Burglars Hit Home of Gun Owner ID’d by Newspaper

[regulator 0]

Quote

Quote

How can an inanimate object cause a crime to be committed? That would be the same as saying the ground caused you to hook turn and break your femur.

I did not say the gun caused the crime, I said the PRESENCE of the gun caused the crime. In other words it was the bait that attracted the burglars.
If all you people have to defend yourselves is word games then I take it that my argument has ore validity.

the bait wouldnt be available for common public knowledge if it werent for the newspaper outing law abiding citizens. What part of this are you having difficulty understanding? Obviously all of it because you refuse to pull your head out of the sand and continue to say completely absurd illogical statements.

[davjohns 1]

So, if a woman has a vagina present, it is that presence that causes rape?

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[regulator 0]

Are we secretly talking about liberals?

[DocPop 1]

Quote

Quote

In that case, the gun was directly responsible for the break-in. Therefore, in this case, the presence of the gun caused a crime to be committed.

Nobody else is playing word games. Whether you blame the object or the presence of the object is a word game. You are placing blame on something that cannot manifest internt, nor act on that intent. People commit crimes. They are directly responsbile for their actions. Blaming an object is not logical.

I never used the word blame.

Clearly the people are to blame, but the gun was the bait.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[DocPop 1]

Quote

So, if a woman has a vagina present, it is that presence that causes rape?

OK - that's it. I am done with this.

You people are just crazy and it concerns me that it's the likes of you that want lethal force on everyone's hip.

I hope nobody ever murders your kids with a "legal" firearm.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[rehmwa 2]

anyone -

how is it assumed in the first place that the thief went to this house because of the list?

all I see is a house got broke into, and a safe was screwed with (SURPRISE - a thief will muck about with a safe.)

after that, a bunch of people jumping to conclusions.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[regulator 0]

dont let the door hit your ass on the way out.

[DocPop 1]

Quote

dont let the door hit your ass on the way out.

That's exactly what I am talking about.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

In that case, the gun was directly responsible for the break-in. Therefore, in this case, the presence of the gun caused a crime to be committed.

Nobody else is playing word games. Whether you blame the object or the presence of the object is a word game. You are placing blame on something that cannot manifest internt, nor act on that intent. People commit crimes. They are directly responsbile for their actions. Blaming an object is not logical.

I never used the word blame.

Clearly the people are to blame, but the gun was the bait.

so if a newspaper published your address in a list of people who owned expensive jewelry (pretending you do) and the burglars waited until you left, broke in, attempted to steal your fine jewelry, but failed, would then the presence of jewelry have "caused a crime to be committed"?

--
Rob

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

dont let the door hit your ass on the way out.

That's exactly what I am talking about.

Need a tissue?

[regulator 0]

I hope nobody ever murders your kids with a "legal" firearm.

I hope nobody murders your kid with any instrument. In general I hope we can live in a place where there is no evil. Yet I refuse to bend over and take it if I have the opportunity to defend myself and my family.

[lawrocket 3]

There are plenty of arguments going around. Some of the more silly are similar to, “If she didn’t have a purse then her purse would not have been snatched.” Or, “If she didn’t have a car then she wouldn’t have been carjacked.”

All matters of but-for. But for the fella having a gun he wouldn’t have been published on the list. But-for the publication of the list then he wouldn’t have been burgled. Blah. Quade, of course, makes a point that we certainly have a correlation but little evidence of “causation.” And Quade’s point is quite valid.

Meanwhile, I am looking at the issue differently. Said a legislator:

Quote

“The Journal News has placed the lives of these folks at risk by creating a virtual shopping list for criminals and nut jobs,” said Ball. “If the connection is proven, this is further proof that these maps are not only an invasion of privacy but that they present a clear and present danger to law-abiding, private citizens.”

The article went on that:

Quote

Ball is introducing legislation Monday to protect the names of New Yorkers who have legally obtained gun permits.

This, to me, presents some First Amendment issues. Like it or not, such a law would be a prior restraint of free speech. I don’t like those. Unless the law is to prevent the state or localities from releasing the names of those with gun permits. That I don’t have a problem with.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[champu 1]

Quote

how is it assumed in the first place that the thief went to this house because of the list?

all I see is a house got broke into, and a safe was screwed with (SURPRISE - a thief will muck about with a safe.)

Thus far that's all it seems to be...

Quote

A White Plains residence pinpointed on a controversial handgun permit database was burglarized Saturday, and the burglars' target was the homeowner's gun safe.

At least two burglars broke into a home on Davis Avenue at 9:30 p.m. Saturday but were unsuccessful in an attempt to open the safe, which contained legally owned weapons, according to a law enforcement source. One suspect was taken into custody, the source said.

The gun owner was not home when the burglary occurred, the source said. The victim, who is in his 70s, told Newsday on Sunday that he did not want to comment while the police investigation continues.

"The police are doing a full investigation," the man said through a partially opened front door.

There was broken glass in the backyard Sunday and a ladder leading up to a second-story window. Neighbors on the street of modest, Colonial homes said they had heard about the burglary.

The homeowner's name and address were included recently on the controversial interactive map of gun permit holders in Westchester and Rockland counties published on The Journal News' website.

Neighbor John Mascia said he thought the gun permit database should not have been published.

"I could [not] care less what they have in their home," Mascia said.

Police are investigating what role, if any, the database played in the burglars' decision to target the home, the law enforcement source said.

http://newyork.newsday.com/westchester/journal-news-gun-permit-map-used-by-burglars-to-target-white-plains-home-1.4441678

I can't find an article that describes the circumstances under which one of the suspects was arrested and the other was at large. Caught in the act and the other got away? Left fingerprints and only one had priors? Was anything else taken or does it appear they went right for the safe?

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

anyone -

how is it assumed in the first place that the thief went to this house because of the list?

all I see is a house got broke into, and a safe was screwed with (SURPRISE - a thief will muck about with a safe.)

after that, a bunch of people jumping to conclusions.....

From the article:

"...a state lawmaker said it appears the burglars may have used the newspaper’s map to target the residence."

“The police are doing a full investigation,” the unidentified man told NewsDay. Police said it appears the burglars targeted the homeowner’s gun safe.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

anyone -

how is it assumed in the first place that the thief went to this house because of the list?

all I see is a house got broke into, and a safe was screwed with (SURPRISE - a thief will muck about with a safe.)

after that, a bunch of people jumping to conclusions.....

From the article:

"...a state lawmaker said it appears the burglars may have used the newspaper’s map to target the residence."

“The police are doing a full investigation,” the unidentified man told NewsDay. Police said it appears the burglars targeted the homeowner’s gun safe.

1 - that a law maker "Said it appears" - that's nothing
2 - the fact that a thief targets a safe is nothing earth shattering. If was a thief and I came across a SAFE (any kind of safe, including a gun safe) I'd take some time and try to get in. That's where the valuable items are kept. no kidding

I don't like the fact that a newspaper printed a list of people that own something valuable and put it out there. The analogy of printing a list of people that owned a lot of jewelry is absolutely analogous. But whether that list is directly causal to this particular robbery? I don't know or care. We can't know unless the thieves are caught and say so.


However, that random speculation does open up a good discussion topic.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[champu 1]

Quote

We can't know unless the thieves are caught and say so.

Well, if they broke into the house, ransacked the place, tried to break open the safe for a while, gave up, and left without taking anything else, that would at least give credence to the hypothesis.

Or if one of the guys has or used a computer the judge subpoenas, and the internet history includes the published maps...



If they just admit that's what they did without other evidence then I'll have to assume they made a deal to say that in exchange for a lighter sentence so that the gun lobby has ammo to use against the liberal paper.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

If they just admit that's what they did without other evidence then I'll have to assume they made a deal to say that in exchange for a lighter sentence so that the gun lobby has ammo to use against the liberal paper.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[chutem 0]

People are missing a problem here. If you look at this the other way the newspaper published the location of gun free homes for burgulars.

Picture this "hey bubba is 123 first street on the list"?
"NO, ok lets see what they got".

[Pteropuss 0]

Quote

People are missing a problem here. If you look at this the other way the newspaper published the location of gun free homes for burgulars.
Picture this "hey bubba is 123 first street on the list"?
"NO, ok lets see what they got".

That perspective is like the idea behind concealed handgun carry. The idea is that if some percentage of the population is carrying armed defense, and the bad guys can't identify which ones, then they'll leave all of them alone, because they can't predict who might respond with deadly force. Thus, all citizens become more safe, even those who are not carrying a gun, because of the doubt placed into the minds of the criminals.

So yes, the publication of homes with guns, also indirectly gave the criminals a list of relatively safe homes which they can target, because they are less likely to meet armed resistance if someone is home when they break in.

[billvon 2,476]

>So yes, the publication of homes with guns, also indirectly gave the criminals a list of
>relatively safe homes which they can target, because they are less likely to meet
>armed resistance if someone is home when they break in.

So people who put up "this property protected by Smith and Wesson" signs are helping out criminals. Interesting.

[chutem 0]

Yes, in two ways.

1 It would be safer to break in somewhere else.

2 If you are looking for guns there is probably one here.

[OHCHUTE 0]

They should deputise every law abiding citizen, allow them to carry a gun if they want and be able to shoot any person they see who has any gun out of a holster. That ought to cure the problem. Make a law you can only take your gun out of your holster upon shooting another person who has their gun out of their holsters. This way no one would dare take their gun out of their holster in public. All the criminals could easily be identified. Hey, hes' got his gun out etc.

Any questions?

Look all this gun BS started when they gave up guns and let the sherriff carry the gun. We need to go back to cowboy days.
Just loved watching those elementary school teachers in TX shoot at targets. WOW that was sweet. Bang Bang Bang Yeehaw

[BillyVance 34]

If a gun owner wants to protect his/her home and firearms from burglars when the house is unoccupied, just rig up a motion sensor system around the exterior that when triggered, a recording starts of 2 or 3 large dogs barking furiously for a minute or two, and loud enough to carry through the walls/doors/windows. And make sure there's no way for the douchebags to look inside.

That or a house alarm, if you are okay with a police response time of 3-5 minutes.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[davjohns 1]

Quote

Quote

So, if a woman has a vagina present, it is that presence that causes rape?

OK - that's it. I am done with this.

You people are just crazy and it concerns me that it's the likes of you that want lethal force on everyone's hip.

I hope nobody ever murders your kids with a "legal" firearm.

More emotion based argument.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

Quote

anyone -

how is it assumed in the first place that the thief went to this house because of the list?

all I see is a house got broke into, and a safe was screwed with (SURPRISE - a thief will muck about with a safe.)

after that, a bunch of people jumping to conclusions.....

I agree with this. Some causal connection would be nice. Very possible the two events are being linked because people are pissed the media did what it did. I agree with their reaction, but this is not necessarily proof of consequences.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.