The problem is that when someone else is leaving (property or not) you are NOT justified in shooting them. That's murder, cut and dry... that law doesn't provide for you to mow down someone in petulence.

The intent is that you do not have to attempt to remove yourself from the situation in order to be justified in shooting someone that is attacking.

Tobasco, if you did what you posted:

Quote:

ehh...sorry.....if someone breaks into my house i am going to shoot them. whether face to face, or while he is running away...if he is on my property he is fair game the exception might be if he is unarmed. but if the dude has a gun or any weapon he is toast. why? hes broken in...so what if he runs away? whats to stop him from breaking in again, only killing me this time? nothing can stop him from doing that...except by taking him out of the equation. harsh? yeah. but when youve been invaded to that point i cant imagine how you could let someone go.

Then I sincerely hope you can tell the difference in the dark between a non-uniformed police officer or volunteer firefighter trying to save your ass, and an intruder.

Second, I also hope you have a VERY good lawyer, and/or body armour, because, in the instance that you shoot at a vandal/thief, and they return fire, YOU are the aggressor, and they are justified in your death.

It's a legal quagmire, and if you get caught in it, you have either all of the after-life or the proceeding 15years to life to ponder it.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

leaving the property or not, they are still on it. again, what if they were leaving but they had a gun? there is nothing to stop them from coming back and shooting me. its not like im going and looking for this person...he came to me. its not like im walking through the ghetto at 11 at night and shooting at people. this person has come into my house armed. that right there is more than enough reason to do something.

and im hardly the kind of person to go blindly shooting into the dark. the idea is to get my gun, turn on the light, and if the person is someone i dont know and he has a gun, to lay him out. and in all honesty, if i felt compelled enough to say "hey drop it" i woudl do that first, but its not a necessity.

and further...i live in West Virginia.... rural wv. we have one sheriff and one deputy for the whole county and the occasional state cop. there is no such thing as a non-uniformed officer around here. and the firefighters are all volunteers, so i know most if not all of them. and firemen wont have guns anyway.

and as far as them being justified in my death.....i am more than willing to say that a ruling like that woudl never stand around here. im not sure what our actual laws on that are, but luckily the liberals dont have a very strong foothold on our politics.

like it or not, grey area or not.....someone comes to me in my house....i will not back down.

If they are leaving and you shoot them, you've committed murder... they could have 30 pistols, and the fact would remain.

Again, this law is in FL... not sure about other states. Most cases where non-uniformed police and off-duty firefighters (or even good samaritans) getting shot and killed as would-be intruders are in Urban areas.

The last part is fine, but if they're leaving the property, you shoot and kill them, it's murder, and this law is no shield to that.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:Mike: Seriously, WTF DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE AVERAGE CRIMINAL? The Average criminal is not JUST some punk kid... Even if they were, then would you really rather them be strapped? I doubt it.

Armed citizenry is not something most people want because the average joe is stupider than a sack of hammers given the right provocation.. and the rest are dumer than that. Guns when needed prevent crime, sure... Shooting and killing someone in obvious retreat of your house and having license to do that is invitation for criminals to shoot first, ask questions later. That's a great idea, eh?

Tazers, pepper spray (you say its junk? Try a little Scotch Bonnet and cayenne smeared on your face, see how well you live through it, then multiply that by about 3000 for heat for mace and pepper spray... you'll sing a significantly different tune, chum) are DEFENSIVE weapons.. they do NOT kill when applied properly, and subdue a target long enough to allow police time to intervene and even flush the irritants if necessary. Nobody dies, and no one has to live with the idea that someone else will break in and do the deed before you get a chance to retaliate.

I'm going to have to disagree here, I don't have any stats here, but I would be willing to bet that an overwhelming percentage of burglaries are done by 22 year olds or less. Most of these kids are not extremely violent criminals, they are just looking to make an easy buck. Now, if they know there is a loaded gun in every house that has a right to shoot, the risk vs. benefits don't look nearly as appealing as they did before.

As for giving the invitation for criminals to shoot first... There has to be an awfully big incentive to murder someone just to rob there house. If someone has a plan to go in and murder someone for maybe 15K worth of stuff, with the risk of life in prison, odds are they would do it anyways.

Personally I say issue a gun to every house with free bullets. Make the risk of breaking into a house so high that it is just not worth it. How many purse snatchers would there be if a bullet more than likely hit them in the back?

If you want an extreme example, look at the cold war. Did we really need enough nukes to destroy the world 30X over? No, we just made the risk so high that it would be pointless to shoot first.




Promise that forever we will never get better at growing up and learning to lie

Niceguy4186 wrote:

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:Mike: Seriously, WTF DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE AVERAGE CRIMINAL? The Average criminal is not JUST some punk kid... Even if they were, then would you really rather them be strapped? I doubt it.

Armed citizenry is not something most people want because the average joe is stupider than a sack of hammers given the right provocation.. and the rest are dumer than that. Guns when needed prevent crime, sure... Shooting and killing someone in obvious retreat of your house and having license to do that is invitation for criminals to shoot first, ask questions later. That's a great idea, eh?

Tazers, pepper spray (you say its junk? Try a little Scotch Bonnet and cayenne smeared on your face, see how well you live through it, then multiply that by about 3000 for heat for mace and pepper spray... you'll sing a significantly different tune, chum) are DEFENSIVE weapons.. they do NOT kill when applied properly, and subdue a target long enough to allow police time to intervene and even flush the irritants if necessary. Nobody dies, and no one has to live with the idea that someone else will break in and do the deed before you get a chance to retaliate.

I'm going to have to disagree here, I don't have any stats here, but I would be willing to bet that an overwhelming percentage of burglaries are done by 22 year olds or less. Most of these kids are not extremely violent criminals, they are just looking to make an easy buck. Now, if they know there is a loaded gun in every house that has a right to shoot, the risk vs. benefits don't look nearly as appealing as they did before.

As for giving the invitation for criminals to shoot first... There has to be an awfully big incentive to murder someone just to rob there house. If someone has a plan to go in and murder someone for maybe 15K worth of stuff, with the risk of life in prison, odds are they would do it anyways.

Personally I say issue a gun to every house with free bullets. Make the risk of breaking into a house so high that it is just not worth it. How many purse snatchers would there be if a bullet more than likely hit them in the back?

If you want an extreme example, look at the cold war. Did we really need enough nukes to destroy the world 30X over? No, we just made the risk so high that it would be pointless to shoot first.

GAM mike knows a little aboot the average criminal just from being stationed in the All Criminal Regiment at ft. polk, la. seriously though you hit the nail on the head with the average joe being just above drooling on themselves, which leads me to mynext point.

Nice guy giving out free guns and free ammo to all residents is insane, not just in cost alone, but imagine how many people in florida that can't operate a simple punch card and now you would have them own a gun? most people should not have guns, they can because it is their right but probably should not, they will be irresponsible with them, will not maintain them properly, and most likely if they are not going to take the time to familiarize themselves with such a weapon definitely will be unable to instill any type of respect or reverance for the magnitude of of damage that can be done to their children. darwin would be proud though.

hey now, im escaping from the all criminal regiment lol......i got one day left


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

congrats mike, and good luck

thanks man......its a good feeling to be leaving


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

/me looks @ mike's profile... sees Helicopter Tech...

umm colour me confused...

Anyhow... From FBI stats collected from contributing states, the average low-level criminal (ie. assault, theft under $5000, fraud under $5000) is about 17. Burglary and other felonies are classed differently by state, but Canada has a more uniform Criminal code, and the average offender for B&E/Robbery is 23. It's why I say most criminals aren't kids... where you might get to see offenders locally, I get to see them from across the country.

Niceguy:
The problem with the idea that you've offered is that most people WOULD shoot a criminal in the back, or their neighbour, or whatnot, because people in large herds are stupid, spiteful and petulant.

"An armed population is a polite population" (or however the quote goes) might have been a noble idea in 1776 with single-shot flintlock, but it's utter nonsense in practical application. It only encourages passivity when inequity forces people to criminal measure, and the criminal has no weapon. Otherwise, it's just an invitation for the average person who's had a bad day to take it out on someone unrelated because they got cut off by an inconsiderate prick.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:/me looks @ mike's profile... sees Helicopter Tech...

umm colour me confused...

im a helicopter tech in the army, im in the 2nd ACR (armored cavalry regiment) but we call it the all criminal regiment......and today is my last day in the army.......there..no more confusion


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

Ahh.. well then.

I suspect you're not going to be re-enlisting?

Either way, best of luck in your future endeavors!



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

ehh....no, no reenlistment for me, 6 months in iraq.....fine.......12 months....i can deal.....but spending a year, then the day before coming home, finding out that you have to go back for another 3 months..........no, i quit, that was the last straw. i guess the military is for some people, but not for me.....i will always be proud that i served, but i couldn't make a career of it


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

Did you tell them thanks for all the fish? *Roll


Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

So does this mean I can carry a gun now, or do I still need a concealed weapons permit????? I really dont get this law... Is it just force with force, or force with force FOR force... Meaning you pull a knife then I can shoot you, or if I shoot you when you pull a knife I go to jail? Somebody break it down please.


<img src="http://ojcsolutions.com/images/sig.jpg">

it's in the link I provided.

All it states is that in case of threat you do NOT have to retreat in order to use lethal force. The problem is, people feel threatened by all sorts of little things... Arabs, Negros, Honkeys... hell, squirrels and coyotes...

Anyhow...

It doesn't pre-empt any existing laws, you do still need a concealed carry permit, and you have to follow all the same laws as before.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

You will still need a permit to carry !No you can not shoot someone in retreat .Better think real hard about pulling the trigger because the lawsuits and crap are enough to ruin your life.Besides that the mental trauma from killing someone will weigh on you forever.I believe no one should ever have the right to tell you how and when to protect yourself or your family,the police cannot and will never be able to fully protect you.There are now 38 states with concealed carry laws ,maryland is fighting for it right now hard.In virginia you can carry open but need a permit to conceal.I will carry in MD if they pass the law,ive carried in several other states that allow carry.This stupid redneck outlook on people who have firearms for protection is the same as stereotyping gays,blacks,and anyone else for that matter,there are lots of people who should not have weapons,but they usually dont buy there guns legally.Theres alot of steps to obtain a firearm these days and i believe if your an honest citizen and pass your fbi check theres no reason you shouldnt be able to carry.Guns are an lifelesss object till some dummy decides to make it a killing tool.Living in baltimore ive been robbed twice in 3 years ,twice right in front of my house,my neighbor stabbed for 20 bucks and ive almost been carjacked and had one guy try to get in my car with me in it and he didnt even know i was sitting in the car.I think the whole fear of firearms thing is because most people today werent brought up hunting or fishing,and are seriously misguided about firearms.I will gladly take anyone on here in MD shooting and even teach you how to shoot if interested or just show you what its like for a day.I have guns,im not a rednech psycho,i am christian,i have strong values,and i dont wish to shoot up schools or kill liberals.My 2 cents


redcavi 04

If I made it sound like you could shoot someone in retreat, I apologise.. the law just states that YOU do not have to retreat first.

The point is that if you feel threatened, you do not need to wait to confirm aggression... the crux of the point is that you can, without real provocation, shoot to kill.. if they shoot back and you get plugged, you're pretty much buggered.

The best thing, I think, to mediate this law is the same thing you'd see most military peacekeepers getting... learn body language, and be aware when you're actually threatened.


Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

I just want to throw in my .02.

I dont care if a guy is retreating, breaking in or happens to pass by me in the park if ANYONE EVER POINTS A GUN OR KNIFE AT ME IN A THREATENING MANNER I will

A: If i have a gun shoot first ask questions later or
B: Kick the @!#$ out of him horribly.

and im not talking about if someone is joking around like with your friends or something but if a stranger is either going to cause bodily harm or force me into submission. I will do what should be done whether he decides to run or not.


____________________________________________________________________

Madjack wrote:Like I said before, building an engine like ours (2.2 or 2200) is a painstaking chore , since there is so few custom made parts. It's frustrating to me too, but that's what I like about doing this engine, it's the challenge.

AmazingJay wrote:I would like a better explanation of the law. I saw something about this on CNN last night and they said that if somebody was leaving your house after having broke you used to have to let him go (or at least not shot him) but now you can shoot. I may have misunderstood I wasn't really paying attention at the beginning of the story. I am all for self defence, as far as I thought you were allowed to use deadly force if you were in danger. Am I wrong? I guess I can see a good thing if you do kill somebody that in self defence you have a better chance of not being charged. The problem I see with this is people killing for possessions and not safety. I hate thrives as much as the next guy but do they really deserve to die for stealing a stereo?

i have mixed feelins on it, but for someone stealing personal property....


well personally for stealing a stereo in someones house i just want there to be a law, that i get that many times to beat the everliving hell out of em.

for each dollar the stero costs retail, thats how many licks you get.

i;ve known people to steal from corporate... not really worried, they can replace it.


but own personal property that someone worked hard for??? thats where i draw the line. some people are struggling to make a decent life for their kids, family, etc... only to have a freeloader or someone steal from their busting arse...


it would be better if it was like the middle east, when you steal, they dont want the story, just show em the hand you stole with......CLINK!......

to hell with 3 strikes and your out, meaning go to jail, as said by carlos mencia, 3 strikes law in the middle east is some guy standing on just one foot.


he'll get the message not to steal anymore.



here at times we are just tooooo sensitive to peoples needs. if you steal, deal with consequences.

stealing from a house or car is usually.

1) breaking and entering
2) destruction on property
3) theft

and if they do it once they will do it again....so killin em or atleast putting a slug in em so the police can catch em, just protecting others down the line.

currently stealing gets you put into a jail with HBO and 3 meals a day. just gott make sure bubba doesnt dwell in your "kabookey hole" at night.

armed robbery a bit more.

I'd like to throw a few thoughts in here. First to any comparison of tasers/peper spray to guns, I have been tasered before, and I kinda liked it, annoying at first though, but it didn't stop me. As to pepper spray, my dad has been sprayed before, and while he said it was annoying, it didn't slow him down, he has also sprayed others who felt no effect from the stuff. As for guns, I know of 1 incident where 2 cops tasered and sprayed a guy on pcp, but in the end had to shoot him several times just to slow him down, and finally kill him, but they stopped him. My dad was a police officer for 20 years if anyone was wondering why he was sprayed, it was an accident where another cop missed the assailant. pepper spray and tasers will work on most people, but the effects are a lot less on those under any influence like alcohol or drugs, and they don't work on everyone, where as guns work as long as their pointed in the right direction. If your talking about using them against an armed attacker, you probably will only get 1 chance, and hoping their not high is just too great a risk I think.

Also, if you look at the statistics nationwide, you will find crime is lower in areas with less strict gun control laws(by that I do not mean none of the common ssensechecks, but in areas with concealed permits and more aggressive defensive laws). If a criminal is a killer, chances are they will kill you whether your armed or not, if their not a killer, chances are they won't bother you if they see a gun rack in your truck.

While I completely agree that most people work hard for what they have, and some *hole coming along and stealing it ddefinitelydeserves whatever that person can dish out to them, I also think businesses should have the same rights. I think people forget that every business is 1 or more(usually more) people working their *ss off to make a living for themselves, and that goes for both big and small(my family owns a small business, but I understand the work that goes into big businesses too). I think a shotgun under the counter of every cconveniencestore(or any business) and a mandatory trained and llicensedclerk could do a lot to keep crime down and our jails not so full(and i don't mean just by filling up the morgue either).

That's just a few thoughts I felt I needed to share.

Am I the only person that has a conscience? I wouldn't want to shoot & kill someone cause they are stealing something of mine but I wouldn't mind hurting them a little bit but like someone said before, it's not worth killing someone cause they are stealing my stereo.



www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837

I am going to apply for my concealed weapons permit this summer. My husband and I went to the shooting range yesterday for practice. North Dakota requires a background check, a written test and a shooting test. We had some bad experiences when we lived in Maryland with crime and even since we moved to North Dakota. Our house was vandalized while we were at home and we had no weapons to protect ourselves. Luckily we didn't need to but if it ever happens in the future we are more prepared. We're not going to go crazy if we have an intruder but I feel more reassured since he deploys for 4-6 months at a time that if someone breaks in I feel confident and trained at using my handgun.

NJs Honda Killa wrote:Am I the only person that has a conscience? I wouldn't want to shoot & kill someone cause they are stealing something of mine but I wouldn't mind hurting them a little bit but like someone said before, it's not worth killing someone cause they are stealing my stereo.

i def have a conscience, however, i also have rage, and am not the normal sized person.

rage and me hurting someone would prob lead to near death, if not there, especially if i was pissed off. i;d rather take a shot, and let em not be in my vicinity or be caught by cops, than have me pissed, adrenaline flowing, and fresh from the gym.

like most dangerous things in life, i am tranquil until provoked. after then its your own risk... and catching someone in my house, i prob wouldnt need a bullet to kill, but trespassing into my domain, you put me at risk as well as family and or friends there as well.

if one is man enough to break, enter, steal.... then one is man enough to suffer any consequences from doing so.

common law of life is dont do something if you arent prepared to accept and and all consequences associated with it

thats why i dont sky dive, bungee jump, or wrestle alligators or charm snakes.

^^^^agree to that

not that i'm built like a brick @!#$house like Event, but i do have a proficiency in bladed weapons--and it's not like a rapier, stilleto, dagger, katana, or broadsword can't kill just as dead as a gun can.

Besides, it would me amusing to hear a police officer say on the stand, "Judging by the way his skull was cleaved open, he was obviously coming towards KOTL, not running away."


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

I think most people would only shoot if the person was armed or coming at them, or if you couldn't tell. Personally I don't think it's worth the risk to any innocent person being victimized to wait until your sure of the attackers intent or if he's unarmed for that matter. I am pretty sure when actually faced with the situation, even the people who said they would shoot probably would not if they knew the attacker was unarmed. As for shooting an armed attacker while they run away, I would myself if they were still armed. Nothing stops them from turning right around and endangering mine or my families lives again unless they drop their weapon while running.