Current Events > Man goughes the eyes of armed home invader.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I have no sympathy for that attacker at all.
---

CapnMuffin posted...

MabusIncarnate posted...

I don't break into homes while armed when I don't want my eyes gouged out. He went into survival mode, they say during a crocodile or shark attack to go for the eyes to subdue the attacker. This man was being attacked, took a few rifle butts to the head and reacted to survive. Completely fair game and that point he didn't know if he had a backup sidearm, a knife, all he knew was his life was being threatened in that moment. He wasn't thinking "how can I torture this guy" he was thinking "what's the most effective way to subdue this attacker". I have no issue with this, don't fuckin break into someones house with a rifle.

This x 1000

Its easy to judge people from a moral perch without being in that life threatening situation.

Hey fuck you buddy, I've had people both try and successfully break into my home.

I've even been stabbed by a mugger.

And I doubt I'm the only one on CE who has

Don't make assumptions.
---

Dick Golden.
---

I aint your buddy, guy!
---

not gonna lie, i often fantasize about killing trying burglars with my family's sword. it tasted the blood of four bros in the 19th century and it is probably getting fuckin thirsty by now right haha
---

eston posted...

pikachupwnage posted...

eston posted...

VandorLee posted...

Im at a loss here. I mean, dont break into peoples houses with a gun....

I hold firm to my personal belief that just because someone breaks into your home doesn't give you free reign to do whatever fucked up thing you want to them

I feel there is little limit to the force that can be exercised when there is any appreciable level of threat present in a break in(so if the thief is still on the property and not fleeing and conscious/alive especially if armed) outside of raping them or outright torturing them for the sake of torture.

Shooting an active intruder? Fine. If he has a gun and you dump a bucket of dangerous chemicals on him as he turns the corner? Fine in my book. Gouging his eyes WHILE HE IS STILL AN ACTIVE THREAT? Fine. Even lighting them on fire if that is what it takes to protect your home, person and family(though I see few circumstances where that is a remotely sane option to take given the nature of fire...)

But you gotta keep it to whatever is needed to keep them restrained once they go down.

Like if the intruder is out cold you can tie him up or cross his arms behind his back and sit on them or lock him in the closet while waiting for police. You dont start scalping him or breaking bones, of shooting him or whatever if he is already down.

Basically in my book.

-If the intruder is still possibly a threat nearly unlimited levels of force are justified outside of wanton cruelty(Breaking an arm to make him drop a knife is cool. Systemically breaking as many bones in their body as possible without killing them...not cool.)

-if the intruder is no longer a threat only the force needed to keep him there force emergency services and to maintain the state of minimal-to no threat. I.E Restraining with rope, locking them in a closet, keeping them in a hold, holding them at gunpoint, etc.

Exactly.

Had he gouged this man's eyes out while wrestling for the gun, I think that would be justified. Based on the man's own words it does not sound like self defense.

Did you even read the article or are you just basing it off of the title? It seems as usual most shucks don't even read the article before they post. He didn't gouge out anything. There was no "torture". He "gouged" as in he stuck his finger in his eyes while the struggle was going on due to his military training. It was purely self defense. The only questionable thing was beating him with his own gun since he was apparently doing it at the same time he had him in a hold.
---

MabusIncarnate posted...

I don't break into homes while armed when I don't want my eyes gouged out. He went into survival mode, they say during a crocodile or shark attack to go for the eyes to subdue the attacker. This man was being attacked, took a few rifle butts to the head and reacted to survive. Completely fair game and that point he didn't know if he had a backup sidearm, a knife, all he knew was his life was being threatened in that moment. He wasn't thinking "how can I torture this guy" he was thinking "what's the most effective way to subdue this attacker". I have no issue with this, don't fuckin break into someones house with a rifle.

This, 100%.
---

Rad_Chad posted...

not gonna lie, i often fantasize about killing trying burglars with my family's sword. it tasted the blood of four bros in the 19th century and it is probably getting fuckin thirsty by now right haha

Seek help
---

Thats awesome! I bet he didnt see that coming!
---

eston posted...

VandorLee posted...

Im at a loss here. I mean, dont break into peoples houses with a gun....

I hold firm to my personal belief that just because someone breaks into your home doesn't give you free reign to do whatever fucked up thing you want to them

Are you crazy
---

If you're invading a home with lethal force intent - which if you have a loaded gun, that is inheriently lethal force - then expect that you may be met with equal or greater force. Don't cry when you end up with your eyes gouged out.
---

ReignFury posted...

eston posted...

VandorLee posted...

Im at a loss here. I mean, dont break into peoples houses with a gun....

I hold firm to my personal belief that just because someone breaks into your home doesn't give you free reign to do whatever fucked up thing you want to them

Are you crazy

No he's quite sane.

Do you think it's okay to rape home invaders? Or castrate them?

Then you agree with him.
---

Shuto-uke posted...

by gouging out does he mean poking them, or did he actually made the man go blind?

---

If you break into someones home and point a gun at them, you lose all rights. I honestly dont care what happens to the invader so long as he never walks free again.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

Did you even read the article or are you just basing it off of the title? It seems as usual most shucks don't even read the article before they post. He didn't gouge out anything. There was no "torture". He "gouged" as in he stuck his finger in his eyes while the struggle was going on due to his military training. It was purely self defense. The only questionable thing was beating him with his own gun since he was apparently doing it at the same time he had him in a hold.

Unbunch your panties and read the article again. The guy himself says the eye gouging happened after he unloaded the intruder's gun and was sitting on him waiting for the police
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

ReignFury posted...

eston posted...

VandorLee posted...

Im at a loss here. I mean, dont break into peoples houses with a gun....

I hold firm to my personal belief that just because someone breaks into your home doesn't give you free reign to do whatever fucked up thing you want to them

Are you crazy

No he's quite sane.

Do you think it's okay to rape home invaders? Or castrate them?

Then you agree with him.

I dont give a damn what happens to home invaders.
---

eston posted...

GiftedACIII posted...

Did you even read the article or are you just basing it off of the title? It seems as usual most shucks don't even read the article before they post. He didn't gouge out anything. There was no "torture". He "gouged" as in he stuck his finger in his eyes while the struggle was going on due to his military training. It was purely self defense. The only questionable thing was beating him with his own gun since he was apparently doing it at the same time he had him in a hold.

Unbunch your panties and read the article again. The guy himself says the eye gouging happened after he unloaded the intruder's gun and was sitting on him waiting for the police

Yeah, because he's still an active threat dude. He kept his fingers in his eyes while he had him struggling in a hold due to his military training. When your life is in danger you take no risks. I remember that was one of the most basic things you learn in a jujutsu course I took too. The only questionable thing was how he was able to beat him with his gun if he had him in a hold because that makes no sense.
Fact remains that there was no "gouging anything out" as you claimed.
Try to keep up and post something intelligent at least once in a while.
---

Villain posted...

Shuto-uke posted...

by gouging out does he mean poking them, or did he actually made the man go blind?

guess nobody knows?

Shuto-uke posted...

Villain posted...

Shuto-uke posted...

by gouging out does he mean poking them, or did he actually made the man go blind?

guess nobody knows?

Poking them. It says he was treated for his injuries, and didn't say anything was serious which if he had actually gouged his eyes out it would.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

Shuto-uke posted...

Villain posted...

Shuto-uke posted...

by gouging out does he mean poking them, or did he actually made the man go blind?

guess nobody knows?

Poking them. It says he was treated for his injuries, and didn't say anything was serious which if he had actually gouged his eyes out it would.

good point

58GiftedACIII posted...

Yeah, because he's still an active threat dude. Sitting on someone doesn't mean they're completely restrained or subdued. He kept his fingers in his eyes while he had him struggling in a hold due to his military training. When your life is in danger you take no risks. I remember that was one of the most basic things you learn in a jujutsu course I took too. The only questionable thing was how he was able to beat him with his gun if he had him in a hold because that makes no sense.
Fact remains that there was no "gouging anything out" as you claimed.
Try to keep up and post something intelligent at least once in a while.

Going by the dude's story it does not sound like he was still an active threat tbqh
Gouging his eyes was egregious and unnecessary
---

The gunman got what he deserved, let that be a lesson to him.

Fucking savage
---

Of course there are psychopaths itt who are probably waiting for the day someone tries to break into their home so they can re-enact their favorite Hostel scene.
---

eston posted...

58GiftedACIII posted...

Yeah, because he's still an active threat dude. Sitting on someone doesn't mean they're completely restrained or subdued. He kept his fingers in his eyes while he had him struggling in a hold due to his military training. When your life is in danger you take no risks. I remember that was one of the most basic things you learn in a jujutsu course I took too. The only questionable thing was how he was able to beat him with his gun if he had him in a hold because that makes no sense.
Fact remains that there was no "gouging anything out" as you claimed.
Try to keep up and post something intelligent at least once in a while.

Going by the dude's story it does not sound like he was still an active threat tbqh
Gouging his eyes was egregious and unnecessary

Actually no, the fact that he had cuts on his arms is evidence that the intruder was still actively fighting him. If the intruder had surrendered and begged for mercy or tapped out then he could bring it up in court. Somehow I doubt that is the case though. Gouging eyes is a basic tactic for self defense in life and death scenarios. This isn't some boxing match or even street fight with rules. It was literally part of his military training to do this.
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.
---

Shouldn't have broken in. A home is a place that you should feel safe in. Fuck anyone who tries to take that away from someone
---

l Dudeboy l posted...

Of course there are psychopaths itt who are probably waiting for the day someone tries to break into their home so they can re-enact their favorite Hostel scene.

Who cares, as long as the degenerates of society manage to scrounge up the brain cells to not invade other people's homes, then nothing will happen.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

Actually no, the fact that he had cuts on his arms is evidence that the intruder was still actively fighting him. If the intruder had surrendered and begged for mercy or tapped out then he could bring it up in court. Somehow I doubt that is the case though. Gouging eyes is a basic tactic for self defense in life and death scenarios. This isn't some boxing match or even street fight with rules. It was literally part of his military training to do this.
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

Cuts on his arms do not indicate whether or not he was still fighting at that time, and why are you incapable of responding without being an asshole about it
---

eston posted...

58GiftedACIII posted...

Yeah, because he's still an active threat dude. Sitting on someone doesn't mean they're completely restrained or subdued. He kept his fingers in his eyes while he had him struggling in a hold due to his military training. When your life is in danger you take no risks. I remember that was one of the most basic things you learn in a jujutsu course I took too. The only questionable thing was how he was able to beat him with his gun if he had him in a hold because that makes no sense.
Fact remains that there was no "gouging anything out" as you claimed.
Try to keep up and post something intelligent at least once in a while.

Going by the dude's story it does not sound like he was still an active threat tbqh
Gouging his eyes was egregious and unnecessary

Some lessons are learned the hard way.....this guy won't be breaking into homes in the future.

eston posted...

GiftedACIII posted...

Actually no, the fact that he had cuts on his arms is evidence that the intruder was still actively fighting him. If the intruder had surrendered and begged for mercy or tapped out then he could bring it up in court. Somehow I doubt that is the case though. Gouging eyes is a basic tactic for self defense in life and death scenarios. This isn't some boxing match or even street fight with rules. It was literally part of his military training to do this.
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

Cuts on his arms do not indicate whether or not he was still fighting at that time, and why are you incapable of responding without being an asshole about it

And nothing indicates that the intruder wasn't actively fighting him or that Golden's actions was egregarious in the slightest other than your biased speculations. The intruder only had minor injuries and the fact that he got his eyes poked at all was given by Golden. It was obviously nothing serious and this is a straightforward fair next as a self defense tactic. You clearly misread the article since you kept talking about "gouging out" on your previous posts and now you're doubling down on your ignorance.
Why do you always make such unintelligent posts and have a habit of sympathizing with violent criminals?
---

Blah blah blah *random insult*
Go fuck yourself bro
---

Fair, next. Don't break into someones house.
---

eston posted...

Blah blah blah *random insult*
Go fuck yourself bro

So because your flimsy arguments were brought down you resort to acting like a little child, nice. And I never actually insulted you itt while you were the first to call asshole. Grow up, kid.
---

eston posted...

I don't have an argument

We know.
---

Who cares, as long as the degenerates of society manage to scrounge up the brain cells to not invade other people's homes, then nothing will happen.

degenerates make themselves known when the opportunity arises. these are your riot thieves. these are people who know where their pitchforks are just in case. these are people who unload violence just because the law says they can.

breaking the law doesn't make you a degenerate. doing horrible things does. and a lot of people want the opportunity.
---

If you wanted to continue the discussion you could have maybe tried to be less of a dick about it. I gave you a chance. Every response you've made to me has made a point of insulting my intelligence. You can call it childish if you want, I don't see any reason to keep arguing with someone like that.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

And I never actually insulted you itt while you were the first to call asshole. Grow up, kid.

GiftedACIII posted...

Try to keep up and post something intelligent at least once in a while.

GiftedACIII posted...

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not even really on his side tbh but both of the above could easily be considered insults. Especially the first one.
---

eston posted...

If you wanted to continue the discussion you could have maybe tried to be less of a dick about it. I gave you a chance. Every response you've made to me has made a point of insulting my intelligence. You can call it childish if you want, I don't see any reason to keep arguing with someone like that.

I haven't insulted your intelligence. I've called you out on your unintelligent posts. If you don't want your posts called out stop making unintelligent posts. Though you haven't given us any reason to think you're any different from your posts tbh. And I wouldn't be talking about being a dick. You're usually a massive dick yourself.

Twin3Turbo posted...

I'm not even really on his side tbh but both of the above could easily be considered insults. Especially the first one.

I mean, the last two aren't insults. They're criticizing his actions and posts. The former is already after he made insults himself and then tries to play victim about it and even then is really tame.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

I haven't insulted your intelligence. I've called you out on your unintelligent posts. If you don't want your posts called out stop making unintelligent posts. Though you haven't given us any reason to think you're any different from your posts tbh.

eston posted...

Go fuck yourself bro

---

i won't ever feel bad about anything that happens to home invaders, robbers, bullies, etc
---

GiftedACIII posted...

I mean, the last two aren't insults. They're criticizing his actions and posts. The former is already after he made insults himself and then tries to play victim about it and even then is really tame.

Both of what I posted were posts by you BEFORE he called you an asshole.

And I have a hard time seeing how those aren't insults. You're basically insulting his intelligence in a roundabout way. Either way they were certainly not needed and I'd think the assessment of "asshole" after those two statements would be one most would agree with. This coming form someone that knows nothing else about the two of you.
---

eston posted...

GiftedACIII posted...

I haven't insulted your intelligence. I've called you out on your unintelligent posts. If you don't want your posts called out stop making unintelligent posts. Though you haven't given us any reason to think you're any different from your posts tbh.

eston posted...

Go fuck yourself bro

I think the habitual criminal sympathizer and simpleton who becomes a child when his argument is destroyed would be a better candidate for fucking themselves.
---

Fuck thieves
---

I'd say forcing people to become fearful for their lives in their own home makes them degenerates

i would count that as a horrible thing. but i would also count taking the opportunity to re-enact a hostel scene as such a thing.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

Uh you posted three posts. The last two weren't insults. There's a difference between being passive aggressive, (one of which you happen to be doing right now) and direct insults.
The first one you posted WAS after he made the asshole and go fuck yourself statement.
Honestly, you're being awfully defensive with factually wrong examples yourself for someone who was clearly making really stupid posts and doubling down on it. I wonder why Anyway If all you have against me is the tone of my (admittedly impatient, but he doesn't deserve any patience) posts then you've got nothing else to say. I really don't give a shit about his sensibilities.

Let me be a bit clearer, the first quote I posted was just to quote you saying that he was the first to insult so you would know what I was responding to. When I said " both of the the above could be considered insults" I was specifically referring to the bottom two quotes of my post. So to be clear, I was not referring to the first quote when I said "especially the first" I was referring specifically to the 2nd quote". Yeah that's a bit confusing and I probably should have been clearer, my mistake

And how am I being passive aggressive? I'm just having a conversation here. I'm not defending the contents of his posts, just showing that you (now admittedly) were at a minimum being a bit harsh to someone who at that point hadn't insulted you, which might make the asshole comment an accurate one. You can wonder why all you want, I was just hopefully getting you to do a bit of introspection but it appears you don't really care so whatever at this point.
---

You don't have to give a shit about my sensibilities, but I don't know why you would expect me to keep discussing the topic when you're going out of your way to be super dickish about it. I really tried to be patient
---

Twin3Turbo posted...

Let me be a bit clearer, the first quote I posted was just to quote you saying that he was the first to insult so you would know what I was responding to. When I said " both of the the above could be considered insults" I was specifically referring to the bottom two quotes of my post. So to be clear, I was not referring to the first quote when I said "especially the first" I was referring specifically to the 2nd quote". Yeah that's a bit confusing and I probably should have been clearer, my mistake

Oh I see. Yeah, those last posts aren't direct insults by themselves. They're both phrases that can be used in a civil discussion if used in the right tone. They seemed insulting because I used them in a passive aggressive tone but they're not actual insults, unlike "go fuck yourselves and being an asshole"

eston posted...

You don't have to give a shit about my sensibilities, but I don't know why you would expect me to keep discussing the topic when you're going out of your way to be super dickish about it. I really tried to be patient

If you don't want people to be dickish then don't make exasperatingly moronic posts. And lol patience? Your first response to me was a passive aggressive "unbunch your panties" (which, twinturbo, if you consider "you don't know what you're talking about" an insult, surely you consider this one also?).
I knew you would inevitably just break down like this anyway so I just sped up the results before you waste time having useless back and forths like "hurr how do you know he was really fighting back?"
---

Your first post to me was a long and unnecessarily aggressive rant accusing me of having not read the article. That's what "unbunch your panties" was about. But whatever. You're doubling down on acting like an asshole, the topic has been derailed, who really gives a shit anymore. Let's just all be dicks
---