Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree... What about the case that just took place in the States, where a black woman shot an unarmed man outside her car?
I don't know what particular case you are talking about but someone doesn't need to be armed to pose a severe threat. Mike Tyson could be unarmed. Is he a threat? If he hits a normal person once they will either be dead or a vegetable. People die from punches all the time usually becsue they smash their head off the ground.
I don't know what particular case you are talking about but someone doesn't need to be armed to pose a severe threat. Mike Tyson could be unarmed. Is he a threat? If he hits a normal person once they will either be dead or a vegetable. People die from punches all the time usually becsue they smash their head off the ground.
You have captured the very essence as to why people like myself are so dead-against such laws. It's a sad state of affairs when laws permit someone to take a life, because (heaven forbid) someone kicked a little sand in the face of someone at the beach, or called them a naughty name... and from everything I see and read, the justice system that governs such laws in the US, have the bloodiest hands of all.
If I were a US citizen, I'd fear for my life every time I exited the safety and comfort of my home, out of fear I looked at someone the wrong way, and when society gets to that point and stage, laws such as the SYG law, sadly become necessary, because what's happening is you live in an out of control country, with out of control people, and a government that backs an out of control gun-law.
First off, IMO that is where the 2nd amendment fails common US people... common people, as in those who aren't interested in hot-shotting around with a pistol tucked into their pants belt. IMO affording that sort of power to ordinary everyday people of all walks of life is as asinine as it gets.
This is where your understanding goes askew. The original intent of the Constitution was that every man was endowed with the same rights and privileges as a King.
The ordinary person as you put it has the exact same right to protect himself and his home as a King has to protect his country. That is the difference between an American citizen and a peasant or subject of a king.
If her account is accurate the man was trying to illegally enter her car, she has every right to defend herself against those actions. What exactly do you propose she do? I once put my fist through a drivers side window, it's not that hard. Do you really think that little bit of glass is protecting you from someone? LOL.
Understand the law, if you kill someone becsue they kicked some sand in your face or they called you a name you are going to jail.
Knowing what I know about the SYG law, and seeing how lax the justice system is when ruling on cases where SYG was used, I'm hard-pressed to believe jail time awaits anyone using the SYG law.
You can't ask the dead what he or she did exactly to deserve to be put to death after a person decides to act under the SYG law, and from everything I've seen regarding the Zimmerman case/trial, I'm bent on believeing that the killings you are seeing and witnessing in your country day after day, will continue to balloon out of control, as will the number of cases/trails where guilty people will be allowed to walk freely out of court rooms, even though they are cold-blooded murderers.
Knowing what I know about the SYG law, and seeing how lax the justice system is when ruling on cases where SYG was used, I'm hard-pressed to believe jail time awaits anyone using the SYG law.
You can't ask the dead what he or she did exactly to deserve to be put to death after a person decides to act under the SYG law, and from everything I've seen regarding the Zimmerman case/trial, I'm bent on believeing that the killings you are seeing and witnessing in your country day after day, will continue to balloon out of control, as will the number of cases/trails where guilty people will be allowed to walk freely out of court rooms, even though they are cold-blooded murderers.
You clearly don't have a very good understanding of the SYG laws of the United States, I wouldn't expect you to.
I'm not familiar with the Castle Doctrine, however, when it comes to protecting oneself and family (in ones very own home), I'm all for that, however, gallivanting around with a gun fastened to your hip isn't in my view sane, well-adjusted, or in keeping with modern day progression.
How can you rationalize your 2 very different feelings towards a person's right to defend themselves and their family? You're "all for" being able to defend your family inside your home but a block down the street in your car you feel that defending your family is "gallivanting around with a gun fastened to your hip".
Your arguments against self defense laws are quite illogical to say the least.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
