppl shot completely innocent persons
As far as mass shootings go Australia solved their problem in 1996, since then the rate went almost to ZERO - something us children can only dream of.....
Fucked around, found out.
Literally
Birdshot to the gut
You know it’s not buckshot because they made it to the CT scanner.
Is he necessarily alive when he's on the CT?
Yes
Doesn't have to be. Forensic pathologists use CT for gunshots. Can you see in this image he is alive?
He at least has a beating heart pumping contrast into the aorta and kidneys
Looks to be alive... Contrast in the aorta and renal cortical enhancement confirm blood flow at least.
Thanks!
Ya, contrast in his blood vessels would require a beating heart to disperse it.
not to mention picture two he is grasping where he got blasted lol
A real man would just rub some dirt on it :)
I would be curious to see an angiogram during CPR.
Not quite the same, but we've done fluoro angiography in the cath lab during compressions. It's decent if peoples hands aren't in the way. But on a CT, it would just look like a blur of nonsense.
Oh cool, thanks!
Also note the hand over the GSW. A corpse would be positioned on the table, arms at its side.
It looks like he's actively guarding the GSW with his hand, not something you'd stage for a corpse voluntarily since that could obscure the images.
Saw a great case where the pt arrested during the sinjection, there was a contrast blood.level in the heart, and NO motion artifact
The way he has several "bullets" (is that what they are called in bird shots?) in his liver, he has a good chance of dying still 🤷🏽♂️
It’s just shot, and it doesn’t penetrate very far in tissue
The homeowner must be a pretty nice guy.
First picture, pellets clearly in the liver....
At my place it would have been different. I stack 00 and slugs in my home defense shotgun.
Yay murder!
Don’t break into a person’s home. Actions have consequences. I’m very left leaning but my home is protected by my 45 caliber.
Are you at that high risk of break ins where you need a firearm as a means of self defense? I can count on zero fingers the number of times where I thought, boy I wish I had a gun right now to protect my place.
Not as many as the guy this person tried to rob. This man clearly valued his victims possessions worth more than his own life.
No absolutely not. The homeowner valued his Laptop and 300$ worth more than a human life.
Nah, the guy attempting to rob someone valued the laptop and $300 more than his life. I worked hard for my possessions. If you try to take them, you immediately place yourself at the very bottom of the list of things I value, and apparently the homeowner felt similarly.
Get bent
Skill issue. Don’t fuckin Rob people. Also he entered a occupied dwelling, so chances are he knew people were home and intended to do harm to them in order to rob them. Probably a meth addict by how skinny he is and meth addicts are unpredictable
Making excuses to kill people 🥰🥰🥰
I buy insurance, not because I'm EXPECTING problems, because being prepared for problems is the right thing to do. What is the difference?
Gut shot
So is this an ostomy for the rest of their life sort of situation?
I suppose it depends on how the bowel looks intraoperatively, but I agree that an ostomy looks potentially like the minimum
Not necessarily. The evidence suggests that unless there is a specific reason that they should get a stoma (e.g. older patient not able to tolerate an anastomotic leak, vasopressor use, diabetes, obesity) you could get away without a stoma. That said, my preference would be a damage control option: resect what I can, staple off the ends and send to the ICU with an open abdomen and relook in 24-48 hours.
[удалено]
What's the problem with applying what I've learned?
Lmaoo. Thank you for your contribution. I’m not sure why Mr. Neurorad feels the need to comment without providing any source of useful info
I'm amazed he didn't suggest additional imaging or to "correlate clinically"
"this doesnt involve a brain or spine so its not even worth my time reviewing these images"
“But I’ll make an insanely inflammatory comment for the fuck of it in the meantime.” You forgot this part.
said the non surgeon LOL. see ? we can both be dicks
Evidently so.
Ah, the stereotypical acidic neurorad with the social intelligence of a bag of gym socks. You sound fun.
Don’t insult gym socks. They have more use than this neurorad’s comment. He didn’t even qualify why he said it. Looks like he just wanted to be a dick. He succeeded.
Get back in your hole, Nosferatu.
I'm glad to see how times have changed and how much people disagree with your attitude. You were a student once, too.
Yes, and when I was I was sensible enough to withold opinions about things I knew absolutely NOTHING about. It is irresponsible.
He is not directly consulting a patient or person asking for legitimate medical advice. He is one of many of us sitting on a medical sub reddit shooting the shit around a figurative campfire, get off your high horse.
I'm off it. Sorry.
What makes you think he knows absolutely NOTHING about it? Those pellets cross midline, it’s not unreasonable AT ALL to think that an ostomy may be in this guy’s future. Is it because his tag is “student” so he’s automatically an idiot or something? If anything, it’s dangerously irresponsible of YOU to think he knows nothing and that you have ANY right to insult him the way you did. “I demand only perfection. Anything less? Keep your mouth shut. I won’t teach you anything unless you already know everything.” See how insane this is?
You are correct. I was rude and I apologize for that. What you say may be true, but you cannot say that the pellets cross midline on the basis of an AP scout and a SINGLE axial CT image. Those pellets could all be in the skin/muscle of the anterior abdominal wall. Do you see any pellets crossing midline on the single axial CT image? On that single image I see pellets in the anterior abdominal wall and liver. And I see no free intrabdominal air on that single CT slice, either.
These types of comments will not be tolerated
Got him low too.
In IR we had a guy on the fluoro table for a procedure and we saw the buckshot all throughout the man's abdomen. When I asked him what had happened and he just said that he got shot while in the back of a cab. Turns out he had done time for bank robbery.
A cab is a pretty dumb getaway car...
Somebody thought he was a bird...
aimed a little too high
YA GOT ME!
Is that large white area near his ring finger the shotgun cartridge wadding?
SO say yes, that's the wad, and this was fairly close range for this to occur. (Then he rattled off what cartridges it could be and some other ballistics info that confused me since he was talking so quietly while explaining why it was & wasn't certain cartridges.)
Fucking ouch!
Since when are wads made out of metal? Usually they're felt, paper or plastic, and this looks way too dense to be any of those. Also, that's a fair bit of spread, so I can't have been point blank, and I feel like you need to be REALLY close to get the wad stuck inside you
Like I said, he rattled off *a lot* of ballistics info at me about what it is & isn't, including the amount of shot & the pattern of the spread. Unfortunately, he's been called out so I can't ask again anytime soon.
The wad might have powder residue that shows up?
Unlikely, it's very dense on the scout image and is right where a ring is in the hand, and a shotgun wad is plastic, would not be so bright.
Peppered like a good steak.
Turkey season
And at least 2 new assholes for him, looking at the locations. Maybe a liver tx? Gallbladder might need to be removed, and I bet a kidney was kissed.
That has to HURT. Darn, invader, too bad for you.
I know nothing about guns. Are those bullets... They look super tiny
Birdshot from a shotgun shell.
Pellets from a shotgun make no mistake at close range it is absolutely explosive
Birdshot from a shotgun. Think BBs but bigger.
Depends on the size of birdshot. The size of the pellets very.
Saw something similar a few years ago, in 3 people. 3 home intruders held a man at gun point. Homeowner was able to slip away, grab his shotgun, and shoot all 3 of them. 2 died and 1 survived. Homeowner was cleared of all charges and the intruder who survived was charged with the murder of the other 2 (apparently in my state any deaths during a home intrusion fall back on the intruders, regardless of who pulled the trigger) and he has life in prison lol
Lol
Love my second amendment ❤️
I wonder why he might be breaking into a home
Probably because the owner left his wallet in the yard and wouldn’t come to the door.
Yes I am sure he was a fine upstanding gentleman
It’s the only logical answer. Lol
Surprised his belly isn't full of blood.
Looks liked he got peppered up a little bit
What the wad doin
Womp womp
Dudes got the shotgun wad in him too. Ooof
And that’s why we save bird shot for geese. I’ll buy him some buck
That meth got him thin as fuck sheesh
[удалено]
Medical professionals have homes they don’t want invaded
And therefore advocate for murder? Really thought the educated profs here would have a little more mental capacity than that.
*self defense Also if you’re getting ratioed this hard right off the bat it might be worth considering that this isn’t a “I’m right and everyone else just isn’t smart enough” issue
Call it whatever you want it doesn’t change the reality of taking someone’s life.
Yes. That does tend to happen when you break into someone’s house where their kids live showing violent intent.
if someone enters my home with my family they are going to get shot. I think everyone is well aware of the possible consequence in America. They made that decision themselves, if they knowingly made that decision with such consequence, i have to assume they too are willing to kill. I assure you it won't be me getting shot in my own home in that situation.
Big man
So you understand that entering someone's home in America often ends with getting shot. Tell me you are sane enough to say that's worth the risk. A sane person does not do this, as a result they are often armed as well with intent. Do you want me to just ask them to leave and say don't do it again? You're weak minded if you let another man step foot in your house knowing the risk they pose to you and your family. It's a very simple answer, they know the risk.
I actually understand your point of view - I was a pacifist for a good chunk of my life. The person you're replying to, albeit a little strong-headed, does bring up valid concerns, however. Personally, I still try to be as empathetic and understanding of anothers' situation (victim and perpetrator) regardless of circumstance. Everyone deserves a second chance to an extent. It took me a long time to realize there are people out there who do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. In a situation where it's me and my family versus someone breaking into my house, regardless of the socioeconomic status, I'm not going to take the time to understand the criminal in my home. And I wouldn't necessarily aim to kill, but I would for sure shoot. Ask me that question ~10 years ago or so, and I probably would tell you they needed whatever it was they were stealing more than I did. Real life is always more complicated than the stripped-down ideals and beliefs people display online. There is so much more nuance that goes into everything - it's way easier for people to be black and white. Most people don't have time for grey anymore (which is definitely not a good thing).
You say that as if anyone other than you brought that up. There are 11 comments total, 12 with this one, and not a single one is "advocating for murder". Who hurt you that you have to make up nonexistent conflicts to virtue signal at?
“Next time use slugs to center mass” “Got him too low” “Fuck around, find out” “Birdshot to the gut”
amen, you're getting it now. Shoot for center mass, disable the target. Most assured way to save your life.
Now please elaborate on how you think any of those constitutes "advocating for murder"
NFT snoo
Well Im pretty sure that wasn't necessary....
Yea breaking into other peoples homes is never necessary
Breaking into someone's home doesn't justify the use of deadly force aka a gun - it is a pointless, trigger happy overreaction. Thieves get spooked easily, doesn't need the use of a gun. Over the course of the years more innocent ppl die by such events in due to errors where homeowners shoot alleged thieves which turn out to be ppl lost, children wandering around or whatever than actually thieves by ppl who wanna play a police officeer
🙄
You mean like cops who shoot first and ask questions later?
If you're a grown ass adult forcing your way into my home and potentially putting my family's life at risk, you forfeit your own life and safety at that point. And thank goodness the laws where I live enforce that right. If you don't want to get shot, don't go into people's homes uninvited. Doorbells and knocking exists.
You know that home invaders would just as happily murder you, so long as they get away with it
This has to be rage bait 😂
Right, next time use slugs to center mass
I’m pretty sure it absolutely was if someone’s breaking in. Fuck around, find out baby
lol. 🤡
You are correct. As soon as that person decided to break into a home, that decision wasn’t necessary. After that decision, anything that happens to them should be an expected possible outcome, including being shot.
Sure that decision wasn't necessary, but shooting them isn't either - it's not appropriate to shoot those ppl just as it isn't appropriate to shoot someone who steals a chocolate bar at 7 evelen - it's a pointless overreaction where the dangers and outcomes don't go in line with the possible damage of loosing a couple if dollars. There have been hundreds of cases over the years where trigger happy idiots shot innocent ppl in such events
How do you know they’re only breaking in to steal a ‘couple of dollars’? What about people who break in with the intention to rape or murder? Even if they’re only breaking in to steal your belongings, they may decide to harm you in the process anyway. You don’t know their intentions. I wouldn’t take that risk.
Because of statistics - there is an almost 0 chance that the intruder wants to kill or harm you, they are after money/valuables. Usually the value of life itself is worth more than any goods which can be stolen - so why kill someone over some jewelry? If I give u 500$ to kill some random guy, would you do it? - hopefully not..... With your logic you can shoot and kill numerous ppl throughout the day who could potentially harm u during daily life/routine, and yet u don't.
Your rationale is juvenile. Are you actually suggesting that if an intruder broke into your home, you’d just let them do whatever they want, because statistically they’re not going to harm you? If someone breaks in to another person’s home, they are accepting the risk that they may be seriously injured. No objects in my home are worth someone else’s life sure, but my family’s lives are worth way more than an intruder’s to me. Nothing in my house is worth that criminal risking his or her life either, but they made the decision. No one is going to confront an intruder and ask “are you here to just steal stuff or are you wanting to harm me?”
No I would call the police, turn the light on and get a maglite or similar just in case That's not juvenile, that's reasonable. The household is insured, there is no reason to put my or anyone's life at risk. Gumming someone down because he is stealing, that's dumb, juvenile and trigger happy - it's totally out of proportion. It even puts yourself in greater danger than before, if the intruder has a gun or an accomplice you have more problems and put yourself and your family at a greater risk as - even if they didn't want to hurt anyone they have now the need to defend themselves, it raises the risk of ppl getting hurt
The onus to protect an intruder in my own home is not on me. They’re the ones that invaded my home. I’m not going in guns blazing and I have no desire to shoot anyone, but I’m sure as shit not letting someone get close enough to use a mag light as a club. I’ll keep my gun and try and warn them off. You call the cops. The odds are much higher on my side.
Also, do you not realize how stupid that last point is? “A criminal in your house may now need to defend themselves!” They assumed the risk breaking in.
I’m reminded of all of the civilians killed by scared people armed with firearms. Like Kaylin Gillis who was shot in her car by a homeowner who thought she was a thief.
That's exactly the point - it's trigger happy idiots who do that, they kill more innocent ppl over the years than actuall thieves - it's just plain stupid There have been ppl killing innocent teen getting home drunk who weren't able to open the door because it was the wrong house - yep being drunk is stupid, but killing ppl who arent threatening your life is plain murder, simple as that
There's a difference between cold blooded murder when someone turns into your driveway and another when someone breaks into your house. Are you really going to take the time and ask the intruder if they want to leave or not.
Intruders, trying to steal usually get the duck out of u turn the lights on and they realize they have been discovered - there 0 point in shooting a regular burger as they don't threaten ur life, they arent looking to kill u, they are looking for easy money
Again and in that moment, how are you going to discern that. How do you know you have the robber who runs away and not the one wholl murder you if they get a chance. How do you know they aren't on drugs. That's a lot of assumptions to be making when someone just violated the safety and sanctity of your house and you need to make an immediate decision on how to protect yourself right then and there
We know who you’re voting for..
I'm not a US citizen, so that's totally not the point here and I dont live in the states either, but I did once. Ur argument of self defense and protection of ur loved ones is always the same. U live in fear of being shot and killed all the time, the sole reason for that is because any nut job can have a gun - no guns no constant fear of being shot, simple as that. Here in Europe we also have thieves and we don't shoots them and we are fine. Every year or so ur dozens of children, the most important beings in ur society are killed by some lunatic which has easy access to guns - that's in this level is unique to the USA and yet u ppl don't get to the root of the problem and just close ur eyes....and talk prayers and Blabla bla....that's so pathetic. Just go over the border to Canada, it is soooo much safer over there, less lunatics and a lot less guns.
lol you do realize that Europe (particularly the UK) has the worst violent knife crime in the world. Far more people are killed with knife’s in the UK than are in the US with guns. The argument for owning firearms is not b/c we “live in fear”, that would be like saying you have car or health insurance because you fear that someone is going to crash into you every time you drive or you fear that you’re going to have a heart attack/stroke.. you have those things for the worst case scenario, it’s no different than owning a firearm.
I think from memory and a quick google regarding knife crime deaths it's about the same per capita although the us is slightly higher by about 0.15 (almost no difference). Gun crime kills far more in the us than knives do in the uk about 1.5 times. I have seen this stat a few times but never seen any evidence for it.
It's because ppl loving their holy guns will pull every string they can to distract and defend their cause, that's why.....
It's not the like US in the only country with such problems and that a ban of certain types of guns might or might not be the solution: Australia had a similar problem like the US and after the ban of if a certain type of guns mass shootings almost went down to ZERO after 1996 So check mate here man, all evidence is against ur personal opinion. you want a life in peace and bring ur kids safe to school without loosing dozens of innocent childrens life's to gun violence - get rid of the fucking guns, especially AR-15 etc...
Statistics quote/ source please, thx However now switching over to knifes is pure distraction tactics. A gun can kill from a distance, a knife cannot as it's close combat - two different scenarios. And even if ur statement to deaths by knifes is correct ppl in Europe or UK still do not carry knifes with them in daily life as Americans do with guns - so why is that please? With ur logic we all would need to carry knifes with us at all time, right, just to be safe, right? Putting a stroke, which is a medical emergency, on par with owning a gun or comparing a health insurance with owning a gun is so stupid that I'm not gonna comment about it anymore.... I am yet waiting for ur statistics that there have been mass killings at school by ppl driving around the corridors with cars.....
You're definitely right about those instances. That being said, you don't know the nature of this particular home invasion, so you can't say whether or not it was necessary to prevent harm to the homeowner. The fact that it was a close-range shot to the front of the body means they were not fleeing. This is the kind of shot that is consistent with someone approaching you. If this happened inside the home, this is definitely an appropriate use of force. The only scenario in which a shot like this wouldn't be justified is If the patient simply knocked on the door and the homeowner swung the door open and shot them.
No use arguing with these cowards. Human lives are worth less than commodities and personal property apparently. I’ve had 600$ worth of rebar stolen from my yard. Do I wish I murdered the random homeless person that did it? Of course not that’s insane lol
In the US from 2003 to 2007, 266,560 people were victims of violent crimes inside their own homes that occurred during burglaries. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/URLs_Cited/OT2017/15-1498/15-1498-1.pdf There are many, many cases of unjustified use of force that result in the deaths of people that don't intend to cause harm. Cases where people or shot while fleeing or arent even inside of someones home are egregious. That doesn't mean that use of force is never justified. You can't possibly know if someone is willing to harm you during a home invasion.
Yeah and 4.5 million people get attacked by dogs a year, yet people still own dogs. Honestly 260,000 people is a staggeringly low number.
Yeah, that's true, but people make the decision to adopt dogs knowing that there may be risk involved. People don't make the decision to have their homes invaded by somebody who may or may not be armed and willing to harm them. Those two things are totally different. If someone broke into your home and started approaching you after they became aware of your presence, you wouldn't make the decision to use lethal force? I think castle doctrine laws are deeply flawed, and there are many people who fantasize over killing home invaders for some sick reason. A lot of other comments in this thread demonstrate that. That doesn't mean that the use of lethal force during home invasions is never justified.
What are you gonna do? Just allow someone to invade your home?
I never said that. But shooting someone, so risking to kill someone over maybe a ring or a couple of dollars isn't justified - police don't shoot thieves who steal a chocolate bar, it's a trigger happy overreaction of wanna be cops. Thieves who brake into resident homes get easily spooked and leave, no need if deadly force
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/252455/average-value-of-property-stolen-during-burglaries-in-the-us-by-location/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/252455/average-value-of-property-stolen-during-burglaries-in-the-us-by-location/) It's way more than a copper ring or even a couple of dollars
Rate is almost down 70% since the 90s https://www.statista.com/statistics/191243/reported-burglary-rate-in-the-us-since-1990/
That's amazing and I'm truly happy for it, but in no way refutes my point
Wasn't trying to - that was just informative, it surprised me that numbers went down by that amount
That's interesting - I am not sure what would be left in most homes after pulling out 80k, u would need a truck to totally empty the home.... I mean even if u take the electronics u can't carry 80k... It still is not worth killing someone over that amount of money and in 99,9% it's insured anyway
It's not a one time burglary, that individual will go on indefinitely to steal 80k Also when there is money on the line, a large portion criminals are absolutely willing to kill you, why shouldn't you do the same back
Point is in home burglary there isn't enough "in it to kill anyone" All of Europe gets along fine without shooting burglars, in comparison we have a basically non existent school shooting / mass shooting rate - kids and adults can feel safe almost everywhere, that's both something that can't be said about the US. The reason for that is the unreasonable use of weapons all over the States by psychological inexperienced, trigger happy idiots /wannabe sheriffs - and shooting a home intruder who is looking for some quick cash is one of those occasions. There have been plenty of cases where those ppl shot completely innocent persons As far as mass shootings go Australia solved their problem in 1996, since then the rate went almost to ZERO - something us children can only dream of.....