not all robbers are also keen murderers ;) also, you probably imagine a situation where the robber points his gun at me, and all the bystanders forgot their sub-machine guns at home so they're basically helpless...

in that case I'd point my finger behind his back and yell "look, it's Beyoncé" (if I knew how to pronounce it that is), and once he turned around, I'd use the Vulcan neck trick...

of course, having someone with your training with me would be much easier (and the news would love it!)

Yahoo Sports.com should be fined heavily for their inability to fullfill basic journalistic standards. Badly written news is even worse than no news.

If you're going all Sam Fisher, shouldn't you sneak up behind him and break his neck or is that another game I am thinking of.
I know you are from another country, but isn't that one of the easier names to pronounce. I've only seen her on TV commercials, and I know it is pronounced, Bee-yon-Say. (Bee as in bumble bee, yon as in over yonder, and say as in say what.

Clearly there's something very wrong with this guy. In a sane world he would be sectioned.

No right minded person would queue for hours to get those shoes.

As far as purchasing guns in the states, there are some people who can not purchase one. People with mental conditions, people with felonies on their record, and of course you have to be 18. And once you get your gun the really hard part is finding bullets for said gun. They are getting harder and harder to find, since the elementary school thing, people are stockpiling thinking our government will overreact and ban handguns.
That is actually pretty tame for some basketball shoes. I have seen some really fugly designs in the past, the only objection to that shoe I have is the color choices.

Edit: another objection would of course be the price.

The colour choices, the fact that it looks like it would rub my feet up something awful and the fact that they'd probably fall apart inside of three months. I can't imagine that they're actually more sturdy than the photoshopped sales image makes them out to be.

Cultural differences.
Not in this case.

Hindsight does not go into the equation when investigating the situation and should not be. This robber pulled a gun and was a threat to the person that shot him. You don't have time to call the police and even if they were only a block away, you don't know that at the time, only after the fact. You don't know if it's loaded or not. You have to make a split-second decision.

Even if an unarmed person is shoplifting in a store, you can say "Hold it right there" or "Get lost punk" but if that person then still sprints toward you, you don't know if they are a master martial artist capable of snapping your neck or disarming you. If the shoplifter ran away though, shooting him or her wouldn't be self-defense.

If someone breaks into your house while you are inside, you always assume they intend to do bodily harm, so it's shoot on sight. If you are so kind to ask "State your business", you have given away your position to the invader. Not good. If it's someone you know, you would think they would have the decency to announce themselves and then explain why they broke into your house. It's a little different though if you pull up to your driveway and see someone running away from your house.

I really don't know whether I should laugh or cry right now...

So true.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pvbZ9xUlZk

And this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM52_zC2hxQ#t=1m58s

Haha, I swear we won't shoot you if you come visit, Kunovski. Well, in most parts of the U.S. anyway. Really, most people will never be in this situation.

I was trying to explain some of the thought process of self-defense from an aggressor. It helps to have a clear plan and a clean conscience if one ever gets into this kind of predicament. That's what this is about, defense, not about the offense of how to be an aggressor. One of the most important rules about gun safety is to never point a gun at something that you don't intend to shoot. That applies both ways. People are acting like the man who shot the robber is the one who had disregard for human life. That's not true. He valued his life and his peers lives. When the robber pulled his gun on the crowd, he was letting people know his own disregard for life, that his intention was to shoot. If he didn't, he should not have pulled his gun. The defender was protecting himself and his peers.

I would rather people be able to defend themselves than petition their God...er, I mean government (same thing, really) with prayer. The police are not personal bodyguards. They have no duty to protect individuals. They only serve the public at large and are not liable if you call them for help and then something still happens to you.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html#T11
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

I live in a part of the U.S. where most everyone owns several guns. I don't fear any of my neighbors though. In fact, they would help me from an aggressor if I needed it. Crime rates are low. I am confident to say that mutual aid is stronger or as strong as anywhere in the U.S. here. It's done without any kind of positive law that tries to force them to.

maybe that's it... in the modern world, almost every "main" nation has a nuclear missile... so all these countries are super careful not to threaten the others with it, as they know EVERYBODY IMPORTANT has one

but this is not the right way. first, the ones that don't own one (either a missile, or a gun in such cases) are fucked... second, do you really want every country (and every person) to own a weapon able to end anybody's life in a flash?

and one more thing - does everyone think that pointing a gun at someone means 100% intent to kill? how many robbers do want to rob people and kill them too? it's just a tool to cause fear, and I think it works very well, no doubt about that... but I really don't think that a person who wants to steal something from you and points a gun at you wants to kill you too. why would he do that? you're scared (or you should be scared), he takes your stuff and leaves.

it's pretty much like the nuclear weapons - if one nation has it (which by itself means they're willing to use it), should the other ones nuke them immediately, just to be sure?

sorry, but I'll never be able to understand your way of thinking...

About the intent to kill, yes. Try telling an armed robber no, that you will not give him or her your wallet. They're desperadoes.
People don't kill each other here just because their neighbors buy guns and keep them in their house (and they're willing to use it for defense). People here don't walk on eggshells either. It's the intent that matters.

Well, I tried to explain self-defense but I can leave it be. Some people just can't grok it and I'm fine with that (until they try to use the law to take my defense away). It's not like everyone is required to participate in self-defense.

How the F is this self-defense? I thought the whole idea was to use the amount of force needed to prevent/stop something, but not respond above and beyond necessity. But I guess for some, the answer to everything is shoot first and think later (if at all).

ok, just watch this :)

sure, Moore is a manipulator and he lies quite a lot, but I think this funny video is quite accurate (in the terms of "fear" I mean, you can read it everywhere in this thread)

..so when US will finally hire Judge Dredd to uphold the Law & Order?

Or some sort of "The one to walk away alive is right" -law would also simplify things.