Subject:
|
Re: National vote on handguns?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 16:18:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
712 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Duane Hess writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> > Oh dang - it was a fireman responding to a call and now you are up for
> > manslaughter! Sorry, you don't get to shoot people just because they are in
> > your home.
>
> Not sure where you're coming from, but where I'm at it's legal to shoot
> first and ask questions later when an unidentified person is in your home.
Generally, no, you are wrong. You have to establish reasonable belief that
your life was in danger. Example, I'm standing there admiring your Lego
with you, when you spot a 10 year old ripping off one of your sets (Black
Seas Schooner, dang, a good reason to shoot!) and start blasting away. You
didn't have probable cause to shoot. And in the case of the fireman, you
wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on regardless of no witnesses.
You answer is a good example of why I think people who want firearms should
be required to take a course and pass a test (not just about the safe
handling of weapons, but also the legal ramifications of using them).
All bets are off in Texas, of course, where you used to get to shoot your
wife if you caught her in comprimising circumstances.
> Granted, there have been a couple of unfortunate "mistakes" where a family
> member has been taken out by another person living in the residence. Or the
> cops having the wrong address on their search warrant. In general, I'm glad
> to have that law in place. I would like to have the opportunity waste the
> scumbag who has the balls to sneak into my residence and take property (or
> worse) which I spent my hard-earned money on. The only thing you have to be
> sure of is finishing the job, otherwise you could find yourself in a big
> lawsuit and paying money to the bonehead who was robbing you in the first >place.
Ahhhh, the Death Penalty for stealing a crust of bread. Judge Dredd in
action, "I yam the law!"
:-)
Bruce
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
| (...) OK, you are right with regard to the fireman situation. I should have qualified the unidentified person better. In general, if a stranger is in my home uninvited I'll be going after them with everything that I have until they are either (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
| (...) Not sure where you're coming from, but where I'm at it's legal to shoot first and ask questions later when an unidentified person is in your home. Granted, there have been a couple of unfortunate "mistakes" where a family member has been taken (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
110 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
