An amazing case for reducing gun ownership in America

espola said:
You are weaseling away from your initial position into what is already legal.
Click to expand...
Its not legal in this state unless the trespasser has a weapon and you can prove you are in imminent danger.
In a sense, this presents the defender of their property as guilty until proven innocent.
 
messy said:
The trespasser was committing a property crime outside of the house, making no effort to come into the house. From your description, there was no indication that the trespasser was armed, nor is there any reasonable basis to assume that an a-hole breaking into cars in driveways is armed.
The trespasser would not deserve to die for turning around, absent the shooter’s reasonable belief of his own imminent harm, such as trespasser showing a weapon or charging the homeowner.
So if the homeowner shot and killed the trespasser for the simple act of turning around in violation of “the order,” the homeowner should be subject to prosecution for manslaughter. OBVI.
Chickenshits don’t get to kill people in the circumstance you describe...but I notice you gun nuts are chickenshits so you’re probably ok with it. The “order” makes you feel powerful. I get it.
Click to expand...

I have found that dialing 911 and telling the operator in a voice loud enough for the intruder to hear "A person is breaking into cars in my yard - how soon can you be here?" to be sufficient.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Its not legal in this state unless the trespasser has a weapon and you can prove you are in imminent danger.
In a sense, this presents the defender of their property as guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that "defend your life and property " does not include "imminent danger"? Have you thought this through yet?
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Either way, I leave the looking down your nose point of view to others.
Click to expand...

I have always found it a good policy to be honest with people. I had various experiences and results in positions as a college newspaper editor, as a Navy petty officer, as a manager of engineers and technicians, and as a soccer club board member. If I need something from them, I will tell them what I expect. If they ask me what I think of them, I'll tell them. If you think you are below my nose, it's your own behavior that put you here.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Its not legal in this state unless the trespasser has a weapon and you can prove you are in imminent danger.
In a sense, this presents the defender of their property as guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...
Proof of a reasonable belief of imminent danger is probably enough, without the weapon (e.g. if the trespasser turned and charged forward).
The shooter committed a homicide. That’s a simple fact. It doesn’t make him or her guilty of a crime until there is a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the homicide was u justified. So you’re “guilty until proven innocent” argument is incorrect.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Aside from your predictable ad hominem slights, this is not an entirely irrational response.
I will say, that within ten yards, you have very little time to determine if the trespasser has a weapon before its too late.
Do you believe the (person) has a right to defend their property, or should they lock the door and dial 911?
Click to expand...
Tough one. I think there are a number of ways to prevent the trespasser who you busted without putting yourself in harm’s way. If within 10 yards and you give your order and they suddenly turn around it’s a really tough call. Why would the homeowner expose themself like that? I don’t think that’s a safe way to handle it and too likely to result in injury or death. If I had a gun, I would not be out in the open within 10 yards of the trespasser over the contents of my car, with a willingness to kill. That’s dumb.
 
messy said:
Tough one. I think there are a number of ways to prevent the trespasser who you busted without putting yourself in harm’s way. If within 10 yards and you give your order and they suddenly turn around it’s a really tough call. Why would the homeowner expose themself like that? I don’t think that’s a safe way to handle it and too likely to result in injury or death. If I had a gun, I would not be out in the open within 10 yards of the trespasser over the contents of my car, with a willingness to kill. That’s dumb.
Click to expand...
Assuming there is ever a willingness to kill.
 
messy said:
Tough one. I think there are a number of ways to prevent the trespasser who you busted without putting yourself in harm’s way. If within 10 yards and you give your order and they suddenly turn around it’s a really tough call. Why would the homeowner expose themself like that? I don’t think that’s a safe way to handle it and too likely to result in injury or death. If I had a gun, I would not be out in the open within 10 yards of the trespasser over the contents of my car, with a willingness to kill. That’s dumb.
Click to expand...
I've had that conversation about do you shoot someone for breaking into your empty home (you come in on them or catch them coming out) or other property, barn, tool shed, yard, vehicle etc. My thought was no I'm not going to possible kill someone over objects (especially if they haven't gotten away with any). Every circumstance is different but if you aren't a threat to my family, pets, neighbors, myself or anyone else I'm not looking to kill you. But as we have seen before some people feel threatened by a person, unarmed, laying belly down, hands out, responding to and following all directions, so they kill them.
 
messy said:
Tough one. I think there are a number of ways to prevent the trespasser who you busted without putting yourself in harm’s way. If within 10 yards and you give your order and they suddenly turn around it’s a really tough call. Why would the homeowner expose themself like that? I don’t think that’s a safe way to handle it and too likely to result in injury or death. If I had a gun, I would not be out in the open within 10 yards of the trespasser over the contents of my car, with a willingness to kill. That’s dumb.
Click to expand...
You assume too much and don’t pay attention nearly enough.
Nicest way I can put it.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Assuming there is ever a willingness to kill.
Click to expand...
What a dumb thing to say. The entire hypothetical is based on whether or not the shooting/killing may be justified.
So the shooter by definition had a willingness to kill.
Why are you people so stupid?
Nicest way I can put it.
“I love the uneducated!”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top