So, you wake up and someone is trying to set your carpet on fire with a blow torch,so you shoot them

[2aguy]

Shooting someone is, well, "heavy", I think, is the term. Instinct tells me I would not do it over a mere possession. Instinct tells me I would do it without hesitation if I thought my wife were in danger.
I'm a good shot, too.

A "mere possession" like your home being burned down by a fucking lunatic?
The 'blow torch' lunatic would have had enough time to see the flash from the barrel before I put society out of it's misery.

That is not what the post said. As often happens here, people take a post to say something they want to address, not what the post actually says.
That (hopefully) clarified, shooting someone for trying to set a house on fire would still be a bit much. I would be more occupied with putting out the blaze after stopping the perpetrator. If were armed and attacked by the 'perp', well, the 'gun' might 'go off'.

Without rereading it I thought it said carpet? If he's inside it's game on. If he's trying to set a fire outside the house it's still game on but they'll find him with a weapon.

Here it is .....

A Peoria, Arizona man named Dave B. awoke in the middle of the night to the sound of his security alarm going off. Dave immediately jumped out of bed and retrieved his handgun loaded with hollowpoint rounds. As Dave went to investigate the alarm an intruder with a blowtorch was setting the carpet in his home on fire . . .

Dave and the intruder got into a physical struggle at which point Dave fired a single round from his .357. The round struck the suspect who immediately retreated out of the home and was caught by police. The suspect is still in critical condition at a local hospital.

You're right.
The old man wasnt the shooter but he was a scum bag.
Still have to wonder about the motive though. Was it retaliation against the old man or did "Dave" screw someone over?
Kind of a weird crime setting a house on fire with a blowtorch,sounds more like a revenge thing than anything else.
And the guy wearing a mask makes you think he was known by the homeowner who could identify him.
Be curious to see how this one plays out.

although...having listened to it again.....it is really bad reporting.....I can't say for sure actually....you might have been right the first time.....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

A "mere possession" like your home being burned down by a fucking lunatic?
The 'blow torch' lunatic would have had enough time to see the flash from the barrel before I put society out of it's misery.

That is not what the post said. As often happens here, people take a post to say something they want to address, not what the post actually says.
That (hopefully) clarified, shooting someone for trying to set a house on fire would still be a bit much. I would be more occupied with putting out the blaze after stopping the perpetrator. If were armed and attacked by the 'perp', well, the 'gun' might 'go off'.

Without rereading it I thought it said carpet? If he's inside it's game on. If he's trying to set a fire outside the house it's still game on but they'll find him with a weapon.

Here it is .....

A Peoria, Arizona man named Dave B. awoke in the middle of the night to the sound of his security alarm going off. Dave immediately jumped out of bed and retrieved his handgun loaded with hollowpoint rounds. As Dave went to investigate the alarm an intruder with a blowtorch was setting the carpet in his home on fire . . .

Dave and the intruder got into a physical struggle at which point Dave fired a single round from his .357. The round struck the suspect who immediately retreated out of the home and was caught by police. The suspect is still in critical condition at a local hospital.

You're right.
The old man wasnt the shooter but he was a scum bag.
Still have to wonder about the motive though. Was it retaliation against the old man or did "Dave" screw someone over?
Kind of a weird crime setting a house on fire with a blowtorch,sounds more like a revenge thing than anything else.
And the guy wearing a mask makes you think he was known by the homeowner who could identify him.
Be curious to see how this one plays out.

although...having listened to it again.....it is really bad reporting.....I can't say for sure actually....you might have been right the first time.....

My thoughts exactly as far as the quality of the reporting,there seemed to be some conflicting statements.

Found this while looking into it and it clarifies your version.
MCSO: 1 dead, 1 critical after Peoria-area man shoots blowtorch-wielding intruder

 

[EverCurious]

My husband and I are in agreement, if someone attempts to burn our house down then they are de facto trying to kill our entire family and thus guns is an appropriate response. And that would be even if they didn't break into the house, if one breaks into the house they are automatically putting our lives in danger and thus will be shot on sight (or through a wall - so long as the child [and roommate] are properly in their beds on the way by.)

 

[Tresha91203]

Some of us are more sensitive than others and are not looking for an excuse to pump bullets into another person.

Some of us are girls and not interested in getting in a tussle with a criminal intent on burning us alive. Rape is not a permanent action, but I don't have to tolerate it because death is. If someone breaks into my home while I am in it, I'm going to assume my life is at risk. I will use lethal means to protect it. If he values his life, he would not be breaking into an occupied home.