Do you carry a gun in your Z?
12-13-2005, 09:07 AM
#301
Registered User
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think if you treat people like children they will act like children. Everyone should own a gun, sure a bunch of people would die the first week or so but hey, I'm willing to pay that price.
12-13-2005, 09:20 AM
#302
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: na
Posts: 13,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kcobean
Per the post in question, the poster said "crowbar", not gun...this very situation has been discussed on some gun forums of which I am a member. It's almost universally agreed upon that shooting someone for beating on your window with crowbar in hand would be defined as "deadly force in defense of property", which in most states is not allowed. They also agreed that once a window is broken or a door opened, they have entered your domain and your defense is justified.
I know it's a huge gray area and it can be argued both ways. The responsible American in me says if you've lost your presence of mind enough to be beating on my window, then I have reason to believe that you intend to do serious bodily harm to me or my family, but the law often doesn't see it that way.
This is just one more argument for taking a class about defensive handgun use if you own a gun.
Peace.
I know it's a huge gray area and it can be argued both ways. The responsible American in me says if you've lost your presence of mind enough to be beating on my window, then I have reason to believe that you intend to do serious bodily harm to me or my family, but the law often doesn't see it that way.
This is just one more argument for taking a class about defensive handgun use if you own a gun.
Peace.
Yes, I agree with you that shooting someone who is beating your window with a crowbar is not acceptible....especially since you can most likely drive away (which is the smartest thing to do in that case). However, the poster said that he thought at first that the crowbar was a gun....and that's the case I was referring to where I would have shot. If I thought it was a gun, I'd shoot.....if I could tell that it was just a crowbar......I'd hit the gas.
12-13-2005, 09:21 AM
#303
Originally Posted by Kaitain
I think if you treat people like children they will act like children. Everyone should own a gun, sure a bunch of people would die the first week or so but hey, I'm willing to pay that price.
12-13-2005, 11:05 AM
#304
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: B'ham Al
Posts: 1,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kcobean
At the risk of sounding like I disagree with you (which is something I have yet to do), if you had injected yourself into the situation you describe above with a gun to prevent fool #1 from beating fool #2 with the bat, you would likely have been charged with a felony of some sort, and if you shot and killed fool #1, you'd likely go to jail. The purpose of owning a weapon (and more specifically carrying that weapon concealed) is to protect yourself and your loved ones from harm. It is not to act as a LEO in the absence of LE presence. Now if fools #1 and #2 had come crashing through your door and were running around in your apartment, it's open season, but "in the apartment complex" is outside your domain. Reluctantly, I think I would have stayed clear of the fools altercation regardless of my weapons status and called the police as you did.
When gun owners start taking the law into their own hands, that's when the anti-gunners will win the war to disarm America.
For what it's worth, I agree with every other point in your post.
When gun owners start taking the law into their own hands, that's when the anti-gunners will win the war to disarm America.
For what it's worth, I agree with every other point in your post.
I disagree. You have the obligation to protect more than people you love and yourself. You can protect any person from bodily harm or a life threatning situation. It's not taking the law into your own hands, it protecting one individual from another individual inflicting bodily harm.
If it had been a mad boyfriend chasing his girlfriend with a bat, would that have changed the situation for you? Would you have stood by or interrupted the situation? What if it was an enraged father and child scenario?
You can't look at race, creed, religion or sex. It's one human harming another. If you have the ability to prevent it, it is your obligation to do so as a licensed firearm owner. If you could have stopped it and watched the guy beat him to death, whatever the starting situation is, would that not bother you?
12-13-2005, 11:48 AM
#306
Originally Posted by DayBlueZ
I disagree. You have the obligation to protect more than people you love and yourself. You can protect any person from bodily harm or a life threatning situation. It's not taking the law into your own hands, it protecting one individual from another individual inflicting bodily harm.
If it had been a mad boyfriend chasing his girlfriend with a bat, would that have changed the situation for you? Would you have stood by or interrupted the situation? What if it was an enraged father and child scenario?
You can't look at race, creed, religion or sex. It's one human harming another. If you have the ability to prevent it, it is your obligation to do so as a licensed firearm owner. If you could have stopped it and watched the guy beat him to death, whatever the starting situation is, would that not bother you?
If it had been a mad boyfriend chasing his girlfriend with a bat, would that have changed the situation for you? Would you have stood by or interrupted the situation? What if it was an enraged father and child scenario?
You can't look at race, creed, religion or sex. It's one human harming another. If you have the ability to prevent it, it is your obligation to do so as a licensed firearm owner. If you could have stopped it and watched the guy beat him to death, whatever the starting situation is, would that not bother you?
In the eyes of the law however, if you show up on the scene of a domestic dispute and shoot the boyfriend, you ARE going to jail. Now if you try to intervene physically first and the boyfriend turns the bat towards you, you are in the clear to use your gun in personal defense. Then you are defending your own life, not the life of the girlfriend.
The LAW does not give the average citizen the right to intervene with deadly force unless gun owners life or the life of a loved one is at risk.
So, in the original scenario, I might try to stop the bat-wielding fool #1 in other ways first, and on the first appearance that he has now turned his aggressions on me, I would escalate. Or, I might be inclined to assume that a drug deal ending in the death of one or both participants is a good thing for society and sit back and watch
12-13-2005, 01:46 PM
#307
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: B'ham Al
Posts: 1,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not approaching to shoot the individual, you are approaching to stop a threat.
And the law states "defend themselves if they "[reasonably believe] it is necessary to do so, to prevent death or great bodily harm" to themselves or others."
Others, not loved ones. You can't go into a situation thinking of solely shooting someone. You go into a situation to defend life. And use the same amount of force defending as the force applied. You have the right to protect any individual that is in a threating situation.
Now, 2 drug dealers going at it, ok, let them kill themselves and rid us of 2 A$$hats that do no good anyway.
And the law states "defend themselves if they "[reasonably believe] it is necessary to do so, to prevent death or great bodily harm" to themselves or others."
Others, not loved ones. You can't go into a situation thinking of solely shooting someone. You go into a situation to defend life. And use the same amount of force defending as the force applied. You have the right to protect any individual that is in a threating situation.
Now, 2 drug dealers going at it, ok, let them kill themselves and rid us of 2 A$$hats that do no good anyway.
Last edited by DayBlueZ; 12-13-2005 at 01:48 PM.
12-13-2005, 02:33 PM
#309
Originally Posted by DayBlueZ
You are not approaching to shoot the individual, you are approaching to stop a threat.
And the law states "defend themselves if they "[reasonably believe] it is necessary to do so, to prevent death or great bodily harm" to themselves or others."
Others, not loved ones. You can't go into a situation thinking of solely shooting someone. You go into a situation to defend life. And use the same amount of force defending as the force applied. You have the right to protect any individual that is in a threating situation.
Now, 2 drug dealers going at it, ok, let them kill themselves and rid us of 2 A$$hats that do no good anyway.
And the law states "defend themselves if they "[reasonably believe] it is necessary to do so, to prevent death or great bodily harm" to themselves or others."
Others, not loved ones. You can't go into a situation thinking of solely shooting someone. You go into a situation to defend life. And use the same amount of force defending as the force applied. You have the right to protect any individual that is in a threating situation.
Now, 2 drug dealers going at it, ok, let them kill themselves and rid us of 2 A$$hats that do no good anyway.
Here in VA, as far as I know, prior to Aug of this year, this "concept" didn't exist....See below
*FROM PACKING.ORG*
Date updated: Aug 2, 2005 @ 11:05 am
Virginia has no law on deadly force, per se. Instead Virginia covers deadly force with case law and common law.
Basically a person may stand his ground as long as he was not a part of the initial confrontation. If he was part of the initial confrontation, then he must retreat as far as possible and announce his intentions to leave the confrontation before he can use deadly force to defend himself.
An innocent third party can also be defended with deadly force.
Deadly force can only be used against deadly force, where the victim could be killed or greviously injured.
*END OF QUOTE FROM PACKING.ORG*
The bolded sentence, if I recall correctly, is NEW on the website, but published VA law says nothing about the actual threat or use of deadly force since it is all covered by common and case law.
Good discussion. Looking at the gun laws for Florida, I like the states stance on alot of this stuff. Gotta love the South, I guess.
12-13-2005, 03:08 PM
#311
Originally Posted by DayBlueZ
Fl and LA have great laws that i admire. Now Va has a great one.
http://www.legislature.state.al.us/C...975/coatoc.htm
12-13-2005, 03:16 PM
#312
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: B'ham Al
Posts: 1,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yup.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force if the actor reasonably believes that such other person is:
(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling; or
(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape or forcible sodomy.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force if the actor reasonably believes that such other person is:
(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling; or
(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape or forcible sodomy.
12-13-2005, 04:51 PM
#313
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: B'ham, AL
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DayBlueZ
Yup.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force if the actor reasonably believes that such other person is:
(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling; or
(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape or forcible sodomy.
(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force if the actor reasonably believes that such other person is:
(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force; or
(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling; or
(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape or forcible sodomy.
12-13-2005, 06:48 PM
#314
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: san diego, ca- daytona beach,
Posts: 1,944
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for my job i carry a shot gun and a 9mm in my car since im always on call i also have strobes and red and blue portable lights on the dash!! lol im for real im always on call! my car is not a pov its a gov. that means goverment owned vehicle you do the math.
12-13-2005, 07:09 PM
#315
Originally Posted by chuquison
for my job i carry a shot gun and a 9mm in my car since im always on call i also have strobes and red and blue portable lights on the dash!! lol im for real im always on call! my car is not a pov its a gov. that means goverment owned vehicle you do the math.
j/k.
12-13-2005, 07:39 PM
#317
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bala Cynwyd, PA
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's get ridiculous
Without jumping into the gun laws debate let's get creative on protecting our prized possessions: 
1) South African Auto Flame Blasters (no damage to car paint)(http://transportation.frost.com/prod...Label=FcmCtx26)
2) Pepper Spray ("This device called Bingo Auto Defense consists of a pepper spray canister, which is connected to nozzles fitted to the front doors of the vehicle. These nozzles may be activated by remote control or from a dash-mounted button to spray a pepper spray around the driver and front passenger's window.")
3) Razor Leg Chop - my personal favorite (a "rare exceptions was a chopping device, which consisted of a spring-loaded, razor-sharp blade, fitted to the underside of the vehicle. This blade could be activated by the push of a button to slice off the feet of a would-be hijacker." )
1) South African Auto Flame Blasters (no damage to car paint)(http://transportation.frost.com/prod...Label=FcmCtx26)
2) Pepper Spray ("This device called Bingo Auto Defense consists of a pepper spray canister, which is connected to nozzles fitted to the front doors of the vehicle. These nozzles may be activated by remote control or from a dash-mounted button to spray a pepper spray around the driver and front passenger's window.")
3) Razor Leg Chop - my personal favorite (a "rare exceptions was a chopping device, which consisted of a spring-loaded, razor-sharp blade, fitted to the underside of the vehicle. This blade could be activated by the push of a button to slice off the feet of a would-be hijacker." )
12-14-2005, 03:38 AM
#318
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm from Manchester, England where guns have been banned for the last 5-6 years since Dunblaine.
The only guns around are held by gangsters and you'd have to be incredibly unlucky to meet somebody with one. Knives are a different matter, but the only people carrying those are the ones asking for trouble.
So if somebody were to honk me, I'll quite happily give them the finger. And if they get out of their car I'll again quite happily get out of mine, seeing as I'm 180cm tall and 170lb (thats 6 foot and 14 stone) and by the bruising on the last two guys I've fallen out with, I'm quite "handy".
And I can do this because I don't have to worry about some f**ked up 18 year old kid or drunken redneck with a gun. Sure, they might have a crowbar or knife, but a quick trip to my boot gets me a wheel brace.. You know that the worst that can happen isn't really that bad, you'll live and in most cases the only thing that will get hurt is your pride.
Your "right to bear arms" seems to me to be your "right to have arms used against you". Utter madness.
The only guns around are held by gangsters and you'd have to be incredibly unlucky to meet somebody with one. Knives are a different matter, but the only people carrying those are the ones asking for trouble.
So if somebody were to honk me, I'll quite happily give them the finger. And if they get out of their car I'll again quite happily get out of mine, seeing as I'm 180cm tall and 170lb (thats 6 foot and 14 stone) and by the bruising on the last two guys I've fallen out with, I'm quite "handy".
And I can do this because I don't have to worry about some f**ked up 18 year old kid or drunken redneck with a gun. Sure, they might have a crowbar or knife, but a quick trip to my boot gets me a wheel brace..
You know that the worst that can happen isn't really that bad, you'll live and in most cases the only thing that will get hurt is your pride.Your "right to bear arms" seems to me to be your "right to have arms used against you". Utter madness.
12-14-2005, 04:11 AM
#319
Originally Posted by Kano
I'm from Manchester, England where guns have been banned for the last 5-6 years since Dunblaine.
The only guns around are held by gangsters and you'd have to be incredibly unlucky to meet somebody with one. Knives are a different matter, but the only people carrying those are the ones asking for trouble.
So if somebody were to honk me, I'll quite happily give them the finger. And if they get out of their car I'll again quite happily get out of mine, seeing as I'm 180cm tall and 170lb (thats 6 foot and 14 stone) and by the bruising on the last two guys I've fallen out with, I'm quite "handy".
And I can do this because I don't have to worry about some f**ked up 18 year old kid or drunken redneck with a gun. Sure, they might have a crowbar or knife, but a quick trip to my boot gets me a wheel brace.. You know that the worst that can happen isn't really that bad, you'll live and in most cases the only thing that will get hurt is your pride.
Your "right to bear arms" seems to me to be your "right to have arms used against you". Utter madness.
The only guns around are held by gangsters and you'd have to be incredibly unlucky to meet somebody with one. Knives are a different matter, but the only people carrying those are the ones asking for trouble.
So if somebody were to honk me, I'll quite happily give them the finger. And if they get out of their car I'll again quite happily get out of mine, seeing as I'm 180cm tall and 170lb (thats 6 foot and 14 stone) and by the bruising on the last two guys I've fallen out with, I'm quite "handy".
And I can do this because I don't have to worry about some f**ked up 18 year old kid or drunken redneck with a gun. Sure, they might have a crowbar or knife, but a quick trip to my boot gets me a wheel brace..
You know that the worst that can happen isn't really that bad, you'll live and in most cases the only thing that will get hurt is your pride.Your "right to bear arms" seems to me to be your "right to have arms used against you". Utter madness.
Check history brother: Communists, Marxists, etc.
12-14-2005, 05:14 AM
#320
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: na
Posts: 13,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kano
Your "right to bear arms" seems to me to be your "right to have arms used against you". Utter madness.
Yes.....there's a price to pay for the freedom we enjoy....and we gladly pay it. In the meantime, check the statistics of how violence and gun crime in the UK have risen drastically since guns were banned. You've got to realize that disarming the law abiding public doesn't lessen gun crime.....we're not the ones committing crimes and killing people.