About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Boortz: "I know I'm wrong," but "I ought to be able to shoot" an intruder and leave body for garbage collector to "dump... into a landfill"

May 21, 2009 1:41 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 21, 2009 1:44 pm ET)
      7  
      "I know I'm wrong..."

      STOP TALKING! Just STOP TALKING and you actually WON'T BE!!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (May 21, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
        3  
        He can't help himself, he has to talk. After all, this is his bread 'n' butter. He has nothing else going for him, except for perhaps a couple of hack-job books.

        Ever notice that about these con talkers - they really do not have anything else going for them in their miserable lives other than being on the radio spewing garbage and writing stupid books? Oh, and making booksigning appearances too. And, in Limpy's case, lounging on his fat posterior in his mansion all dressed up and nowhere to go.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 21, 2009 1:44 pm ET)
      3  
      I know I'm wrong
      The first step to recovery, Neal, is admitting you have a problem.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (May 21, 2009 1:52 pm ET)
        2  
        A wingnut actually admitting he has a problem? Nevah...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (May 21, 2009 1:56 pm ET)
      3  
      Neal, I've said this before, I'll say it again. If you ever had a weapon brandished in front of you, you'd pee and poop your pants, and cower in a corner asking to not be shot or harmed.

      You're just another fake tough guy.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (May 21, 2009 2:00 pm ET)
      1  
      Boortz knows he's wrong, but too stupid to know why he's wrong. He's wrong because we live in a civilized nation of laws.

      If he wants to be able to shoot intruders and dump the bodies, he should relocate to a lawless, ungoverned nation. I'm pretty sure he could get away with it in Somalia.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 21, 2009 3:09 pm ET)
           
        I'm sad to say that I almost agree with [Boortz.] I just wouldn't phrase the argument in such stupid sounding terms, or take it to such paranoid-schitzoid extremes. But I DO believe that if someone breaks into your house ("intruder" can be defined a bit too broadly) that you should be authorized to shoot them (or otherwise use deadly force, see below) and/or use non-lethal physical force in your defense and the defense of your home and familiy, and that you should be able to do so without fear of criminal OR CIVIL penalty - as long as you have the evidence to support the allegation of unlawful entry on the part of the assailee. Now... I'd call the POLICE afterwards, not "leave him in a dumpster" but that's just another conservative taking a perfectly reasonable position and rathceting up the crazy in order to sound "tough."

        (And why SHOOT? I may be a bit of a throwback (especially for a liberal) but a gun is a coward's weapon. And, having kids, I wouldn't own one even if I didn't despise them. The one time I though we had an intruder, I grabbed my RAPIER - an elegant weapon, from a more civilized age. And not one generally wielded by cowards. If you see a guy grab a sword, it's a good bet he's crzier than you are: so just leave!) ;)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (May 21, 2009 4:25 pm ET)
             
          In the audio clip, Boortz says that he wants the right to shoot someone in the back as they are running from his house with something that's of value to him. I can't almost agree with that. If someone is running from my house with some jewelry, cash, etc., while my wife and kids are untouched and unharmed, I do not feel entitled to end that person's life. Defending your family is an entirely different matter from what Boortz discussed.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (May 22, 2009 11:58 am ET)
               
            Yeah, OK. Unfortuinately I normally can't hear the clips when I'm in the office, so I have to go by the smaller snippet of text that MMFA provides. No... I can't say that I'd EVER condone shooting anyone in the back as they ran away. (And indeed it would be rather difficult with my weapon of choice anyway!) ;)
            Report Abuse
            • Author by fairliberal (May 23, 2009 12:35 pm ET)
                 
              Ah, the fact that you can't hear the clips explains many of your posts.
              But what would you do with that rapier if the intruder had a gun, I know, deflect the bullet with the sword, very clever.
              Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (May 21, 2009 3:06 pm ET)
         
      I almost agree with him on this. If someone breaks into your home, your rights, as a victim of their crime, take precedent. So if in the process of defending yourself you kill the perp, that's just too damn bad. The second they broke it they forfeited their rights. I'm not much for arguments of constraint. Who's to say what constitutes "excessive force". When you come face to face with a home invader, we'll talk about what is and is not excessive. Until that fateful day, it's pure speculation. But on dumping the body in the landfill, I have to draw the line. Beside, no garbage collector is going to pick up anything as heavy as a body.

      Randy

      PS I don't own a gun, so any fatalities would be from hand to hand combat, possibly a katana. One cut and down they go.
      Report Abuse