• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

[Psilocybin] Teen shot to death during home invasion

so you would rather turn your cheek to the intruder? who hides from the very clear and present enemy when you have assets and other lives to protect?

I never said I'd turn my cheek to the intruder. I didn't even go near saying something to which this could be compared. I'm saying, and have been saying for numerous posts now, that there are other, better ways to act which don't end with the killing of someone.

Hiding to protect assets? Wait. That must mean you're one of those who would kill to protect material values. That's pure nonsense. I hope your vision of life change someday.

Lastly I already said that when someone of your family can't hide and is in danger, protect them.

How many times have I said it? Have you even read my posts? Fucking read my posts before answering crap next time.
 
Why should anyone have to hide in their own home? That is your sanctuary and I do not believe anybody should ever have to hide in it.

When you hide you are less equipped to catch an intruder off guard than if you prepare yourself ad confront/ambush them. Just because it turns out this kid wasn't armed doesn't mean he couldn't have had a knife in his pocket, I wouldn't want to let him get close enough to me to find out.

I admit it might have turned out in this case that the homeowner and his family probably were never in any immediate danger and killing the intruder did not make them any safer. The point is it is your right to be on the safe side and as soon as you feel threatened for any reason in your own home by an illegal intruder then your right to safety trumps their right to life. Maybe they weren't armed and maybe they didn't have any malicious intentions, if you pause to find out you might just end up being the one who is dead.
 
You must be kidding. There's a difference between: "Hi, I'm Charles Manson and I'm gonna cut that baby out of your stomach" and "Dad? Is that you?".

Because everyone thats ever killed anyone has always told the person they were going to kill them. No one has ever killed anyone without giving them a heads up. ... You... must.... be... kidding... oh and now we are adding words into the intruders mouth?

Again, what the fuck? I'm not saying people have to risk their lives. Quite the opposite actually: they do not risk their lives as much by HIDING. If you think the intruder might be armed and you or someone of your family can't hide, and after you pointed your gun at him he doesn't cooperate, SHOOT. What I'm saying is, do not shoot, then ask questions. Don't shoot in the dark, don't shoot if you and your family can hide, but most of all DON'T SHOOT A FUCKING UNARMED 18 YEARS OLD.

Again, stupid as fuck. When you hide you are giving the intruder a chance to act first. ITS YOUR FUCKING HOUSE. He is NOT supposed to be there. HE WAS NOT COOPERATING. He continued to advance after being warned. A intruders life is worth FAR less than putting you and your family at ANY potential risk. Why do you think people get shot by police officers every day when they make a fast move when the officer warns them to keep their hands up? Because its not worth taking the chance. I'm not gonna put my family in a closet and give them a chance to be found when I can end the situation at the window. It may be more dangerous but i'd rather die trying than lose the advantage of the high ground and be caught cowering in a closet like a pussy.


That is untrue. Quite the opposite: I value my life enough to not try and play the big hero, and hide instead of getting into a shootout, at the risk of looking like a pussy in the eyes of big heroes like many people in this thread seem to think they are. There are 2 options: either the person breaking into your house wants to kill/rape/hurt you, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, why would you kill him? And if he does, chances are he shoots better than you, so hide.

HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PERSON THAT WANTS TO BREAK IN WANTS? HES BREAKING IN. JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. HES NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. HES MAKING AGGRESSIVE ACTION AND BREAKING INTO YOUR HOME. OHHHHH HE MUSTTTTT BE LOST. JUST LIKE EVERYONE WHO BREAKS IN.

BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which, just that you are better hiding, and that shooting someone should be used in last resort.

Absolutely wrong. Hiding is the dumbest thing anyone could do. Even more so if they catch the person coming in the window and have a gun in hand.

If they find me dead in the closet, that means the person breaking in was armed and had as a goal to KILL me. It wasn't a guy alone and confused on mushrooms, nor a robber, not even a robber with the intention of shooting if he's found (I can't find him if I'm hiding). If the guy's goal is to kill me, he can do it whether I'm in my living room, in my closet or taking a dump. And as I already said, if such is the case, there is nothing wrong in defending yourself. But I still say, hide, then if you're found, defend yourself, rather than "do not hide, go on him and shoot him right there".

Oh i forgot. The homeowner was supposed to know this person was confused and on mushrooms. Isn't he aware of the fact that its always like that? 99.99 % of people who break in are confused and on mushrooms. Stupid homeowner. Take your head out of your ass and use it for a second.

You give him a better chance to kill you if you confront him rather than locking yourself up in your room with your gun pointed at the door.

This doesnt even deserve a reply

Answer this: in what way did he defended the life of his precious wife when he shot that 18 years old?

He did everything in his legal right to defend his home and loved ones.

Fuck. I don't understand how any of you are having such a hard time understanding this shit.
 
Last edited:
^^god i love your posts!!!they are not only friggin' hilarious but they are spot on!!! man i cant believe how many people are posting in this thread and how many people's responses are so ludacris that it makes me wonder wtf is wrong with people now adays:\ lets just take away everybody's guns and give everybody mace and let people break into their homes and try and talk them out of your house or go hide in the closet etc etc etc.


10 .40 calibers shells 2 in each leg, if you dont stop, 2 in each arm, if you stillkeep coming then its 2 center chest and then its all done....
 
If someone breaks into my house I will grab the most deadly weapon I have at hand and I will use that weapon aggressively with intent to maim or kill and I will continue using that weapon until the intruder drops to the floor in submission or death or flees my home. Then I will thank God I was able to defend myself and my family. A man's home is his castle and you have a natural right to defend it.

The kid was stupid and now he's dead. So it goes. Condolences to his parents.

"Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid." - John Wayne.
 
I'm speechless (not really) looking at the extent of shit contained in your post suppup, and even more by how you managed to reply things that had nothing to do with what I said. I thought I was speaking simple English here but apparently it wasn't enough for you to understand.

So I'm gonna go over all the things you wrote and express myself very clearly so you can get it. And there's nothing wrong in reading the same sentence twice when you don't understand.

Because everyone thats ever killed anyone has always told the person they were going to kill them. No one has ever killed anyone without giving them a heads up. ... You... must.... be... kidding... oh and now we are adding words into the intruders mouth?

What I used there that you call "adding words into the intruder's mouth" is named an EXAMPLE. Click here for the Merriam-Webster's definition of the word example.

My goal was to show, by an exaggerated example of what an intruder could say, that you could, that is if you have the required intellect, tell that someone calling you "Dad?" might not be as dangerous as someone having other potential reactions you'd expect from an intruder, and that reconsidering shooting him is a possibility that should have been considered in this situation.

Again, stupid as fuck. When you hide you are giving the intruder a chance to act first. ITS YOUR FUCKING HOUSE. He is NOT supposed to be there. HE WAS NOT COOPERATING. He continued to advance after being warned. A intruders life is worth FAR less than putting you and your family at ANY potential risk. Why do you think people get shot by police officers every day when they make a fast move when the officer warns them to keep their hands up? Because its not worth taking the chance. I'm not gonna put my family in a closet and give them a chance to be found when I can end the situation at the window. It may be more dangerous but i'd rather die trying than lose the advantage of the high ground and be caught cowering in a closet like a pussy.

Firstly, saying that what I'm saying is stupid does not make you look any more intelligent. If your goal is to appear so, you should try writing a clever post instead. Good luck.

Secondly, I never ever said something about hiding in the closet. Yet all you have understood and said in your last two posts is that this is what I meant by hiding. That's wrong. I was rather referring to locking yourself up in a room or simply going elsewhere than where you must confront the intruder. I thought you would understand that. I was wrong.

Thirdly, I disagree that hiding gives the intruder the advantage. It is the opposite. Think about it: he doesn't know where you are. If you know how to hide, you can even see him before he sees you! How great!

Lastly, "cowering in a closet like a pussy". Well I believe there's nothing wrong in hiding. But I suppose you would rather risk killing/dying so no one will call you a pussy, as everyone does when someone hides. So show the intruder you're the boss, hero. I just hope you're a better shooter, or instead of being called a pussy you will be dead.

HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PERSON THAT WANTS TO BREAK IN WANTS? HES BREAKING IN. JESUS FUCKING CHRIST. HES NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. HES MAKING AGGRESSIVE ACTION AND BREAKING INTO YOUR HOME. OHHHHH HE MUSTTTTT BE LOST. JUST LIKE EVERYONE WHO BREAKS IN.

Wowowow, calm down little fella. You know, I should be the one mad here, because all this part you wrote in capital letters isn't worth shit, since you didn't even consider the part I wrote RIGHT AFTER the paragraph you were referring to.

Look, I'll quote myself:

That is untrue. Quite the opposite: I value my life enough to not try and play the big hero, and hide instead of getting into a shootout, at the risk of looking like a pussy in the eyes of big heroes like many people in this thread seem to think they are. There are 2 options: either the person breaking into your house wants to kill/rape/hurt you, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, why would you kill him? And if he does, chances are he shoots better than you, so hide.

BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which, just that you are better hiding, and that shooting someone should be used in last resort.

The key here is the part in bold. I just said, right after the paragraph you answered to in all beautiful capital letters, that I was not intending anyone to magically know what the intruder wants. "BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which" is exactly what I said.

Still, you find the mean to ask this: "HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PERSON THAT WANTS TO BREAK IN WANTS?"

As I said to someone else in my last post: fucking read what I write before answering crap.

Absolutely wrong. Hiding is the dumbest thing anyone could do. Even more so if they catch the person coming in the window and have a gun in hand.

See I disagree. But I have no statistic to prove my point. Do you?

I wonder though: how many people get killed when successfully hiding (that is, no one finds them) VS. how many people get killed while confronting the intruder?

Oh i forgot. The homeowner was supposed to know this person was confused and on mushrooms. Isn't he aware of the fact that its always like that? 99.99 % of people who break in are confused and on mushrooms. Stupid homeowner. Take your head out of your ass and use it for a second.

Hahahaha! I find it fun that you tell me to take my head out of my ass and use it, right after you post an entire paragraph about something I never said (that is, the homeowner was supposed to know the intruder was on mushrooms) and manage to answer something which had absolutely nothing to do with what I really did say. Reread my post.

He did everything in his legal right to defend his home and loved ones.

Fuck. I don't understand how any of you are having such a hard time understanding this shit.

So that is your answer to this question: in what way did he defended the life of his precious wife when he shot that 18 years old?

See, I'm a little saddened here because I was hoping you would come to the conclusion that killing the intruder didn't do shit to protect his wife's life, since she never was in danger.

--------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I'm going to stop posting in this thread now, because this has already started to repeat itself and will continue over and over again following this course of actions:


  • drug_mentor will discuss in a correct way and make his points, which are the opposite of mine, and we will keep disagreeing until Armageddon;

  • then, suppup will come and say that what I'm saying is stupid in a lame and unsuccessful attempt to prove he's clever, before answering things that have nothing to do with my posts;

  • right after, Selfmeditaker will come say he agrees, then talk about the size of his guns, adding nothing useful to the conversation;

  • and finally, some random dude who has nothing to do with this conversation will clearly state how he would kill anyone breaking in his house.

This is getting boring. Feel free to answer this post though, I'll come and read what you wrote.

I'll state my point one very last time: I believe there are other, better ways to deal with someone breaking into your house SUCH AS, for EXAMPLE, hiding (it doesn't have to be in the closet suppup, though it seems you like that place), going out, using non-lethal weapons, etc. AND that people should use lethal force when there is no other options, rather than shooting first, asking questions latter. This should avoid the death of small time thieves and confused harmless people, and those of course of unlucky homeowners who fought the wrong guy. Once again, there is nothing wrong in shooting an armed person, or what one believes to be an armed person, when there is no other options.

But have it your way people. Shoot first. Confront the intruder and show him who's the boss of the castle. Show him your big, hard gun and penetrate him with all the force of your bullets. You'll feel like a real man when he dies, that is unless he kills you first. Or unless he is a confused kid in the wrong house.
 
^ The only problem I have with your post is your comparison of how many people die hiding successfully compared to confronting the intruder. That is obviously a ridiculous comparison, if you were going to compare the success of hiding to that of confrontation you would have to include people attempting to hide and not just those who never got found.

I agree that this thread is starting to repeat itself and is getting a tad boring because of it. The topic has pretty much been discussed as much as it can be. I don't have a problem with you just because we have opposite opinions and we will just have to agree to disagree.
 
Mister Superzombie said:
What I used there that you call "adding words into the intruder's mouth" is named an EXAMPLE. Click here for the Merriam-Webster's definition of the word example.

My goal was to show, by an exaggerated example of what an intruder could say, that you could, that is if you have the required intellect, tell that someone calling you "Dad?" might not be as dangerous as someone having other potential reactions you'd expect from an intruder, and that reconsidering shooting him is a possibility that should have been considered in this situation.

When you're obviously not someones parent... and they are breaking into your house.... and you are telling them they will be shot... and they continue to break in at what point do they become not dangerous? When they ignore your warnings? When they continue to enter your home? Kids kill their parents every day. Just because someone says dad as they are BREAKING in doesn't mean they want milk and cookies.


Firstly, saying that what I'm saying is stupid does not make you look any more intelligent. If your goal is to appear so, you should try writing a clever post instead. Good luck.

Secondly, I never ever said something about hiding in the closet. Yet all you have understood and said in your last two posts is that this is what I meant by hiding. That's wrong. I was rather referring to locking yourself up in a room or simply going elsewhere than where you must confront the intruder. I thought you would understand that. I was wrong.

Thirdly, I disagree that hiding gives the intruder the advantage. It is the opposite. Think about it: he doesn't know where you are. If you know how to hide, you can even see him before he sees you! How great!

Lastly, "cowering in a closet like a pussy". Well I believe there's nothing wrong in hiding. But I suppose you would rather risk killing/dying so no one will call you a pussy, as everyone does when someone hides. So show the intruder you're the boss, hero. I just hope you're a better shooter, or instead of being called a pussy you will be dead.

First, you're stupid.

Second, I was giving a example. Maybe you can refer to your websters dictionary you have already seem to have read. Closet, room, secret passage way... where ever you want to hide from someone coming into your own house is fine with me. But its my house. I'm going to defend it and my family. I'm not going to sit back on the defensive side while someone breaking in takes action and wait for them to find me in a house i should know better than anyone.

Thirdly, so in this very situation where the homeowner CATCHES the person coming into the window his better option is to run and hide. Even though you've already seen them before they saw you. I guess you need to give them a second chance. It only makes hide and seek fair....

Lastly, this is where men and cowards are truly made. This is all really optional. But I would feel a lot better knowing I tried instead of just giving it a chance to happen. I guess some people would rather risk their life and family to give someone breaking into their house the benefit of the doubt.

Wowowow, calm down little fella. You know, I hould be the one mad here, because all this part you wrote in capital letters isn't worth shit, since you didn't even consider the part I wrote RIGHT AFTER the paragraph you were referring to.

Look, I'll quote myself:

The key here is the part in bold. I just said, right after the paragraph you answered to in all beautiful capital letters, that I was not intending anyone to magically know what the intruder wants. "BTW I'm not saying you should magically know which one is which" is exactly what I said.

Still, you find the mean to ask this: "HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PERSON THAT WANTS TO BREAK IN WANTS?"

As I said to someone else in my last post: fucking read what I write before answering crap.

First you say either he wants to kill you or he doesn't. Then you say that no one could magically know what they wanted. I ask how could you know what the person breaking into your house could possibly want? Then I said with sarcasm that 'ohhh everyone who breaks in must be lost' and you still don't get it? 99 percent of people breaking into homes aren't lost.. ok? They either want to harm you, steal shit, etc etc. They are entering a home unwelcome - they are no longer adhering to the law. They aren't in the right. They have given up their rights. Its over. They can/should to be shot. Like you said - read what i write before you inject stupidity.


See I disagree. But I have no statistic to prove my point. Do you?

I wonder though: how many people get killed when successfully hiding (that is, no one finds them) VS. how many people get killed while confronting the intruder?

see drug_mentors post


Hahahaha! I find it fun that you tell me to take my head out of my ass and use it, right after you post an entire paragraph about something I never said (that is, the homeowner was supposed to know the intruder was on mushrooms) and manage to answer something which had absolutely nothing to do with what I really did say. Reread my post.

You used confused and on mushrooms as an example as if its something that matters when someone breaks into your house. You also said that if someone breaks in without the intention of killing you they wont... thats wrong. People don't need to have the goal of killing you when they break in for you to die. You just need to get in the way.



So that is your answer to this question: in what way did he defended the life of his precious wife when he shot that 18 years old?

See, I'm a little saddened here because I was hoping you would come to the conclusion that killing the intruder didn't do shit to protect his wife's life, since she never was in danger.

Do you know her life was never in danger? Do you know this for 100% fact. Someone is breaking into someones house, fights the person after being shot after repeated warnings and you still say this person was no danger to anyone? How do you know this? Because the facts do not say anything close. I was hoping you weren't a idiot. I'm saddened.
--------------------------------------------------

Anyway, I'm going to stop posting in this thread now, because this has already started to repeat itself and will continue over and over again following this course of actions:


  • drug_mentor will discuss in a correct way and make his points, which are the opposite of mine, and we will keep disagreeing until Armageddon;

  • then, suppup will come and say that what I'm saying is stupid in a lame and unsuccessful attempt to prove he's clever, before answering things that have nothing to do with my posts;

  • right after, Selfmeditaker will come say he agrees, then talk about the size of his guns, adding nothing useful to the conversation;

  • and finally, some random dude who has nothing to do with this conversation will clearly state how he would kill anyone breaking in his house.

This is getting boring. Feel free to answer this post though, I'll come and read what you wrote.

Lets add the last part to the list


  • idiot, that would rather sit back and watch his family be put in harms way without ever doing a thing other than locking a door - even though the first door you locked to keep the intruder out wasn't doing the job, chimes in with coward bullshit

I'll state my point one very last time: I believe there are other, better ways to deal with someone breaking into your house SUCH AS, for EXAMPLE, hiding (it doesn't have to be in the closet suppup, though it seems you like that place), going out, using non-lethal weapons, etc. AND that people should use lethal force when there is no other options, rather than shooting first, asking questions latter. This should avoid the death of small time thieves and confused harmless people, and those of course of unlucky homeowners who fought the wrong guy. Once again, there is nothing wrong in shooting an armed person, or what one believes to be an armed person, when there is no other options.

I'll state my point once again, this homeowner, who obviously is not superman like others in this thread, did exactly what should have been done. He did not act wrong or inappropriately. Not everyone wants to go into a UFC cage match with a random stranger in their home. Not everyone wants to use a frying pan(example 8)) in homes of knocking this person out. They want to give themselves as much of a advantage as possible. And hiding is not the best way. Especially in this case when you actually catch them coming in. The death of small time thieves is not anywhere near the same level as a innocent homeowner. Trying to protect someone that breaks into homes is absolutely fucking retarded. They forfeit all of their rights when they enter someone elses home. Thats it and thats how it should ALWAYS be. Just because you feel bad for a thief does not make it wrong for someone to blow one away when they break in. This kid went out and got fucked up on mushrooms. He acted irresponsibly and ended up getting killed for it. No one elses fault but his own. No one did anything wrong here but him. No ifs ands or buts. Theres nothing wrong with shooting a armed, unarmed, crazy, stupid, confused person if they are breaking into your home. There is a unknown factor which the homeowner should not risk. If they aren't supposed to be there, thats it.

But have it your way people. Shoot first. Confront the intruder and show him who's the boss of the castle. Show him your big, hard gun and penetrate him with all the force of your bullets. You'll feel like a real man when he dies, that is unless he kills you first. Or unless he is a confused kid in the wrong house

bang bang %)
 
and finally, some random dude who has nothing to do with this conversation will clearly state how he would kill anyone breaking in his house.

^^^ Random dude here - sorry, I didn't realize this was a private conversation.
54125.jpg
 
Though I said I would not post here anymore, I break my promise for this small post. Drug_mentor, I should have stated it differently: those who are found fall into the same category has those who confront the intruder, since there is a confrontation; my point was that, by hiding, you have a chance of never being found, and that the number of people who die when they are not found is 0. I don't have a problem with you either, I respect people who can discuss, even if I disagree.

Finally suppup, you missed your chance to make a clever post in this thread. I wont answer what I find to be another element of the pile of crap you put in here, but I'd like to point this:

People don't need to have the goal of killing you when they break in for you to die. You just need to get in the way.

That is why you should hide. Thank you for proving my point.

Goodbye everyone.
 
I been in a situation like this before, hell I even got bit in the arm and still bare the scar till this very day thank god there was no gun involved. Yea some people really cant handle their psychadelics and end up losin control of their free will and start doin some crazy shit. This is definently a unique situation that ended badly but as a word of warning: choose your trip buddy wisely. These sort of situations are usually the very last thing that one is prepared for and can potentially be very dangerous. Call 911 if you have to get the disoriented individual in a 51/50 (and avoid gettin bitten).
 
Finally suppup, you missed your chance to make a clever post in this thread. I wont answer what I find to be another element of the pile of crap you put in here, but I'd like to point this:


That is why you should hide. Thank you for proving my point.

Goodbye everyone.

Context context context
 
Top