Jump to content


Photo

Because Trump 2.0


  • Please log in to reply
5874 replies to this topic

#5861 Jeff

Jeff

    Drum beating laughing boy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,706 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:07 AM

 

 

 

Why did the shop owners not shoot the attackers?

Feces are not exactly an immediate, credible threat to life.

 

 

I´d say you can expect that the next thing could be a Molotov cocktail so the use of deadly force against the anitfa terrorists is mandated.

 

If a Molotov shows up, or a pipe wrench, or a baseball bat, that is a different story. Throwing shit is not the same level of threat as brandishing a deadly weapon. Mob outside my place of business throwing feces... is throwing feces. Mob outside my place of business with deadly weapons... is an immediate credible threat to life. One does not warrant a deadly response. The other does.  Start shooting into a crowd throwing shit, you're going to jail. For a long time.

 

 

They've already used bike locks as clubs and got away with it. 


  • 0

#5862 CT96

CT96

    Deputy Assistant Secretary to the Dragon Slayer Apprentice

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Virginia
  • Interests:Miltary History, Geopolitics, Computers

Posted Yesterday, 10:52 AM

That is wrong you should be free to protect your business.

I think that is disappointing. You should be free to protect your property and business.

 

 

I, for one, value Life over Property. I am not willing to use deadly force to defend mere stuff. And simply throwing shit on the windows hardly qualifies as something to kill over. It disturbs me that anyone here would think it is.

 

 

They've already used bike locks as clubs and got away with it. 

 

ish. I would consider wielding a bike lock or chain as brandishing a potentially deadly weapon in the context of a mob, and therefore worthy of making a defensive use of firearms. 

 

 

In legal terms, the first fight is a fight of words. Once someone throws punches, it becomes a second fight. The first to throw a punch is the instigator of that second fight, regardless of who started the first fight. The next fight is started by the first one to escalate above the preceding fight. So if I yell at you, and you throw a punch, I started the encounter, but you turned it from speech to violence. If I punch back, and you pull a wrench, you escalated it to a fight with deadly weapons. If instead, I draw a gun instead of punching back, I escalated it to a fight with deadly weapons. What matters, legally, is not who started the disagreement, but who escalated it. A mob throwing feces, fruit, etc. is clearly hostile, but is not an imminent credible threat to life. It is very nearly so, but not quite. A mob throwing nothing, but threatening with pipes, chains, bike locks, bricks.... IS an imminent credible threat, and a reply at the same level is appropriate. 


  • 0

#5863 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 12:10 PM

The closest parallel I can think of was the raising of an armed Korean militia in LA back in 92 to defend Korean-owned businesses from rampaging local Angeleno mobs that may or may not have been brandishing. Some of the rooftop scenes were reminiscent of a thin red line of armed men behind a barricade.

 

You will likely find an especially strong undercurrent of support for the protection of 2nd Amendment rights among the Asian-American community in the United States in general. One reason for the creation and existence of Japantowns, Koreatowns, Chinatowns, and the like all over America is not only because of cultural affinity, but also for self-defense reasons.


Edited by Nobu, Yesterday, 12:47 PM.

  • 0

#5864 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,221 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted Yesterday, 10:21 PM

 

That is wrong you should be free to protect your business.

I think that is disappointing. You should be free to protect your property and business.

 

 

I, for one, value Life over Property. I am not willing to use deadly force to defend mere stuff. And simply throwing shit on the windows hardly qualifies as something to kill over. It disturbs me that anyone here would think it is.

 

 

 

 

What happens is your stuff gets stolen again and again, with no real response, eventually they become more brazen, the homeowner/business person sees their assets being taken and their ability to replace them reduced further and further. At some point you will use deadly force to protect your stuff, because you need it. where that line is, differs.


  • 0

#5865 CT96

CT96

    Deputy Assistant Secretary to the Dragon Slayer Apprentice

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Virginia
  • Interests:Miltary History, Geopolitics, Computers

Posted Today, 07:19 AM

Stopping it is a Law Enforcement job. I am not Law Enforcement. Deadly force MAY be required to stop it. But that is a Law Enforcement job. 

 

If things get bad enough that the community votes me Law Enforcement authority, that equation changes. Again.

 

As a "civilian" I am not able to use deadly force except in the defense of self or others against a credible imminent threat to life. 

 

 

Shit washes off. Gunshot Wounds do not. As a civilian, pulling a gun is a choice of life over liberty. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones, and it turns out not to be considered warranted, I'm spending a long time in jail. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones and it IS warranted, I'm spending at least a night or two in jail, and probably a large sum of money on criminal and civil defense attorneys. Either way, my "liberty" is already gone. This is the reality in America today. Yes, I might get lucky, and not get charged.... it does happen from time to time.  

 

Frankly, I am appalled at the very flippant way folks here are eager to just start shooting people in this situation. I'm starting to understand why so many on the left are painting all gun owners as trigger happy psychopaths. I've always argued that, no, in my experience, the vast majority of gun owners are very responsible, and exhibit an absolutely stellar culture of gun safety. You are making me question this, and God Help Me, I'm starting to side with the left on this site on this issue. STOP IT! 


  • 0

#5866 JasonJ

JasonJ

    majideyabai

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,668 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:dokodoko?
  • Interests:Being odd and unusual.

Posted Today, 08:50 AM

Too many gun users don't respect the 2nd amendment. They support it but don't have the appropriate respect for it. Lose the right respect, lose it entirely. Which is very unfortunate. Firearm ownership, shooting ranges, reloading saved brass, understanding the science behind it, and understanding and living on the history of it.. there's a lot to it. I don't go as far as saying Japan should mimick the second amendment, but I also don't think the 2nd amendment in the US should be done away with either, or at least, I don't want to see it go away and rather see it go on as an American tradition. It shouldn't have to be the case of many gun users using their firearms recklessly and flaunting it like a play thing.

Edited by JasonJ, Today, 08:51 AM.

  • 0

#5867 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,644 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted Today, 09:02 AM

Frankly, I am appalled at the very flippant way folks here are eager to just start shooting people in this situation. I'm starting to understand why so many on the left are painting all gun owners as trigger happy psychopaths. I've always argued that, no, in my experience, the vast majority of gun owners are very responsible, and exhibit an absolutely stellar culture of gun safety. You are making me question this, and God Help Me, I'm starting to side with the left on this site on this issue. STOP IT! 

 

At least some of the posters in question are living by Poe's Law, so don't worry too much. ;)


  • 0

#5868 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,634 posts
  • Location:Moscow, Russia
  • Interests:Tank recovery

Posted Today, 12:26 PM

What happens is your stuff gets stolen again and again, with no real response, eventually they become more brazen, the homeowner/business person sees their assets being taken and their ability to replace them reduced further and further. At some point you will use deadly force to protect your stuff, because you need it. where that line is, differs.

 

This problem is next to unsolvable.  There were cases in Russia when legal gun owners were firing their rifles from apartment block windows (=from safety of own flat) at car thefts trying to break into their cars. On opposite side of the spectrum. recent case in Kazakhstan when athlete (Olympic bronze winner in figure skating) was stabbed by two thefts when trying to stop them from stealing his car mirrors....


  • 0

#5869 Rick

Rick

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,937 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Muncie, Indiana

Posted Today, 12:43 PM

Stopping it is a Law Enforcement job. I am not Law Enforcement. Deadly force MAY be required to stop it. But that is a Law Enforcement job. 

 

If things get bad enough that the community votes me Law Enforcement authority, that equation changes. Again.

 

As a "civilian" I am not able to use deadly force except in the defense of self or others against a credible imminent threat to life. 

 

 

Shit washes off. Gunshot Wounds do not. As a civilian, pulling a gun is a choice of life over liberty. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones, and it turns out not to be considered warranted, I'm spending a long time in jail. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones and it IS warranted, I'm spending at least a night or two in jail, and probably a large sum of money on criminal and civil defense attorneys. Either way, my "liberty" is already gone. This is the reality in America today. Yes, I might get lucky, and not get charged.... it does happen from time to time.  

 

Frankly, I am appalled at the very flippant way folks here are eager to just start shooting people in this situation. I'm starting to understand why so many on the left are painting all gun owners as trigger happy psychopaths. I've always argued that, no, in my experience, the vast majority of gun owners are very responsible, and exhibit an absolutely stellar culture of gun safety. You are making me question this, and God Help Me, I'm starting to side with the left on this site on this issue. STOP IT! 

Have your read this?

 

https://www.hoplofob...3rd-Edition.pdf


  • 0

#5870 CT96

CT96

    Deputy Assistant Secretary to the Dragon Slayer Apprentice

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,290 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Virginia
  • Interests:Miltary History, Geopolitics, Computers

Posted Today, 12:54 PM

You guys do understand... I'm a gun owner... a CCW permit holder... and a 2nd Amendment Absolutest, right?

 

Responsible firearm ownership is an essential ingredient to our freedoms. 

 

I haven't read the particular piece on Hoplophobia. I don't need to. I'm not afraid of guns of any kind. I AM afraid of irresponsible use of guns, as too many here are advocating.

 

I'll raise you: Have you read this?

https://www.amazon.c...n/dp/0988867702

 

Andrew Branca is a Self Defense Attorney. His book is the definitive guide to the armed citizen. You want to stay out of jail? Read and understand. Everything I have said in this thread is as a result of reading this book. You cannot just go shooting people because you feel like it. END OF STORY. You cannot go shooting people because they are throwing feces at you. You can only shoot someone if they present an Imminent credible threat to life. END OF STORY.

 

Or we just turn into schismatic rampaging violent mobs. I am getting the impression that too many here actually want that. Surely we on the right are BETTER than that.


  • 0

#5871 nabqrules

nabqrules

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 286 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arizona
  • Interests:Photography, Astronomy, Computers, Gaming, Military History...

Posted Today, 01:14 PM

 

Stopping it is a Law Enforcement job. I am not Law Enforcement. Deadly force MAY be required to stop it. But that is a Law Enforcement job. 

 

If things get bad enough that the community votes me Law Enforcement authority, that equation changes. Again.

 

As a "civilian" I am not able to use deadly force except in the defense of self or others against a credible imminent threat to life. 

 

 

Shit washes off. Gunshot Wounds do not. As a civilian, pulling a gun is a choice of life over liberty. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones, and it turns out not to be considered warranted, I'm spending a long time in jail. If I pull a gun on someone or several someones and it IS warranted, I'm spending at least a night or two in jail, and probably a large sum of money on criminal and civil defense attorneys. Either way, my "liberty" is already gone. This is the reality in America today. Yes, I might get lucky, and not get charged.... it does happen from time to time.  

 

Frankly, I am appalled at the very flippant way folks here are eager to just start shooting people in this situation. I'm starting to understand why so many on the left are painting all gun owners as trigger happy psychopaths. I've always argued that, no, in my experience, the vast majority of gun owners are very responsible, and exhibit an absolutely stellar culture of gun safety. You are making me question this, and God Help Me, I'm starting to side with the left on this site on this issue. STOP IT! 

Have your read this?

 

https://www.hoplofob...3rd-Edition.pdf

 

What the hell is that for?

 

You do realize that CT96 is arguing FOR gun rights?

 

For others on here: I am also appalled at the cavalier attitude regarding the use of firearms. A firearm is a LETHAL FORCE tool, and I carry to defend my life and the lives of others. To use it otherwise is reckless. Property can be replaced, that is what insurance is for. Shit cleans up easily with water, a human life can not be replaced. Now when a person decides that it's a good idea to cause another bodily harm, you  have crossed into having defend your life and another and then lethal force may be justified, but even then there are bloodthirsty lawyers and bloodthirsty family enablers of thugs who are more than happy to destroy the life of someone who isthe victim of a crime and want any excuse to do it.  That one reason WHY gun owners must be responsible (and CCW holders are one of the most law abiding in this country, more than cops)

 

All I can say is maybe those who think this cavalier shouldn't have a firearm, and just stay the f*ck away from me because I don't want your stupid around me.


  • 0

#5872 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,842 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 39 minutes ago

In Texas. deadly force incidents are investigated and most often sent to the Grand Jury.  Any homicide (not just murder but self defense homicides) always go to the Grand Jury.  Deadly force should always be the last resort if humanly possible.  Property can be replaced, human life cannot.  


  • 0

#5873 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,842 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 37 minutes ago

Carter Page FISA application shows that the FBI (Comey, McCabe, Strozk, et all) LIED, JUST LIED to the court, and judge.  I would go to prison if I did what they did, but since they are FBI they will get away with it like always.  You cannot trust the FBI/DOJ to do the honorable thing, all you can do is understand that they will violate every law, ethical rule, and common morality to show their power.  

 

http://dailycaller.c...ossier-garbage/


  • 0

#5874 FlyingCanOpener

FlyingCanOpener

    Kakistocrat

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,969 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Iberia, LA USA
  • Interests:Geomatics // Naval History // Soccer // Teaching

Posted 10 minutes ago

Yeah, why use a gun on people flinging poop when you can use non-lethal means and just pop them with frozen paintballs? :D


  • 0

#5875 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    Now is the winter of our discontent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 30,865 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:deep in the heart of ... darkness, USA
  • Interests:military technology, military history, weapon systems, management/organizational design, early American history

Posted 4 minutes ago

You can only shoot someone if they present an Imminent credible threat to life. END OF STORY.

 

Wrong. Most states refer to death or "grave bodily injury" (sometimes written as "great bodily injury"). Some states allow lethal force to stop arson. Some states allow lethal force to stop forcible entry.

 

As for property; 

 

https://codes.findla...-sect-9-42.html


  • 0




5 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Murph, Rick