cathieq said:I don't have a concealed gun permit nor do I carry one around in my belt. So the chances are I won't be affected by the law UNLESS my looks scare the living daylights out of somebody else who does have a gun. Everytime I go out in public...no, every waking minute I'm at risk for being shot...by someone who breaks in our house or someone who wants my car or by someone who is trying to protect himself and misses his aim. You get the picture...
I think we should be allowed to protect ourselves...Unfortunately, having legal avenues to do so is still at an extreme disadvantage against those who do it illegally. I hate that life has come to this...that we have to establish laws to protect ourselves.
I am not trying to make light of the situation or be sarcastic. I just find it extremely sad...
Get ready for it??????????.....Whens the last time you read the appeals of one of these crackheads on deathrow fighting to save their pathetic arse?......By reading a tad of nonchalance into your advice to me and others who support such laws I could ALMOST safely assume that answer to be NEVER.It is to the point in this nation that anytime you retaliate in any way shape or form against a ,YOU ARE THE CRIMINAL.BS.You should have the right to defend your self,and the courts need the tools to safely determine if that was in fact what you were doing.The guy on the street upset cause his dealer sold him a 20 piece for 40 is not eligible for such claims......strap him to the gurney and lt the cries of cruel and unusual supersede.It really is not that difficult to have standards under law......Unless of coarse you live in the brainless madness we call fairness today.BhamMama said:Just get ready for those self same crackheads to claim self defense when a deal goes bad or they don't like the colors being shown in their neighborhood because they've extended the law to parking lots and sidewalks. More waste of tax payer money being wasted in the courts for these sickos who fight it out then claim they were the injured party. More court back ups, I can see that coming. More police efforts being wasted in a whole new direction on people who don't deserve it.
Sadly they don't play by the same rules the rest of the law abiding world does.
They never have ... and they never will .. and Ignorance of the intent of the law does not permit exclusion of compliance.BhamMama said:Just get ready for those self same crackheads to claim self defense when a deal goes bad or they don't like the colors being shown in their neighborhood because they've extended the law to parking lots and sidewalks. More waste of tax payer money being wasted in the courts for these sickos who fight it out then claim they were the injured party. More court back ups, I can see that coming. More police efforts being wasted in a whole new direction on people who don't deserve it.
Sadly they don't play by the same rules the rest of the law abiding world does.
Very well put.Those who would advocate against such laws would in essence strip your Constitutional right to life,liberty,and the pursuit of happiness.Not to mntion that silly little right to "keep and bear arms".Of coarse these same advocates will argue how wrong it is to defend yourself with a firearm out one side of their mouth,whilst failing to realize that banning firearms would require a law.Now maybe I am short sighted,maybe as said in another thread I am contemptuous,Perhaps I am just a heartless *advertiser censored*....but in my reading of the definition of "Criminal" I am assuming it to mean "One who does not follow the law".So under my contemptuous interpretation I beg these advocates to explain why if we the innocent lay down our arms by law,the criminal will follow suit.Simple questions for the brainless who would deny us our right to protect that which is ours...........Amraann said:They never have ... and they never will .. and Ignorance of the intent of the law does not permit exclusion of compliance.
I hardly think the crackhead even has a clue or follows the laws or legislation..
If they are lucky their Public Defender does. In the end it will be some cute ploy by a lawyer NOT the intent of getting away with it by a crackhead.
Thanx,for the words of agreementconcernedperson said:Proadvocate,nothing wrong with what you say and I agree 100%.I have seen and heard about too many cases lately (particulary w/ jackings) where the people didn't have a chance.They were murdered for their cars and what piddling amount of ATM withdrawals that could be coerced from them.
I may get a gun or not. I know I would never be afraid to use it but I worry with myself that I may be too quick to act.Dangerous times for all.
I'm not talking about some idiot who is already in jail. I'm talking about giving them another defense for their use of violence. Another reason to tie up our courts. Please don't step on my toes. Who the heck said I didn't support it? And who said I was giving advice?proadvocate said:Get ready for it??????????.....Whens the last time you read the appeals of one of these crackheads on deathrow fighting to save their pathetic arse?......By reading a tad of nonchalance into your advice to me and others who support such laws I could ALMOST safely assume that answer to be NEVER.It is to the point in this nation that anytime you retaliate in any way shape or form against a ,YOU ARE THE CRIMINAL.BS.You should have the right to defend your self,and the courts need the tools to safely determine if that was in fact what you were doing.The guy on the street upset cause his dealer sold him a 20 piece for 40 is not eligible for such claims......strap him to the gurney and lt the cries of cruel and unusual supersede.It really is not that difficult to have standards under law......Unless of coarse you live in the brainless madness we call fairness today.
tennessee said:I don't find this law surprising in the least. Almost 40 years ago my parents lived in downtown Atlanta. Someone tried to break into their apartment one night. An officer came to make a report and told them that if that ever happened again when they were home to fire away. It was happening more than they could keep up with and that the most that would happen is that my dad might be taken in for a statement/questioning and released. They decided that although my dad had a decent job and the money was good, they didn't want to raise their family there. They moved back home a short time later.
I will defend my family against anyone who tries to enter our home. All I could tell someone who tried to break in is that they best be prepared to meet their maker. Of course, we do have an alarm system too. I just don't trust that the local law enforcement could show up in time to stop them.
GlitchWizard said:You still have to prove you were in fear for your life. You still can't get away with murder with this law.
As many movies as I've seen where the bad guy gets back up after being shot once - I'd definitely want the option to make sure he didn't get back up. I do think, though, that if it takes a second shot to kill a person, you better not take the shot. The reason is, once the person is no longer a threat, you no longer have the right to shoot them. Better aim right on the first go around.
Wudge said:People most certainly can get away with murder under this law. In situations where it was one-on-one, only the living testify.
GlitchWizard said:I'm afraid it's still not worth the risk. Those people in this world that I want dead will just have to keep walking around.
....let me know when it's open season on predators though - I'll be out in force.