RE: What are the limits to self defense.

RE: What are the limits to self defense. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 4:18:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound I would guess the majorities intent would be to stop them, not necessarily kill them. True, 3 .45s to the chest disables them real quick.

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 4:23:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: egern The law here is that defending yourself must be in proportion to the attack. You cannot - here - shoot at someone attacking you with a stick, for instance, or use a knife against bare fists. Sounds reasonable, but isn't always, if you are a small person you do not have a chance if your assailant is much bigger unless you have a better weapon. That's not strictly true. You can shoot someone if you have a reasonable fear of being killed. You have to demonstrate that you have a reasonable fear though. Here the fact that they broke into your makes your fear reasonable. We also have innocent until proven guilty so they have to prove your fear wasn't reasonable.

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 4:36:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD There seems to be a wide difference of opinion as to what is justifiable self defense. My personal view is that when they break in to your home, or pull a weapon on you they are fair game. Some seem to think that an assailant must do much more, what do you think? If by fair game you mean that you will kill them? Allow me to elaborate on my previous answer. I would shoot to disable. I would aim at the chest, this is how I have been trained from 9 years old on. I carry a .45,or at home a 12 ga. These in the chest tend to be fatal. Death is very disabling.

subrob1967 -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 4:37:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD There seems to be a wide difference of opinion as to what is justifiable self defense. My personal view is that when they break in to your home, or pull a weapon on you they are fair game. Some seem to think that an assailant must do much more, what do you think? If by fair game you mean that you will kill them? YES You would kill someone for breaking into your home? You would kill someone for stealing your things? Absolutely, fuck them, they should have chosen a less riskier career, or an easier target... One not likely to fight to protect what is theirs. Human life is cheap, we see that every day... It's worth less than the bullet used to kill them.

OsideGirl -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 5:53:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Not everyone wants to kill someone. If you can stop them without killing them why kill them? I have locks on my doors and windows in an effort to stop them without killing them. When someone forces their way into my home, they have chosen the path and have accepted the risk. It is not my role to protect someone that has decided to violate the measures I have put into place.

thompsonx -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 6:42:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Not everyone wants to kill someone. If you can stop them without killing them why kill them? I have locks on my doors and windows in an effort to stop them without killing them. When someone forces their way into my home, they have chosen the path and have accepted the risk. It is not my role to protect someone that has decided to violate the measures I have put into place. Whose mother fucking life do you think I care the most about here.yours or theres? Let me give you a clue. I have first hand knowledge about this shit. I have first hand knowledge how much fucking money it cost to defend yourself. I have first hand knowledge how much fucking time it takes to defend yourself. I have first hand kowledge how little the system cares about right and wrong. All they care about is body count aka conviction ratio. I have first hand knowledge on how you can be denied bail and spend months in jail just trying to get bail. I have first hand knowledge on how much justice cost. Trust me you would not have any fun in the joint.

thompsonx -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 6:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: egern The law here is that defending yourself must be in proportion to the attack. You cannot - here - shoot at someone attacking you with a stick, for instance, or use a knife against bare fists. Sounds reasonable, but isn't always, if you are a small person you do not have a chance if your assailant is much bigger unless you have a better weapon. That's not strictly true. You can shoot someone if you have a reasonable fear of being killed. You have to demonstrate that you have a reasonable fear though. Here the fact that they broke into your makes your fear reasonable. We also have innocent until proven guilty so they have to prove your fear wasn't reasonable. [8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 6:49:05 PM)
Absolutely, fuck them, they should have chosen a less riskier career, or an easier target... One not likely to fight to protect what is theirs. Human life is cheap, we see that every day... It's worth less than the bullet used to kill them. [8\|] Are we are suppose to believe that the police department you claim to work for has a policy that it is proper to use deadly force to protect private property? Have you ever wondered why cops wear body armor? Perhaps it is cops that have this sort of attitude?

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 8:46:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Absolutely, fuck them, they should have chosen a less riskier career, or an easier target... One not likely to fight to protect what is theirs. Human life is cheap, we see that every day... It's worth less than the bullet used to kill them. [8\|] Are we are suppose to believe that the police department you claim to work for has a policy that it is proper to use deadly force to protect private property? Have you ever wondered why cops wear body armor? Perhaps it is cops that have this sort of attitude? In my state they do.

EdBowie -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 8:47:26 PM)
I see them as occupying 2 overlapping spheres. There is a large area of self defense in which no gun need be fired, some of the principles on that topic carry over to gun use, some don't. As an example, I don't believe that any baseball bat has ever passed through the body of a criminal and travelled a hundred feet to kill an innocent child in a schoolyard. quote: ORIGINAL: VideoAdminChi FR, Y'all can have a (mostly) unmoderated discussion about this here: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment *

EdBowie -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 8:49:46 PM)
There is no state in America where the police can ignore the Supreme Court ruling in Garner v. Tenn, that there must be much more than mere protection of property to justify deadly force. And if the police can't shoot you in the back for running away with a can of gas, neither should the people. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Absolutely, fuck them, they should have chosen a less riskier career, or an easier target... One not likely to fight to protect what is theirs. Human life is cheap, we see that every day... It's worth less than the bullet used to kill them. [8\|] Are we are suppose to believe that the police department you claim to work for has a policy that it is proper to use deadly force to protect private property? Have you ever wondered why cops wear body armor? Perhaps it is cops that have this sort of attitude? In my state they do.

EdBowie -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 8:53:06 PM)
That varies by location. Not every place has added the automatic presumption of being a deadly threat to mere breaking and entering... but some have. quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Not everyone wants to kill someone. If you can stop them without killing them why kill them? I have locks on my doors and windows in an effort to stop them without killing them. When someone forces their way into my home, they have chosen the path and have accepted the risk. It is not my role to protect someone that has decided to violate the measures I have put into place.

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/27/2013 9:22:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie There is no state in America where the police can ignore the Supreme Court ruling in Garner v. Tenn, that there must be much more than mere protection of property to justify deadly force. And if the police can't shoot you in the back for running away with a can of gas, neither should the people. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Absolutely, fuck them, they should have chosen a less riskier career, or an easier target... One not likely to fight to protect what is theirs. Human life is cheap, we see that every day... It's worth less than the bullet used to kill them. [8\|] Are we are suppose to believe that the police department you claim to work for has a policy that it is proper to use deadly force to protect private property? Have you ever wondered why cops wear body armor? Perhaps it is cops that have this sort of attitude? In my state they do. Here you are in trouble if you shoot them in the back.

kdsub -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 8:42:23 AM)
Self defense with what? If you are talking a killing weapon it would be different than with fists for instance. I would say you would be justified in using killing force only if your life or another life you feel responsible for were in mortal danger and you could not retreat from the altercation. If say a 14 year old comes up to you on a street with a 3 inch pocket knife and demands your money you would not be justified in pulling your Glock and putting 6 rounds in his head. If you come home and see a burglar in your house you should call the police not barge in and start shooting. You are never justified in using deadly force when you have the ability to retreat. You are never justified in using deadly force when you have the ability to warn and apprehend. You have no moral right to be judge jury and executioner when you are the victim of or witness to a crime. Butch

BitYakin -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 9:24:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound Depends on the state...also it depends on if intent was to kill them. I would guess the majorities intent would be to stop them, not necessarily kill them. Are you willing to bet your "guess" against 8 years in the joint...in california? People talk all kinds of shit about what they would do. I am only sugesting that one should check what the law is in their location and act accordingly. If you pop someone in your home and you cannot prove that it was self defense the chances of you going to jail are high. There is an active thread here,now about a lady who got 20 years for firing a warning shot. All this chair born ranger chin music is just that... chair born ranger chin music. lemme think about that for like ONE SECOND, MAYBE 8 years in jail or MAYBE dead, I'll take the 8 years!

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 9:25:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Self defense with what? If you are talking a killing weapon it would be different than with fists for instance. I would say you would be justified in using killing force only if your life or another life you feel responsible for were in mortal danger and you could not retreat from the altercation. If say a 14 year old comes up to you on a street with a 3 inch pocket knife and demands your money you would not be justified in pulling your Glock and putting 6 rounds in his head. If you come home and see a burglar in your house you should call the police not barge in and start shooting. You are never justified in using deadly force when you have the ability to retreat. You are never justified in using deadly force when you have the ability to warn and apprehend. You have no moral right to be judge jury and executioner when you are the victim of or witness to a crime. Butch A 14 year old with a 3 in blade can kill you if you try to tae it away so I guess you are "morally obligated " to give him your wallet If there is a burglar in your house you won't know till you are inside. He isn't going to give you a time out till the cops arrive. You have to run from the confrontation , but he doesn't ? When he pulls a weapon it is too late to warn or retreat. If he is in your house where are you to retreat to? I am willing to apprehend if he surrenders upon seeing that I will resist on his terms. So the morally correct thing to do when you see someone being beaten to death is call the cops wait for them and hope they don't come after you. Do you really believe that using whatever force is needed to stop someone from harming you or another is being judge jury and executioner? What a sick viewpoint.

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 10:41:02 AM)
If say a 14 year old comes up to you on a street with a 3 inch pocket knife and demands your money you would not be justified in pulling your Glock and putting 6 rounds in his head. Three points 1 I don't like glocks 2 If you know what you are doing you would never aim at the head 3 This is the sort of situation for which I carry a sword cane

RottenJohnny -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 11:45:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD 1 I don't like glocks I'm typically a Ruger man, myself.

BamaD -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 12:34:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD 1 I don't like glocks I'm typically a Ruger man, myself. Yep that is my preference.

jlf1961 -> RE: What are the limits to self defense. (9/28/2013 12:46:21 PM)
If the individual meets any of the following criteria. 1) Breaks into my home. 2) Physically threatens me or my family. 3) (Gotta love Texas for this one) if he physically tries to harm my dog on my property or while I have my dog on a leash. 4) Is on my property illegally (I have no trespassing signs everywhere)

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625