Oh, for crying out load, a person would have to kick my door in to enter and another one at the top of the stairs, at that point, YES, a LETHAL response and nothing less. The lights are out, someone kicks both doors in and they WILL be shot, end of story. And in this state, a grandfather shot and killed his 18 year old grandson coming into a window at 1:00 in the morning and nothing was said. The grandfather felt horrible but he was within his RIGHT to SHOOT to KILL. And since you don't know my neighbors and I do, there wouldn't be a one of them that could mistake my home for theirs. I don't live in a housing development. And civilization is nothing but a very thin vainer so drop that line with me.
O.K., let's say she runs outside and there's another man waiting for her, even IF she had the shot gun she couldn't shoot, she is OUTSIDE her home. Therefore her life and her child's live are forfeited for your stupid ideas of what she could do. Someone break in, kill them, they will never do it again to ANYONE!!!
New Zealand (gun control state) rape rate higher per capita than US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime
Been There, BT, Dude put the Budweiser 12 pack down, no man on the table. Why all the livid hostility? What stupid ideas are you referring to? I do not have an issue with her defensive actions with a firearm. Deadly force is acceptable when one believes/feels/knows that their life is in danger inside or outside home. If it isn't no one would have a reason for a conceal carry license.
Here you go, a valid permit holder defends himself against a gun. IMPD: Man shoots would-be robber outside Northside apartment http://www.indystar.com/article/201...d-robber-outside-Northside-apartment?gcheck=1
It may have been brought up in all this but i dont feel like taking the time to read threw the thread but.. If thishappened in america, this Would be robber could sue the pants off the company for having an employee injure and possibly scar him, not to mention if he had any allergies to anything inthe chile, then the law suit would be that much worse. Wich is why i prefer the stand your ground laws which allow measures up to and including deadly force. Dead men cannot sue you.
New Zealand, like Australia counts ALL sexual offences not just rape - - - Updated - - - Ethically that is the worst excuse for murder I have ever heard
I didn't say its an excuse for murder. I was stating that here in America the guy who got chile to the face would sue and win, even tho he was wrong in the first place. And becuase that sort of thing happens, if I'm ever in need to use my firearm, I will not look to immobilize or stop. I refuse to b made a victim in any way becuase of someone who thinks they can behave outside the law.
But I have heard it before and it is a fallacy if you think there will be no consequence to only shooting to harm as opposed to shooting to kill
If you are justified in a shoot to kill situation there is no fallacy. However if you shoot to injure, they can and will sue you. This is why police dept train their officers that if they ever have to pull the trigger, the shot will be a kill shot and not one that will disable. That way the dept and city does not get sued.
Hi Jahnny, Bowerbird has been told this before but she can't get it through her head that IF you are put in a position to HAVE to shoot, you shoot to kill. Dead people bring about no law suits.
First, I don't drink. Second, I haven't had anybody break in while I was home but I have been shot at and had nothing to shoot back with. If she was outside her home and a weapon is not forthcoming she CAN NOT LEGALLY shoot. You HAVE to shoot inside the home. Go look up the law. Hey, Dix, I wasn't on the poilce reserve for 3 years for nothing. With a CWP you CANNOT shoot unless there is a weapon pulled on you. Back in 1966 if there were 3 or more on one you could use whatever force you thought best but even that law has now changed.
It is a challenge to believe (of course fact is stranger than fiction) that say a five foot tall woman confronted by a six foot two inch male with evil intent cannot legally stop him with her pistol unless he pulls a pen/box-cutter/pistol on her or an eighty year old man being threatened with bodily harm by a thug, must he endure the beating if he only has a pistol to repel the act? Is the castle doctrine the only law about self defense in your neighborhood?
Don't sit and ask questions, start looking up the laws on self defense for yourself. I can NOT pull and use my weapon unless I can prove my life or someone else's life is in danger. I have a friend that was attacked by 2 people, one as big as himself. He whipped both of them and tore one up REAL bad. The police got them at the hospital and they got a lawyer and tried to charge him with using excessive force which might have worked if he hadn't had the witnesses that he did. That's right, you can be the one that gets jumped by more than one persons, come out the winner and get charged with using excessive force. Go figure. If he had drawn and used a weapon he would still be in jail. They have a saying here, only shoot if they are in the house and if they manage to crawl out, drag them back in. That's the only legal way a weapon can be used without a weapon being shown
If a life is in danger in your neighborhood and you use a firearm to defend it you are a criminal unless the bad actors are in your home or you dragged them back in? Wow! Glad your buddy didn't use excessive force. His attackers are no doubt the product of the "zero tolerance" school policy...all that does is move life's lessons further down the road and increase the impact on someone's life when they have to learn that lesson in the real world. Hope your state enacts laws in the future that do not criminalize self-defense.
You do know state laws differ regarding self defense, use of force, and deadly use of force. Please tell me what state you live in so I can look them up. My state says no such thing (Kansas)
The screams a woman makes being raped without a gun: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3vWsa4ags The part they left out of video was the rapist was successful raping her.
Same woman and same rapist. 1st rape she had no gun. The 2nd rape attempt she had a gun. http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=_NJQK2BscIg
Washington State. I know state laws differ but I know of no state that you can pull a weapon when there is no weapon pulled on you.
IF someones life is in danger then deadly force is called for, but if just a case of taking a whipping then deadly force isn't called for. But if you go outside your house and a person is standing there you can NOT shoot him, end of story. If they go to grab you you can hit back, not shoot, because at that point your life is not in danger. If they break into your home you can shoot them on the spot. The guy that was attacked was is 38 years old and my the project superintendent. The guys that attacked him were 24 year old and a 28 year old transients from Arizona . This state isn't as bad as Oregon, in 1976 they enacted a, "meet force with equal force ", policy. In a dark room you have an intruder, you are expected to either know or get the information out of the intruder what he's carrying, "Mr. Intruder, do you have a gun, knife or a club, the law says I can only meet you with equal force". "I have a knife". "O.K., wait until I get one". BLAMMMM, "I lied" One dead homeowner.
You are very very wrong, Out numbered 5 to one or 10 to one puts you in imminent threat of death or great bodily harm if by word or action the crowd implies or states their intentions even if they are unarmed, or a 72 year old wheelchair bound woman is facing a 26 year old male who is unarmed but she believes is facing imminent threat of death or great bodily harm. Weapons are not part of the equation. I'll look up Washington states self defense laws and report back.
OK here is what Washington state law says http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.020 Use of deadly force by a citizen. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16&full=true Sorry there is no mention of having to be facing a weapon. Just this statement I suggest a bit of information gathering to understand your laws eh?
What if the consequences of the whipping is you die, you mean I can't shoot? WOW Where do you get these suppositions? If I am under imminent threat of death or great bodily harm it doesn't really matter where I am does it? How do you know if they hit you your life is not in danger? If the 250 pound lean mean man grabs a 120 pound woman, one hit might be all it takes, quit speaking in absolutes like it applies to all situations. You cannot shoot someone on the spot if they break into your house in all states. That is a Home is your castle law. I don't believe Washington state is a HIYC state.
