whodat2710
New member
I live in a state that does not put criminals before law abiding citizens. I would be justified and would not stand trial. Check your states castle doctrine and see if you can be as certain as I am.
Can I Use Deadly Force to Defend My Home?
- Thread starter opsspec1991
- Start date
I live in a state that does not put criminals before law abiding citizens. I would be justified and would not stand trial. Check your states castle doctrine and see if you can be as certain as I am.
Axeanda45
Banned
Yet you completely ignore that they wouldnt have had the guts to even try if there werent pantywastes like yourself coddling them, judges not punishing those like them, and parents not teaching them there are consequenses to thier actions... People like you actually PROMOTE everything that has led to this in the first place...
Slapping wrists and balling them out does nothing but reward bad behavior...
A few stories of thieves getting blown away will make them think about whether or not it would be wise to break in to someones house...
Sent from my SM-G900V using USA Carry mobile app
BluesStringer
Les Brers
I would've done exactly what the homeowner did, refrained from shooting and done my best to handle it amongst the adults without the cops or courts involved.
That said, the law in Alabama, as with more than half the states in the Union at this time, would've not only supported me opening fire in that situation, but would likewise protect me from civil suits under our Castle Doctrine law's immunity clause. Time of day wouldn't matter - 3:00 AM or 3:00 PM - the situation you describe would permit me to use deadly force. Don't believe me? Read the code section for yourself. The immunity clause is quoted below for your convenience, but you'll find that a burglary of an occupied dwelling is all that's needed to legally presume a threat if you go to the link.
All that said, I am always of the mindset to find a way not to shoot another person, rather than trying to justify how I can legally shoot another person. Such determinations are made at the speed of thought though, and rather than identifying an actual threat, like a weapon or someone in the act of pounding your head into concrete or what have you, all self-defense law that I've ever heard of, even in states without CD/SYG laws, uses the "reasonable belief" standard of justification, rather than proof that a decision made in split seconds and under extreme duress was wholly accurate in its threat assessment.
In fact billt, just for chits and giggles, I went and reviewed Link Removed. Except for your state substituting the word "legally" (AL) with the word "reasonable" (AZ) in describing the presumption part of the law(s), our respective code sections use very nearly the same language and authorize the use of deadly physical force very nearly identically. While your state doesn't have an immunity clause as my state does, AZ does have a reimbursement clause for court and attorney fees if the shooter prevails in any suit ensuing from a given justifiable use of deadly force.
I'm sure he's said before, but since I don't recall where Axe lives, and assuming it's in a state where a similar CD/SYG exists, it is hardly a "dimwitted legal defense" to assert that use of deadly force is supported under the law for reasons not only associated with an imminent physical threat, but also for forced entries, car-jackings etc. Rather than being a "dimwitted" legal defense, it would be a statutory and presumed to be legal defense, just like in Arizona.
Blues
billt
Banned
So did George Zimmerman, "Stand Your Ground" and all. He should NOT have stood trial. He shot and killed Trevon Martin in a totally justified self defense situation. The police questioned him, and were quite satisfied he acted prudently and within the law, with his actions. They then released him. Several weeks later, after the case gained media attention, and racial lines were drawn, he was then charged. He won in a trial that took weeks, and all but destroyed his life financially to the current tune of over $2.5 MILLION dollars in legal debt.
.
The same thing could happen to you, I, or anyone. That's all I'm saying. To think otherwise is to think foolishly. As I said, if Zimmerman had to do it all over again knowing what he now does, he never would have left his car that night. I'm not suggesting to live in fear of the legal system, thugs, or anyone else. I'm merely pointing out the repercussions that can and DO occur within our system of justice, even if you act within the law. All of this adds up to being absolutely positive you have no other option available to you, BEFORE you pull that trigger. If your wrong, and as Zimmerman proved, even if you're right, the consequences can be devastating to both you and your family. Financially as well as emotionally.
.
Look at Zimmerman's life today and compare it to Casey Anthony. Both are forced to live in seclusion because there are people who will harm them. Both are in tremendous financial debt to their attorneys. And yet both were declared innocent of the charges they stood trial for. Everyone knows Zimmerman is innocent, and Anthony is as guilty as sin. But when you examine the train wreck it made of both of their lives, does it really matter?
billt
Banned
I do not disagree with a single thing you've said. My neighbor most likely could have killed both of those kids, and been within legal boundaries to do so. It might have been very legally dicey, and expensive. But he could or would have most likely prevailed. Instead he chose a non lethal option. There was absolutely zero need for him to do otherwise. Those 2 kids weren't going to hurt anyone, and I doubt they ever will. I had a gun pointed at me once, and I NEVER forgot what that felt like. I'm guessing these 2 kids won't either.
.
He told me both of these kids, along with their parents, came over to his house a few weeks after the incident. All apologized to him for what had happened. He told me the one kids mother had tears in her eyes as she thanked him for being patient with his gun, instead of shooting. She actually hugged him. He told me he'll never forget that. Both cops told him he made the right call. A lot of people might not have. There is always more to these situations than meet the eye. Or the story you read in the paper, or hear on the 6 O'clock news.
BC1
,
Bill, it isn't that he was justified. Rather there were no living witnesses to see how the two parties came together and EXACTLY what happened. No one saw the initial confrontation and that is a big if. Could have been either. GZ got off because he couldn't be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. It shouldn't have gone to trial at all, but... we'll never know for sure.
CharlesMorrison
Banned
Yeah...... How long do you think THAT union would last.......
Until one of them meets a violent criminal in real life while they are carrying their unloaded guns, if they are carrying at all.
Oh I don't know ..... I imagine the ET probably follows N R A, maybe even from the same computer
Does anyone actually carry an unloaded gun? [emoji31]
Deanimator
New member
Back in the day in usenet rec.guns, there was a kid who professed his intention to carry a FAKE gun.
Stupid is as stupid does...
BC1
,
Well, they'll only carry it until the first confrontation. I don't generally even carry my gun. And while I know I should, most of the time I'm around my own home area which is kind-of off the beaten path. Where I live is sparsely populated and not on the way to anywhere. There's very few people around and no stores or business. It's mostly a farming community surrounded by state park land. I carry it when on the tractor though because I can't hear anything behind me. But when I head into the more populated areas where the stores and malls are I stick it in my pocket. Rest assured it's ready to rock. I can't imagine carrying an unloaded gun.
I think he means an unloaded chamber
Yes. I should have been more specific.
I understood the point you conveyed on the original comment -- did not mean to use my reply as a jest either, I knew you specifically referred to a chambered round but I was astonished at the fact that some actually do carry without a chambered round. Why carry at all then?
