On 3 Jan 2005 22:33:23 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

Depends on if it's a concealed-carry state or not, I suppose. Armed victims
tend to make criminals a bit more ...docile...

Would you shoot a thief if he disobeyed your command to "stay"? I
wouldn't risk my freedom to catch a thief, though I suppose there's
little downside to trying a bluff.

I really don't know how stuff like this works in real life, as opposed
to TV and movies. I certainly understand the prudence of being armed
and skilled if one goes in harm's way or lives in a risky place but I
(possibly naively) believe that killing someone for disobeying you
could cost far more than it's worth -- and shooting but not killing
them might cost even more.

I may be a dinosaur here. I enjoy the precision of nice firearms,
and spent many enjoyable hours with my rifle as a boy, and I am a
veteran. I hunted as a boy but have not hunted since my military
service other than shooting rabbits that eat the flowers in Mary's
garden. Flowers feed rabbit, pop, rabbit feeds new flowers.
Perhaps there is a lot I don't understand about how responsible
civilians may use lethal force against other civilians.

I'm ambivalent about gun control for that reason. I oppose it in
principle, but I find some of the attitude exhibited by
second-amendment activists to be disturbing.