Benefits of carrying concealed and having real priorities.

Too bad I surely can kill anyone on any of my properties just for being there. The law will back up MY Rights. So, say again how your Rights trump mine on MY property? They don't.

Ultimately, if I die, the one who had no legal right to be on my property goes to jail because their Right to carry an arm and defend themselves is gone on my property.

If I survive, I will have a castle doctrine and/or stand your ground law, depending where I am at, defending my Right as a property owner.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Actually, what you are saying is you will MURDER someone who has NOT threatened you...... Good luck with getting away with that.....

My position is and always has been that a weapon in someones pocket, even if YOU dont want them to have it there is NOT a threat to your life.... It is none of your business.... UNLESS they pull it out and threaten you with it....

It sounds like you are just itching for someone, anyone, to walk across your yard just so you can "LIGHT THEM UP"....
 

Actually, what you are saying is you will MURDER someone who has NOT threatened you...... Good luck with getting away with that.....

My position is and always has been that a weapon in someones pocket, even if YOU dont want them to have it there is NOT a threat to your life.... It is none of your business.... UNLESS they pull it out and threaten you with it....

It sounds like you are just itching for someone, anyone, to walk across your yard just so you can "LIGHT THEM UP"....

It's called justifiable homicide, aka self defense.

Have you ever googled trespassers killed? You should probably see how many times criminals, trespassers like you, get shot for just BEING on someone else's property when they shouldn't have been.

Just for you axe:
Link Removed

http://m.knoxnews.com/news/2013/sep/01/kcso-man-shot-after-trespassing-on-construction/

Link Removed

Want some more proof?

Maybe you should go back and read what I would do if I caught part of the general population trespassing...it's only been a Link Removed so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find where I stated explicitly how I would deal with them...it might be good practice for you since its a really easy "cite your source" exercise.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
well, let us just put this to a vote here...

Who thinks a property owner has the right to shoot anyone who steps onto their property even if that person does not pose a threat (does not act threatening in any way)? If you believe this to be true, say Firefighterchen is correct in a post, or.......


Who thinks you have every right to confront them, and to call the cops on them if they refuse to leave immediately after telling them to do so, but you cannot shoot/kill them if they do not actually threaten you with harm? (pose/show an actual intent to harm you) If you believe this to be true, say Axeanda45 is correct in a post....
 
It's called justifiable homicide, aka self defense.

Have you ever googled trespassers killed? You should probably see how many times criminals, trespassers like you, get shot for just BEING on someone else's property when they shouldn't have been.

Just for you axe:
Link Removed

KCSO: Man shot after trespassing on construction site » Knoxville News Sentinel Mobile

Link Removed

Want some more proof?

Maybe you should go back and read what I would do if I caught part of the general population trespassing...it's only been a Link Removed so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find where I stated explicitly how I would deal with them...it might be good practice for you since its a really easy "cite your source" exercise.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Uhmmm firefighter? There has to be a threat to you for you to be able to claim self-defense... You cannot just walk up to someone and shoot them if they havent threatened your life.... If you DO shoot someone who is not a threat to you , that is called murder........ self-defense means you were DEFENDING yourself, NOT being the one who is the aggressor.... EVERY ONE of your examples has someone who has BROKEN in to someones dwelling in the night or acted aggressively towards the owner... NOT someone who just walked onto someones elses lawn.... Huge difference....

If it (real life) was as you claim it is, the manager of your local walmart could walk up to any customer he chooses, and just blow them away.... or the hairdresser at the local beauty parlor could whip out a knife and filet your 2 yr old daughter right in front of you and claim "self defense! self defense!!!!!!
 
Uhmmm firefighter? There has to be a threat to you for you to be able to claim self-defense... You cannot just walk up to someone and shoot them if they havent threatened your life.... If you DO shoot someone who is not a threat to you , that is called murder........ self-defense means you were DEFENDING yourself, NOT being the one who is the aggressor.... EVERY ONE of your examples has someone who has BROKEN in to someones dwelling in the night or acted aggressively towards the owner... NOT someone who just walked onto someones elses lawn.... Huge difference....

If it (real life) was as you claim it is, the manager of your local walmart could walk up to any customer he chooses, and just blow them away.... or the hairdresser at the local beauty parlor could whip out a knife and filet your 2 yr old daughter right in front of you and claim "self defense! self defense!!!!!!
Here is an example where it is legal for a person to use deadly force on a person who is not attacking them....

Link Removed

Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
bold added by me for emphasis...

That Texas law justifies the use of deadly force against a person who is only messing with property at night... not as a threat to any human.
 
Here is an example where it is legal for a person to use deadly force on a person who is not attacking them....

Link Removed

Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property

§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
bold added by me for emphasis...

That Texas law justifies the use of deadly force against a person who is only messing with property at night... not as a threat to any human.

So, breaking a RULE is the same as stealing property according to you now?

Are you and firefighter planning a little "sniping party" to kill the neighborhood kids from an upstairs window when they come onto your property and steal your sand bucket out of your sandbox???? Inquiring minds want to know.....
 
This is absolutely ridiculous.... these guys are going to the extreme of claiming they can kill anyone they want just so they can claim/hold onto the FALSE IDEA that "property rights" trump all other RIGHTS ever, no matter what....... geesh.....
 
Uhmmm firefighter? There has to be a threat to you for you to be able to claim self-defense... You cannot just walk up to someone and shoot them if they havent threatened your life.... If you DO shoot someone who is not a threat to you , that is called murder........ self-defense means you were DEFENDING yourself, NOT being the one who is the aggressor.... EVERY ONE of your examples has someone who has BROKEN in to someones dwelling in the night or acted aggressively towards the owner... NOT someone who just walked onto someones elses lawn.... Huge difference....

If it (real life) was as you claim it is, the manager of your local walmart could walk up to any customer he chooses, and just blow them away.... or the hairdresser at the local beauty parlor could whip out a knife and filet your 2 yr old daughter right in front of you and claim "self defense! self defense!!!!!!

Did you even read the articles I linked? None of them stated any aggression from the trespassers. None of them had a weapon out in a threatening manner. Just BEING there got them shot. Two examples the criminal was outside of the home (barn and construction site). How did you fail that so miserably?

You also failed miserably at citing my post where I stated what I would do if someone " just stepped on my lawn" even after I linked to the post FOR YOU....and I tell you what, with the reputation police have now days, it's not farfetched the criminal could be shot by a firearm or taser by them.

YOU claim just BEING somewhere isn't justification to being killed. You couldn't be more wrong.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
Did you even read the articles I linked? None of them stated any aggression from the trespassers. None of them had a weapon out in a threatening manner. Just BEING there got them shot. Two examples the criminal was outside of the home (barn and construction site). How did you fail that so miserably?

You also failed miserably at citing my post where I stated what I would do if someone " just stepped on my lawn" even after I linked to the post FOR YOU....and I tell you what, with the reputation police have now days, it's not farfetched the criminal could be shot by a firearm or taser by them.

YOU claim just BEING somewhere isn't justification to being killed. You couldn't be more wrong.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
I actually DID read them.. DID YOU??????

Breaking IN TO SOMEONES HOUSE is a threat... (even if the door is unlocked, it is still breaking in) or are you so ignorant you cannot figure that out......

Breaking into a construction sight and refusing to leave even after shots are fired over your head is proof of ill intent/a threat....

Why is this very easy concept such a hard thing for you to understand? can you not tell the difference between someones presence somewhere and a threat? You are a major danger to everyone around you if you actually think the way you claim..... You have shown that you WOULD skin/butcher a 2 year old just because she is on your property and claim it as "self defense" because you "OWN" the land she is on by your words here... you better rethink this before typing anything else...
 
I gave you an example using a cite and a link... (you know that supporting what has been said with proof thing that you just can't seem to do) where in Texas a person is justified in using deadly force to protect property that showed, at least in Texas in the nighttime, it isn't necessary to be attacked before using deadly force...

And you do not discuss what I posted but come back with the following?
So, breaking a RULE is the same as stealing property according to you now?

Are you and firefighter planning a little "sniping party" to kill the neighborhood kids from an upstairs window when they come onto your property and steal your sand bucket out of your sandbox???? Inquiring minds want to know.....


This is absolutely ridiculous.... these guys are going to the extreme of claiming they can kill anyone they want just so they can claim/hold onto the FALSE IDEA that "property rights" trump all other RIGHTS ever, no matter what....... geesh.....

C'mon Axe ...everyone who has ever read an online discussion such as this one understands that he who resorts to ridicule, insults and accusations not only has lost the argument due to having nothing to back him up but is also an indication of a severe loss of credibility.
 
Hey everyone!!!!!!! Did you know you can KILL anyone on your "property" just because you want to???????? Firefighter says you can, so it just has to be true.... Guess we can just go outside and shoot people who walk down the sidewalk in front of your house (if the sidewalk is owned by you, do NOT forget that part about it, you know, "PROPERTY RIGHTS" and all) without having to worry about that silly thing called "Murder"
 
Bikenut, you did provide an example where it could hapen, yes... I will give you that much... yet you fail to understand how that example works.... It is DARK... and you do not KNOW if the person has a gun aimed at you or not, you just dont know.... so, you ARE actually in a THREATENING SITUATION in your example......

So, your example is not one where, like my argument states, there is NO THREAT PRESENT, so you do NOT have the right to defend yourself or kill someone for simply being on your property....
YOUR EXAMPLE has other aspects to it that change the situation (darkness)......

Just like I ridicule you and firefighter by showing the extremes in your line of thinking, hence butchering 2 year olds is ok by you two..... YOU are ADDING something, (just like I do/have) with the "nighttime" part of your example....

The middle ground is where the truth lies..... If you cannot prove that you FEARED for your life you have no grounds for shooting someone..... You standing upon "property rights" so firmly you cannot fathom that there are times your "property rights" just arent as strong as you claim them to be is exactly WHY I stress that my right to be armed trumps your "rules" (which you claim to be rights) so strongly.....

90% of my posts on this subject have been a "play" on words..... just to get a response from you about it..... Like I said just a minute ago... the truth/reality is somewhere in between .. Right along the line of property rights/personal rights and common sense.... You and firefighter do NOT have the right to shoot me if I dont pose a threat to you.... Yet, at the same time, I DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to "be" on your property... so, I have a choice to make... leave at once, or stay and argue..... IF I leave at once, you cannot morally or legally shoot me (again, in my example, I have done nothing to make you fear for your life, like appear in the darkness or act aggressively) BUT if I stay and argue, I have NOW shown you that I am a danger to you and if I make any sudden movements (or it is too dark to see, like in your example) you would THEN have the right to "self defense" and even then, some of that even depends on where you live......

In OHIO, I am not even "allowed", according to the "law" to do anything other than yell at you and call the cops if I catch you stealing my stuff/property..... yet in the great state of Texas, I could blow you away! and to tell you the truth, that is EXACTLY what I would do if I lived in Texas and caught someone stealing anything on my property....
 
I actually DID read them.. DID YOU??????

Breaking IN TO SOMEONES HOUSE is a threat... (even if the door is unlocked, it is still breaking in) or are you so ignorant you cannot figure that out......

Breaking into a construction sight and refusing to leave even after shots are fired over your head is proof of ill intent/a threat....

Why is this very easy concept such a hard thing for you to understand? can you not tell the difference between someones presence somewhere and a threat? You are a major danger to everyone around you if you actually think the way you claim..... You have shown that you WOULD skin/butcher a 2 year old just because she is on your property and claim it as "self defense" because you "OWN" the land she is on by your words here... you better rethink this before typing anything else...

There is only one sicko who keeps bringing up torturing children, and that person is you. What keeps these thoughts going through your head is beyond me, it's disgusting and you should be ashamed that you would even think that way.

If you read the articles, and my last post, you would see I had three articles linked, but then I stated two of the three the criminal did not break into the dwelling. That leaves how many articles where the person did break into the dwelling? You can do it, 3 - 2 = x? Warning shots mean nothing, the person who walked into a construction site got shot for just BEING there. The person who walked into a barn got shot for just BEING there.

Coming into my property without my permission is breaking into my property. If I have a no guns sign, and you have a gun, you do not have my permission, therefore you are breaking into my property. And as you so eloquently stated, breaking into my property is a threat.

I hope you realize, everyone can see how YOUR thought process works, and how only YOUR thoughts go to torturing children, how much of a threat do you think everyone thinks you are with demented fantasies like skinning children? Seriously, I agree with you on most things, but if doing satanic acts to children are what come into your mind, you should do some soul searching and ask why you think that way...

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
There is only one sicko who keeps bringing up torturing children, and that person is you. What keeps these thoughts going through your head is beyond me, it's disgusting and you should be ashamed that you would even think that way.

If you read the articles, and my last post, you would see I had three articles linked, but then I stated two of the three the criminal did not break into the dwelling. That leaves how many articles where the person did break into the dwelling? You can do it, 3 - 2 = x? Warning shots mean nothing, the person who walked into a construction site got shot for just BEING there. The person who walked into a barn got shot for just BEING there.

Coming into my property without my permission is breaking into my property. If I have a no guns sign, and you have a gun, you do not have my permission, therefore you are breaking into my property. And as you so eloquently stated, breaking into my property is a threat.

I hope you realize, everyone can see how YOUR thought process works, and how only YOUR thoughts go to torturing children, how much of a threat do you think everyone thinks you are with demented fantasies like skinning children? Seriously, I agree with you on most things, but if doing satanic acts to children are what come into your mind, you should do some soul searching and ask why you think that way...

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

Geesh, you are actually going to make me point out how STUPID you have been with every one of your examples IN EACH ONE, THE PERSON DOING THE SHOOTING HAD REASON TO BELIEVE THEIR LIFE WAS IN DANGER.....
There, NOW YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR FLAW is........ WHY your examples DO NOT APPLY to my scenarios.. IN MY SCENARIOS, there is no threat, so there is no justified shooting....

IF what you say is true, that just by being somewhere is grounds for being killed
, then my examples of your way of thinking have to be 100% true also...You CAN shoot a little 2 year old just for walking onto your property, you CAN KILL the postman for delivering your mail, cause, you know, he is ON YOUR PROPERTY..... Hey, if you cannot accept the actual reality of what you are claiming you have the "right" to do, then your view MUST BE WRONG...... and by default, then it would be that I am the one with the correct view..
 
Bikenut, you did provide an example where it could hapen, yes... I will give you that much... yet you fail to understand how that example works.... It is DARK... and you do not KNOW if the person has a gun aimed at you or not, you just dont know.... so, you ARE actually in a THREATENING SITUATION in your example......

So, your example is not one where, like my argument states, there is NO THREAT PRESENT, so you do NOT have the right to defend yourself or kill someone for simply being on your property....
YOUR EXAMPLE has other aspects to it that change the situation (darkness)......

Ummm... nope... your reading too much into the situation by saying I wouldn't "know" if a kid stealing a bale of hay from my barn has a gun. Hell.. I wouldn't know if he DIDN'T have a gun either... yet the Texas law doesn't say anything at all about me being "threatened". That law pertains only to "property". Kindly go back and read it again and stop reaching for straws.

Just like I ridicule you and firefighter by showing the extremes in your line of thinking, hence butchering 2 year olds is ok by you two.....

Enough of your accusations about me being Ok with horrific acts to children! I have never said, hinted, or implied, such a thing. The fact that you would resort to such a libelous tactic speaks volumes.

YOU are ADDING something, (just like I do/have) with the "nighttime" part of your example....

So you are trying to justify and excuse accusing me of being Ok with horrendous acts against children by saying doing so is just "adding something" as a part of your argument? Perhaps it would be wise for you to look up the definition of "libel".

The middle ground is where the truth lies..... If you cannot prove that you FEARED for your life you have no grounds for shooting someone..... You standing upon "property rights" so firmly you cannot fathom that there are times your "property rights" just arent as strong as you claim them to be is exactly WHY I stress that my right to be armed trumps your "rules" (which you claim to be rights) so strongly.....

But the Texas law shows that, at least in Texas at night, private property rights are far more powerful than you are willing to admit. And all that would be necessary would be to "prove" the person on private property was guilty of one or more of the crimes enumerated in that law. Hint... that law only pertains to property and does not cover threatening/attacking a person.

90% of my posts on this subject have been a "play" on words..... just to get a response from you about it.....

I see... so all your talk about harming kids is just to " play on words" in an effort to smear me? You had to resort to such dastardly measures just to "play"? Do you have any idea what that admission does to your credibility?

Like I said just a minute ago... the truth/reality is somewhere in between .. Right along the line of property rights/personal rights and common sense.... You and firefighter do NOT have the right to shoot me if I dont pose a threat to you....

Hmmm... but if you are not a threat to me but are stealing a bale of hay out of my barn at night in Texas...
Yet, at the same time, I DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to "be" on your property... so, I have a choice to make... leave at once, or stay and argue.....

You left out one other and extremely important choice... the most important choice... stay off my property in the first place because you do not have permission to be there nor do you have a right to be there. Now why would you not consider that choice FIRST? Bear in mind I'm talking about any and all of my property from my home to my business that is open to the public.
IF I leave at once, you cannot morally or legally shoot me (again, in my example, I have done nothing to make you fear for your life, like appear in the darkness or act aggressively) BUT if I stay and argue, I have NOW shown you that I am a danger to you and if I make any sudden movements (or it is too dark to see, like in your example) you would THEN have the right to "self defense" and even then, some of that even depends on where you live......

Talk about having things screwed up.... Axe... neither appearing in the darkness nor an argument between a property owner and a trespasser in and of themselves constitutes a "threat" that justifies a lethal force response. But if you have cites and/or links that proves it does then I'd like to see them.

And again you try to twist things. That Texas law I gave as an example didn't say anything about not being able to see... it said "night time"... and sometimes there is light from yard lights/full moon with a clear sky that allow a person to see... but it is still "night time".


In OHIO, I am not even "allowed", according to the "law" to do anything other than yell at you and call the cops if I catch you stealing my stuff/property..... yet in the great state of Texas, I could blow you away! and to tell you the truth, that is EXACTLY what I would do if I lived in Texas and caught someone stealing anything on my property....
part of my reply is in blue contained with the quoted post above...

Hmmmm... first you say that people don't have the right to shoot someone unless they are a threat to them yet ... if you lived in Texas... you would take advantage of the Texas night time law to
yet in the great state of Texas, I could blow you away! and to tell you the truth, that is EXACTLY what I would do if I lived in Texas and caught someone stealing anything on my property....

Edited for clarity....
 
and yet again, you totally ignore what I wrote and go off on a tangent about what you think I said... that is the end of our "conversation"... Yours and firefighters thoughts/stance on "property rights" if followed to their logical ends, include the RIGHT to kill anyone for ANY reason or none at all, as long as they are on your "property".... in the real world, that is called MURDER....(when there is no threat to you)
 
and yet again, you totally ignore what I wrote and go off on a tangent about what you think I said... that is the end of our "conversation"... Yours and firefighters thoughts/stance on "property rights" if followed to their logical ends, include the RIGHT to kill anyone for ANY reason or none at all, as long as they are on your "property".... in the real world, that is called MURDER....(when there is no threat to you)
Actually I do not believe your statement above has any connection with any logic of any kind.

As far as it being the end of our conversation? Dear Lord in Heaven above... one can only hope!
 
Geesh, you are actually going to make me point out how STUPID you have been with every one of your examples IN EACH ONE, THE PERSON DOING THE SHOOTING HAD REASON TO BELIEVE THEIR LIFE WAS IN DANGER.....
There, NOW YOU KNOW WHERE YOUR FLAW is........ WHY your examples DO NOT APPLY to my scenarios.. IN MY SCENARIOS, there is no threat, so there is no justified shooting....

IF what you say is true, that just by being somewhere is grounds for being killed
, then my examples of your way of thinking have to be 100% true also...You CAN shoot a little 2 year old just for walking onto your property, you CAN KILL the postman for delivering your mail, cause, you know, he is ON YOUR PROPERTY..... Hey, if you cannot accept the actual reality of what you are claiming you have the "right" to do, then your view MUST BE WRONG...... and by default, then it would be that I am the one with the correct view..

You can not tell me with exact certainty when a threat is there or not. That is your flaw, you are not all knowing, and as bikenut pointed out, if I have reasonable fear from a grown man breaking into my property at anytime, you are a threat, no matter what YOUR scenarios are.

Why would I kill a postman? My mailbox is not on my property. Guess your wrong AGAIN. If I had mail coming, I would give them permission to come into my property all ready. If they don't have permission, then they will be considered a threat. Just like everyone else who enters without my permission.

As for the two year old you seem to love thinking about dying, I assure you they are only in danger from those who have satanic thoughts about them, which seem to be only coming from you.

Maybe this answer will keep these demons inside your head. Children and adults are two separate levels or risk, but you are going to try and merge the two to justify your lack of respect for property rights. You are not a two year old, you are not "non threatening." Stop using children as a scapegoat for your criminal intentions to trespass.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app
 
You can not tell me with exact certainty when a threat is there or not. That is your flaw, you are not all knowing, and as bikenut pointed out, if I have reasonable fear from a grown man breaking into my property at anytime, you are a threat, no matter what YOUR scenarios are.

Why would I kill a postman? My mailbox is not on my property. Guess your wrong AGAIN. If I had mail coming, I would give them permission to come into my property all ready. If they don't have permission, then they will be considered a threat. Just like everyone else who enters without my permission.

As for the two year old you seem to love thinking about dying, I assure you they are only in danger from those who have satanic thoughts about them, which seem to be only coming from you.

Maybe this answer will keep these demons inside your head. Children and adults are two separate levels or risk, but you are going to try and merge the two to justify your lack of respect for property rights. You are not a two year old, you are not "non threatening." Stop using children as a scapegoat for your criminal intentions to trespass.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app


I am NOT the one that insist on the power to kill anyone on my property for no reason at all, YOU ARE.... I am the one saying that anyone, anywhere must FIRST show a danger to you BEFORE you can justify shooting them..... YOU are the murder condoner,dreamer/satanic (your words, not mine) one...... I am the one who keeps insisting people have rights, you are the one that states they dont....
 
I am NOT the one that insist on the power to kill anyone on my property for no reason at all, YOU ARE.... I am the one saying that anyone, anywhere must FIRST show a danger to you BEFORE you can justify shooting them..... YOU are the murder condoner,dreamer/satanic (your words, not mine) one...... I am the one who keeps insisting people have rights, you are the one that states they dont....

You are the ONLY one to bring up skinning children in some sick twisted way to justify trespassing because "your right's trump property owners rights and they have no valid reason to not allow you on their property." Someone with such a sick mentality really has no place judging others line in the sandbox as to where justified deadly force comes into play.

I all ready agreed with you, you have the right to defend yourself, and your rights end at the soles of your feet. My property rights end at my property line. You can dream of being a 2 year old or whatever you want to do with them, whatever fancies you, but you will be considered a threat if you break into my property without my permission, with or without a weapon, just based on the knowledge I have gained of you in the past 10 replies.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,520
Messages
610,643
Members
74,980
Latest member
Brad_R
Back
Top