After watching the  Zimmerman  case  in  Fla..  and  now    a recent  shooting in Mont,  the  'stand your ground'  laws  are  going to be tested to the max.

 

What's  YOUR  State  saying about your  Right to Defend yourselves?

After reading  the comments  section in various news feeds,   (which  really these days  is  a  hoot in itself)  There are a lot of people  that  don't understand  basic  human  rights!     apparently  these  same people  need laws  on every facet of their lives,  or  they  wouldn't be able to  tie their own shoes!

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stand-your-ground-law-gets-major-test-in-recent-shootings/

 

MY feelings  on this is:    Someone  either enters my house, attacks me or a family member...  And  IF  I am prepared,   (me being armed)  doesn't   deter the  ongoing attack..  then   I SHOULD   be able to put  them down.  Now,   I fully understand  if  someone is  coming at me with a knife,    it should be  fairly easy to  gain the upper hand,  emptying a clip into this guy  may not  fair too well in court.   But if  someone is  doped up, carrying a firearm,   chance are  they  probably may just keep firing  with a   kneecap wound!  

 

 

Not saying it's ok to   dump the whole clip,  especially  in their back  (as in: they were retreating)    Believe me,  that has  happened  close to me   a few years ago!  ( self defense  didn't  work in that  case) 

 

Then,  on a related matter,    'insurance for shooters'.      Say you were out  plinking around,  and  a  stray  tags someone..    Now  we are 'covered'????    Once again,    lets  give  our ultimate  responsibility  of our actions  off to a  risk manager!   

Accidental shooting,  NO PROBLEM!    Just  exchange  insurance cards,  and  be on your merry way!

Or how about this scenario..    Just as  registering a vehicle,  one needs   at least liability insurance  before  they can  drive  it.    So  will this be  just another  way  to  make up a  'list' of  armed  people?  (gotta have  proof of liability  before you can  purchase a firearm?)

I guess bottom line for me is,  when push comes to shove,  I'll do what it takes...  and  deal with whatever consequences  may  fall upon me  later..   

Edited May 1, 201411 yr by rancherman

I seen advertised from the police, 'They are there to protect and to serve'.

 

But I was told by a cop that the police actual duties are to investigate and apprehend the criminals ... AFTER the crime has been committed. Less than 5% of the time (and that is way less than 5%) they are actually present to stop the crime from happening.

The cop was my father and I fell I can trust the source.

 

If someone enters my house uninvited, or anyone of my family feels their life is in jeopardy, I will defend my family, period.

And I agree it is over doing it by unloading a clip if someone is in your home.

I have a 12 gauge and one to a maximum two shots will be enough.

Then if that is not enough, my wife can either pass the pistol or use it herself.

We believe a weapon is a tool, we have these tools, and if needed, we will play no games.

Remember that police are citizens just like us and the ONE thing to remember is they do not carry fire arms to protect us, "THEY CARRY FIRE ARMS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES!!!!" just like we have the right to under the constitution which the supreme court seems to think they can legislate from the bench now and nullify even our natural born rights.

I still continue to open carry my pistol with me when I leave the house. I will alway carry a weapon with me to defend my family and myself. Where I live the four leggers are more of a issue then in the big cities the two leggers are the issue. So I'll continue to carry and defend myself just as police defend themselves.

Try living in the Northeast, liberal capitol of the US. I just got a new job and moved from Connecticut to Ohio, thank god! In CT, if someone enters your house by law you have to evade the situation and jump out the window, up to 2 stories. Any public mention of guns and you're considered a bad/careless/evil person because of the Sandyhook tragedy, besides, why would you need a gun, the world is perfect. The main demographic in CT is wealthy liberals from the insurance industry(old money) and big/inner city liberals(no money). There is a small group of conservatives but it's hard to get anywhere when the area is highly unionized and a growing number of people are on some sort of government assistance...my political vent. I invite you guys to research the wonderful works of CT's current mayor and senator, I would name names but this topic is open to all viewers.  

 There is a small group of conservatives but it's hard to get anywhere when the area is highly unionized and a growing number of people are on some sort of government assistance..

.Ok, EXPLAIN to me HOW being UNION is against your right to protect yourself? I am a Union Pipefitter (retired due to disability). How does being Union put someone on government assistance? None of the Union members I know are on ANY assistance other than unemployment while waiting for their next call for work.

I have not read up on the Mont. case until now and I feel he was not properly trained in gun use or protection rights if he just started shooting without identifying the target or giving a warning of some sort first but the Guy from Minn went too far, he had been robbed a couple of times and was waiting for them and even recorded his events which is what is going to send him to the pokey for a long while as he cut off his own chances of it being considered solely self defense when he killed the first guy and a long while later he killed the woman when she came down the stairs and did a second kill shot to her head even and admits it.

 

In his case he took self defense and turned it into cold blooded murder.

I have read 2 cases in the news right now.  In the first case, the homeowner lie in wait when his alarm was tripped (which I feel is justified to barricade yourself in a protected position) BUT have shot the perp he "finished him off".  And waited for a second FM perp & did the same to her, firing the last shot right behind her ear.  And moved the bodies & did not report until the next day.  The homeowner recorded the event & his recording supports this description. 

His statements indicate he meant to kill the perps.  I believe this amounts to murder.  One can lawfully shoot in self defense but it is no longer self defense if the perp is down.  Had he ceased fire when the perp ceased to be a threat...  whether the perp lived or died...  it would have been defensible in court. 

    

In the second case, the homeowner left the garage open & when the perp entered the garage trapped the perp inside.  This case is less clear because a number of shotgun shots were made.  If the home owner told him to stop & was charged by the perp, it would be self defense.  If the perp was not a threat, it is not.   

 

In one case I'm aware of, an ex-cop shot his (bully) neighbor (after an altercation at ex-cops door.)  Bully neighbor punched ex-cop & knocked him down.  Neighbor turned to flee & ex-c shot him in the back & pursed him into the street shooting (apparently missing).  Ex-c is doing time for murder.  Because at the instant of the shooting, the bully was retreating & no longer a threat. 

 

If I am ever in that position I will call 911, barricade myself & if the perp breaks into my area I will shoot as he advances on me.  There is a very small window between self defense & murder...  

 

I understand the frustration of honest guys being broken into repeatedly by the same punks...  but that does not mean you can shoot them just because they are inside your home. 

 

Lots of gun owners do not understand this.  I studied this as a gunowner & further as a part time Police Officer (shoot / don't shoot scenerios) & took additional courses on my own time & expense.   

 

Just feeling threatened is NOT ENOUGH.  The perp must have the means, opportunity & proximity to cause you death or great bodily harm.  There were training cases where a perp with a knife charged "officer nice" who was armed with a 38...  & killed officer nice with his holstered sidearm.   Officer nice, allowed the perp to close the distance & got off his traffic trike on the side towards the perp instead of using it as a shield to slow the perp down.     

There is still good news for citizens, other citizens who jump in to help!

Here is a story from Houston that just hit the interweb today.

 

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/watch-this-is-what-happens-when-the-good-guy-has-a-gun_04302014

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR2apkX9zwk

.Ok, EXPLAIN to me HOW being UNION is against your right to protect yourself? I am a Union Pipefitter (retired due to disability). How does being Union put someone on government assistance? None of the Union members I know are on ANY assistance other than unemployment while waiting for their next call for work.

Whoops, taken the wrong way. I worked union too for a little but for the local municipal department. Two different groups/references. I was referring to the unemployed in CT and to state unions(not private), like the highway dept. and local municipalities who get their money from tax dollars. This isn't going to come out right either way typing like this, you can PM me and we can talk on the phone if you really want to. Anyways, my point was that both groups get paid via government, so for the most part both groups vote for who is going to give them the most, the liberals. And in CT, who imposed strict guns laws? The liberals. That was a generalization. My definition of unemployed people in CT are people collecting and NOT actively seeking employment. 

I agree too,  the guy waiting-in-wait, well,  he's  got some  'splaining to do...    He   definitely  'planned'  an action/set a trap/baited...

 

This is  yet another   ' intent of the law verses  the  letter of the law'  debacle/loophole  all over again...  

 

This  SHOULD be a common sense  debate,     we should be  able to  use  justifiable means to protect ourselves,  and  the  perp  should've used common sense  NOT TO  COMMIT A CRIME  in the first place.. 

I guarantee you they'll use that Minn. case  to set  new 'improved'  lifestyles  for  all of us!

 

maybe a  moat  around our houses  filled with electric eels   would  suffice?  

I am just afraid that people will take these situations "to heart" like they did with sandyhook. Cause even more strict ammo/gun laws. And just when things were starting to cool off again!! They just need to realize that it wasnt the guns that committed the crime, it was the owners. You wouldnt send your gun to prison for killing someone....

Edited May 1, 201411 yr by Ilikeoldfords

Sandy Hook is a black Hole of missing info just the same as the missing flight 370 which the gov has made all info classified now.............tell me someone doesn't know something when you can not get info on it using the FOIA route.

Self defense is about saving your life & those of our friends & family.  You really do not want to take a life...  or undergo the questioning, accusations, court cases, and possible incarceration of even a good shoot.   Give ground??  You bet...  as long as it is to a better defensible position.  Do not confuse tactics with cowardice.  I will retreat to the best defensible position & make my stand. 

Flee a good tactical position to a lesser one??  Not likely.   

I always have a couple pistols with me. One pea shooter and one more serious with 15 rounds.

It you got to shoot, make the first shot count. And whatever you do, don't record it.

If I am ever in a shooting...  which I sincerely hope I am not...  I will continue to cover the perp and will not leave cover until the Law arrives.  Bad guys have been known to get back up or pick their weapon back up...  as a person all alone, it is very dangerous to attempt to disarm or secure the perps weapon because distance is your friend & you'd have to close with the perp to do so.  Unless they are in pieces, it's not safe & better to keep out of that portion of the scene.   

I will put my weapon safely down when the Police are there (taking care not to point it at responding officers) and ask the first responder to secure my weapon as evidence. 

But having been through a great traumatic situation I will undoubtably be ill...  will request medical transport.  Too ill to make a statement at that time.  It was recommended that cops get treated & ask for their union rep before making that statement.  The evidence will speak for itself & the investigation will continue without my statement.  I will assure the Police of my cooperation but as a civilian, I would get representation while being treated...   before making any statement. 

Want to know why?  Amanda Knox.  The other roommates lawyered up, made their statements & got out of the country.  Did not give LE a chance to go on a fishing expedition...  & get things twisted up.