The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's liberty! Are you free?
--- Andrew Ford
Wow... DA Dan May can suck on a D...
Honestly, I've never understood this "criminal's safety" mentality that the libs seem to have.
"SEND IT" happens to be my trigger words...
It comes from the fact that they, and way too many other people, identify more with the criminal than with an armed home owner.
They think along the lines of "that could have been me, or somebody I care about who felt they needed to take something for whatever reason" and they can rationalize a lot of scenarios where they might have to break into a house for this or that reason.
They have a harder time identifying with somebody who would protect their possessions by force of arms, let alone take responsibility for using deadly force. They think more along the lines of "if somebody broke in my house I'd run out the back door and call the police." Typically most of the things they have are very replaceable, especially if they have insurance.
There are few things, or people, they'd risk their own lives to protect and they can't fathom the idea that somebody else might kill them to protect their property or loved ones. They really believe that no matter what they do, at any time they should simply be allowed to drop any weapons, put their hands in the air and surrender without incident. They operate under the mentality that in the real world you can simply call "time out" and get a do over.
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Hope he can sue the county somehow. Michael brown family got over a million and he actually tried to kill a cop.
Damien
If a large number of people are willing to kill you for saying something, then it probably really needs to be said. .
In this case there were two significant factors:
First. the homeowner did not shoot an intruder in his home but in a detached garage that was 25 feet away from his home. The homeowner saw his bicycle lying in the backyard and went back to investigate.
The negligent homicide count alleged that he was guilty of a "gross deviation" from what a reasonable person would do in his place. Prosecutors said he should have waited in his house and called police, or else used his pistol to hold the intruder at bay.
Second, the homeowner shot the criminal in the back three times. His story was that the guy was lunging at him when he shot him. If his story is accurate, the attacker rapidly turned and by the time the defender realized it he had shot him three times in the back. Force Science Institute came up with a study about human reaction time and how long it would take to register that someone had turned around in a gunfight and stop firing: http://www.forcescience.org/articles/shotback.pdf
As noted firearms instructor Tom Givens of Rangemaster.com has stated, "'In just about every single instance I know of where a permit holder or other lawfully armed citizen was charged after a shooting, he went outside his home or vehicle to confront someone "suspicious" or involved in some petty behavior like vandalism. You will get all the heartache you need in this world without going out of your way to get more.'
Last edited by Ed L.; 06-28-17 at 23:26.
I'm going to disagree with Givens. You can interdict a lot of tragedy by addressing the goblins before they gain access to your home, your loved ones and anything else you care about. Talk to anyone who survived a home invasion and ask them if they would have gone outside armed to confront their attackers if given the chance.
Wholesale dismissal of everyone who "goes outside" or "gets out of their vehicle" is MMQB and very flawed. Sure in many cases a person who doesn't "go outside" or "get out of their car" doesn't get charged with a shooting and that is because in quite a few they are killed by their attackers because they didn't recognize or respond to the threat soon enough.
I wonder about a person who see's something strange enough on their property they feel compelled enough to "investigate" and bring a gun, but decides it isn't worth doing because they might get charged if something goes wrong.
Certainly it's a hard game to play at 2am. Is it the neighbors kid stealing beer out of my garage refrigerator or is it another Richard Chase waiting to happen? Most reasonable people hope they never shoot somebody going after nothing more than free beer, but those same people also wouldn't want a Richard Chase or Danny Rolling type to actually get into their house.
It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.
Chuck, we miss ya man.
كافر
Last edited by Moose-Knuckle; 06-29-17 at 05:36.
"In a nut shell, if it ever goes to Civil War, I'm afraid I'll be in the middle 70%, shooting at both sides" — 26 Inf
"We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them." — CNN's Don Lemon 10/30/18
"In a nut shell, if it ever goes to Civil War, I'm afraid I'll be in the middle 70%, shooting at both sides" — 26 Inf
"We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them." — CNN's Don Lemon 10/30/18
Bookmarks