Would you shoot a home invader?

[dies-l]

Luke 22:36

The is an oft cited proof text in these types of discussions. Generally, however, I tend to think that when one's position relies almost exclusively on one word in one verse of Scripture, that position should be embraced with the greatest of caution.

 

[brinny]

It has nothing to do with where I live. My comment is based on experience that comes with actively participating in the criminal justice system. I am around criminals everyday, and my experience has been that for every one that is genuinely a threat to my safety, there are 20-30 who are just dope fiends looking to score their next buzz.

But, my point is this: the OP was about "home invaders". It was not about rapists or murderers. It is frankly dishonest and downright obscene to claim or even insinuate that those of us who said that we would not shoot a home invader would "allow him to rape our mothers." You can disagree with me in the choice that I would make (I wouldn't even have a gun in my house in the first place.) I am just asking you to be honest in expressing your disagreement.

many times in our city the home invaders shoot the unfortunates in the home before the unfortunates have a chance to blink...including children...

 

[dies-l]

many times in our city the home invaders shoot the unfortunates in the home before the unfortunates have a chance to blink...including children...

Do you have statistics that bear this out?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
many times in our city the home invaders shoot the unfortunates in the home before the unfortunates have a chance to blink...including children...

Do you have statistics that bear this out?

the home invasions, many times, are rooted in the drug wars...and gang activity that is prevalent here.

Unfortunately, if someone targets your house, most likely they've already decided your fate before settin' foot in the place.

Gang activity and initiations are senseless. Members being initiated are given status for killings. Our city is run over with gang activity.

The only ones "carrying" besides the police are the gangsta's and the drug cartel and their co-horts. it's easy pickins here. Most citizens huddle in fear in their homes hopin it doesn't happen to them next. Older people whisper when they call 911 cuz they're terrified the drug dealers and the gangsta's will over hear them and "get" them next.

The entire city is in a malaise. There's this philosophy that permeates the minds of most here...and it's to their own demise....it's "don't tell".

I'm a 911 Operator. It's a heck of a job, but somebody's gotta do it.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

For both of you that I quoted down below, I'm not going to wait so that I can ask the home invader whether he plans on killing me or raping me.

The bottom line is that if you're in my house uninvited, be prepared to look down the barrel of my shotgun. I don't really care why you're there.

I have never read Scripture of Jesus harming another person, that is all I can say. You may live your life as you please, but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord as we have been called, through unwaivering peace and love. Righteousness is not defined by violence, but rather the just reaction. Even if the believer holds themselves to the laws of "an eye for an eye", a mere invader of a home is not equivalent to murder or rape.

It has nothing to do with where I live. My comment is based on experience that comes with actively participating in the criminal justice system. I am around criminals everyday, and my experience has been that for every one that is genuinely a threat to my safety, there are 20-30 who are just dope fiends looking to score their next buzz.

But, my point is this: the OP was about "home invaders". It was not about rapists or murderers. It is frankly dishonest and downright obscene to claim or even insinuate that those of us who said that we would not shoot a home invader would "allow him to rape our mothers." You can disagree with me in the choice that I would make (I wouldn't even have a gun in my house in the first place.) I am just asking you to be honest in expressing your disagreement.

 

[Dark_Lite]

I have never read Scripture of Jesus harming another person, that is all I can say. You may live your life as you please, but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord as we have been called, through unwaivering peace and love. Righteousness is not defined by violence, but rather the just reaction. Even if the believer holds themselves to the laws of "an eye for an eye", a mere invader of a home is not equivalent to murder or rape.

Human morality tends to become much more vague and flexible when one is placed into a situation that threatens the safety of themselves or people they care about. The phrase "desperate times call for desperate measures" exists for a reason. In extreme situations, our moral boundaries become tried and taxed, and in many cases eventually fray.

If someone invading your house was directly threatening you and your family, I bet you would find that your willingness to do whatever it takes to keep yourself and your family safe would outweigh any absolute stance you take on morality.

Now, this isn't to say that our normal moral views won't keep the more extreme version of ourselves in check. Someone who is adamantly against guns probably doesn't even have a gun in their house in the first place, and wouldn't think of killing--but perhaps some other form of disablement (frying pan to the back of the head?) is not necessarily out of the question.

 

[ebia]

Why did God call David the "apple of His eye"?

Jesus has moved us on from where David was at. We don't live on David's side of the cross. As I said before, your whole thinking is an effective denial of what the cross is all about.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Why did God call David the "apple of His eye"?

Jesus has moved us on from where David was at. We don't live on David's side of the cross. As I said before, your whole thinking is an effective denial of what the cross is all about.

God chose David as part of the lineage of Jesus the Christ, His only begotten Son, because David was righteous.

There was a reason that still stands to this day, of why God called David the "apple of His eye".

 

[ebia]

God chose David as part of the lineage of Jesus the Christ, His only begotten Son, because David was righteous.

There was a reason that still stands to this day, of why God called David the "apple of His eye".

I'm sorry, but you've completely missed what Jesus and the cross is all about - you're still at stage of John and James earning their nickname.

 

[Zebra1552]

Would you shoot a home invader?

Why or why not?

Yup. Not a moment's hesitation. Of course... I might be better off without my airsoft shotgun... Much better accuracy, and I probably wouldn't have it handy anyway. Safe to say I probably wouldn't need it. It'd be fairly easy to take them down without the use of a weapon, statistically speaking. And if it wouldn't be for some reason, there'd be plenty of weapons lying around for me to use. I'm not very picky.

But why would I shoot them? Well, simply for inconveniencing me. I have better things to do than defend my home from some idiot... a few welts would be a good deterrent.

 

[Zebra1552]

Do you not realise that you are denying what the cross is all about? That the way evil is defeated is not through violence but through the upside-down power of Jesus' self-sacrificial love. By letting evil do its worst to him and coming out the other side in the resurrection.

I tell you what. You go hug the guy who's holding a gun to your wife/kids/friends/loved one and you let me know how that goes. While you're at it, let me know where you pull an idea of Jesus being a pacifist. Because it's certainly not in the Bible.

 

[dies-l]

For both of you that I quoted down below, I'm not going to wait so that I can ask the home invader whether he plans on killing me or raping me.

The bottom line is that if you're in my house uninvited, be prepared to look down the barrel of my shotgun. I don't really care why you're there.

I understand the sentiment. I don't completely agree, but I understand. What I do not understand is this nonsensical accusation that those who would not be so quick to resort to violence would simply let someone "rape our mother".

 

[dies-l]

I tell you what. You go hug the guy who's holding a gun to your wife/kids/friends/loved one and you let me know how that goes. While you're at it, let me know where you pull an idea of Jesus being a pacifist. Because it's certainly not in the Bible.

Yeah, Jesus would never say anything like "turn the other cheek." And, he certainly would never heal a person who was part of a mob that was trying to capture, torture, and murder him or rebuke his disciple for resorting to violence in such a situation. Completely not at all like the Jesus of the Bible.

 

[Zebra1552]

Yeah, Jesus would never say anything like "turn the other cheek."

Context. That was talking about insults, not people who actually wish to do you physical harm. And if you want to take it to include physical violence, then why did Jesus whip the money changers at the temple? He'd be a hypocrite.

And, he certainly would never heal a person who was part of a mob that was trying to capture, torture, and murder him or rebuke his disciple for resorting to violence in such a situation. Completely not at all like the Jesus of the Bible.

Again, context. Jesus was supposed to die at their hands. You know, for the sins of the world?

Like I said. Jesus is not a pacifist and there is nothing in the Bible to support the idea that He is. Perhaps before you try to school me in who Jesus was and is, sir, you should read your Bible in whole rather than in part.

 

[ebia]

I tell you what. You go hug the guy who's holding a gun to your wife/kids/friends/loved one and you let me know how that goes. While you're at it, let me know where you pull an idea of Jesus being a pacifist. Because it's certainly not in the Bible.

It certainly is in the bible, which was read exclusively that way for the first couple of hundred years of Christian history.

But my point here as not to make the case for a completely pacificist approach here and now in our imperfect lives (others can and do make a case for, say Just War - I don't agree, but the case can be made) , but to point out that to think the Jesus way is ultimately about a violent solution has completely missed the entire point of the cross. It's missed every time Jesus says "my Kingdom doesn't work that way". It's missed the point of what Paul meant when he said the cross was foolishness to the greeks.

Like I said. Jesus is not a pacifist and there is nothing in the Bible to support the idea that He is.

Either you aren't reading the same New Testament or you've completely missed almost everything that it's about.

 

[Zebra1552]

It certainly is in the bible, which was read exclusively that way for the first couple of hundred years of Christian history.

Really? Prove it. Show me that Jesus was actually against the use of violence to resolve any situation- specifically your home being invaded by a stranger for some purpose or another- be it theft or violence.

But my point here as not to make the case for a completely pacificist approach here and now in our imperfect lives (others can and do make a case for, say Just War - I don't agree, but the case can be made) , but to point out that to think the Jesus way is ultimately about a violent solution has completely missed the entire point of the cross. It's missed every time Jesus says "my Kingdom doesn't work that way". It's missed the point of what Paul meant when he said the cross was foolishness to the greeks.

I really don't care what Jesus was or wasn't about in your opinion. That's not the subject. The subject is whether or not you would shoot a home invader and why you would or would not. 'Jesus wouldn't' isn't a reason. Jesus never had a home to BE invaded upon and gave no instruction to that kind of situation. His instruction was on how to treat people in general, not on what to do if they want to harm you or someone you love. The Bible isn't an instruction manual.

Either you aren't reading the same New Testament or you've completely missed almost everything that it's about.

Really? I'd love to see you try and prove that. Perhaps while you're at it you can enlighten me about what the NT is about and what its purpose is, as well as where you get this information.

 

[ebia]

Really? Prove it. Show me that Jesus was actually against the use of violence to resolve any situation- specifically your home being invaded by a stranger for some purpose or another- be it theft or violence.

Little orange shape in the middle of this smilee:

I really don't care what Jesus was or wasn't about in your opinion.

Then I'm not sure what sensible conversation can be had about Christian behaviour.

 

[Zebra1552]

Little orange shape in the middle of this smilee:

Jesus' death and resurrection has nothing to do with home invasion. If Jesus' death and resurrection is the NT's entire purpose, then it is you who needs to reread it.

Then I'm not sure what sensible conversation can be had about Christian behaviour.

Then you're missing the point: I don't care what you say. I care what the evidence says. Do you have any?

 

[Yarddog]

I can understand households having guns in very high-crime areas; but otherwise why would ordinary households (who don't do any gun-related sports or activities) want to have guns?

I think the media has developed a culture of fear here. I hear so many people talking about how we used to never lock our doors at night. Which was true for us.

Why people started living with a touch of fear lies within news coverage and the shows we watch on TV or in movies, IMHO.

What has happened in American culture that has made you so fearful that you believe you need to always have weapons to protect yourself?

I have never owned a gun and hope that I never feel the need to, though I have no problem with those that do. As I have said, I think that is our media and Hollywood.

I used to work in what was considered the worst part of our city. I am white and the area was poor and black. I heard people talk about that area all the time. 90% of the yearly murders occurred there but most of them were all drug related.

I worked there for 23 years and most of the time I worked alone inspecting and repairing railroad tracks. There was not one single time that I was treated with disrespect. There was not one single that I treated them with disrespect.

I had no fear of walking into any local store at lunch and then parking under a shade tree and taking a nap with my windows open.

I know that there were some bad people in that area but 99% of them were just regular people wanting to have a good life. It is the thought of what could happen that drives fear.

What does type of law(s) does the USA make when this type of thing happens? (I really don't know so that is a serious question).

I don't know of laws which have been enacted by a serial killer but there may be curfews put into effect until the killer is found.

Certain cities have enacted gun laws to try and curb murders.
Gun laws in the United States (by state) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ebia]

That has no relation to the discussion at hand.

It has everything to do with the discussion at hand. Because the cross - self-sacrifice - is the Jesus way of dealing with what is wrong in the world.

Then you're missing the point: I don't care what you say. I care what the evidence says. Do you have any?

You already have all the evidence - I assume you have a copy of the New Testament.