is his children to be shot before they start driving.

A few more shootings to go with the already daily shootings that we have. I think there were 3 little children shot here in the last 3 days.

Including the DNC and websites.

Accuracy be damned....

What sad and pathetic little lives these people lead.
All fear, all the time. Afraid of their own shadow, and of monsters behind every corner. Shoot first - no consequences, just because.


And even more here:

This is not the first time Schaefer’s arch-conservative actions have made national news. He has recently presided over a special senate committee on “the sanctity of life,” which has sought to jail Planned Parenthood employees for refusing to turn over documents containing patients’ private medical information. Last year, he attempted to block a University of Missouri grad student from researching the impact of abortion waiting periods.

I don't have much of a problem with this.

Many of my friends and I could have been legally shot and killed several times over without the property owner facing any type of legal scrutiny...we used to cut across peoples yards, etc...for shortcuts to the bus stop, etc...

I really don't understand the point of these laws...

It's pretty easy to see that one could fear for one's life if someone breaks into one's home, while it's much harder to prove that one feared for one's life from the two teens cutting across one's property. I don't own a gun at the moment, but have in the past, and if anyone entered my house and I could shoot, I would have.

I've had my house burglarized when I wasn't home, and I felt personally violated and frightened for years afterwards. Yeah. It's a horrible feeling to come home late at night - sleepy children in tow - with your back door wide open and your house ransacked.

I can't imagine what it would have been like had I and my children been home when it happened.

The point of the law - no one should have to go broke defending herself in a court of law for defending herself in her own home.

Zimmerman did. How much fun life will be in Missouri!

He was on public property not his own

The courts in all 3 outright murders agreed with the convicted murder, even though there is video to show he shot them in the back. This law allow murderers to kill and never be charged. The courts don't seem to give the murdered victims any rights anymore.

A convicted murderer is a felon and as such prohibited from touching firearms to begin with.

especially if the recipient of the bullet(s) are AA, so this POS might as well pass that right along to his kind....

There is nothing in it or about it that involves self defense
If somebody is on your property, you can kill them
Like the meter readers, delivery people, people passing out flyers, anybody
Based on a perception of feeling endangered
This law has absolutely nothing to do with the right to own guns
It has everything to do with the right to murder
Shit, this guy looks like a scummy little weasel, wonder how many times he had his ass kicked in school

I hope there are enough sensible voters to defeat this jerk.

He's got a creepy perv thing going on. Someone might "reasonably believe" they were in danger.

A nasty one at that too.

Interesting way that proposed law is phrased.

I think people are kind of doing this already. Only they usually manage to hit some poor little toddler who accidently got in the way.

Everybody just seems to be out shooting at each other for one stupid thing or another. Sometimes its the gangs out for revenge because someone feels disrespected. Sometimes its road rage. Sometimes its just that some loving parent left a loaded gun out where the kids got ahold of it and shot each other.

It's all mindless. It's all stupid.

First, I do believe that crime should be hazardous to your health. Having said that, I don't think anyone should be judge, jury and executioner. And I do have problems reconciling those two beliefs. If you live in an area where the police are 5 minutes away after a 911 call, I lean much more to the second belief. If you live in the boonies where police are hours away, I lean towards the first belief. You are on your own an it is unlikely you have the skill to confront an armed intruder and come out ahead, armed only with your wits. The law references intruders trespassing on your property which is a bit broad. If they are in your home, it's panic time and you should be able to remove the threat anyway you can. If they are on your property but not in your home, I don't know how you can assume they are a threat, unless they are visibly armed, in which case you should be able to remove the threat anyway you can, but myself, I would hide. The bill is not about guns, it is about lethal force. The homeowner might use a baseball bat which is plenty lethal. I wish the technology on non lethal weapons would progress a bit faster. A one shot taser is useless, since if you miss, you're are done for. I see they now have multi shot tasers so the technology is going in the right direction. The law would be better if it only gave safe harbor if you used a weapon that is expected to be non-lethal, such as a taser. That might encourage people to buy those weapons instead of shot guns.