I Have a Problem With the Concept
…of asking the home invader what his intentions are and, if violence is included, accepting it as your fate, because…well…Christ.
Via Glenn: And the PERFECT illustration of the rollover-and-die principle happens almost immediately. You KNOW what Preacher Man would have had this quick thinking young lad do, even though the question was fairly put to the home intruder vis-à-vis HIS intentions…
Young boy shoots suspected burglar, mocks him for ‘crying like a baby’
11-year-old Chris Gaither from Talladega, Alabama, has told reporters how an intruder “cried like a baby” after Chris shot him in the leg with a 9mm handgun.
Home school-student Chris was alone at his house on Wednesday morning when he heard footsteps; someone had broken in and was walking around upstairs, apparently intending to burgle the Gaither’s home.
Chris took hold of a nearby gun and prepared to face the intruder, who started coming back down the stairs carrying a hamper.
“When he was coming down the stairs, that’s when he told me he was going to kill me, f-you and all that,” the boy told local news broadcaster WVTM.
Humanity...or the Lack Thereof, Life, Morality | tree hugging sister | 
May 2, 2016 9:31 am
Subscribe
O FFS. Someone needs to send hi this:
https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/the-bible-and-self-defense
Good stuff.
Killing an intruder and loving him are not mutually exclusive. God loves everybody, but He still kills everybody.
And maybe it is God’s will that you don’t survive a conflict with an intruder. But then again maybe it is. There’s only one way to know for sure.
edit request on my comment if you permit it.
“And maybe it isn’t God’s will that you survive a conflict with an intruder.”
Thanks.
Home-schooled? Seems his parents brought him up right.
“According to Gaither’s mother the man had broken into their house and stolen items on a previous occasion. ”
The parents did nothing – didn’t catch him or didn’t respond? If so, that kid is an example to his parents (although he should get on a range to improve his hit-miss ration).
Schenck conflates the innocent with the guilty.
Abortion is the killing of a defenceless innocent.
A home invader is ipso facto guilty of an hostile and aggressive act.
That Schenck is unable to make a distinction of such a fundamental nature renders all of his judgment suspect.
Unable, aelfheld, or unwilling?
JeffS, I consider him unable by virtue of his delusion.