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. If you aren't allowed to defend your property, ultimately you will not be able to possess any property, except that that which the criminals don't want.
"Defending property" shouldn't mean that cops become violent. Get an alarm system.
I disagree. If you aren't allowed to defend your property, ultimately you will not be able to possess any property, except that which the criminals don't want.
This is a valid point. If you have to just stand by and let others steal your property, you don't really own any property. It's all just free for the taking.
I hate criminals and I love my firearms.
As much as I hate criminals I don’t think that they should be shot for theft.
Firearms should be used for self defense and self defense only when used on people.
It is not a security guards job to be the judge and executioner.
I retired from San Francisco and don’t much care for a lot of their policies but I agree with this.
I think the guards should be able to carry weapons to protect themselves and others.
I just don’t think a piece of property is worth killing over.
A good old fashioned beat down for theft is ok a good old fashioned killing for theft not so much.
But how do you know they’re not going to be like “You won’t shoot me, so I’m just going to keep loading up my truck here with your stuff”? And how do you know they’re not going to shoot you or kidnap your kids or rape you or otherwise hurt you? And what about women or disabled, etc. who could not properly whoop someone and keep them at bay till the cops arrive? I know I couldn’t. Should I just allow my house to be emptied, my kids to be stolen, and for myself to be raped or worse? (Purposely intended to be hyperbolic.)
Ha ha, I sound like a bleeding heart liberal.
I seldom am accused of that but I am an old school liberal at heart and am not ashamed to admit it .
I don’t take it back nor will I back peddle on anything I said.
Not one word.
That said,
I have been trained by multiple government agencies and am required to do continued education on use of force requirements.
Not to give to much away but there is a legal diagram or flow chart if you will on use of force procedures and techniques.
The amount of use of force in a situation can and will constantly change.
Like a quick tide it can change and you legally need to properly react to that change.
You never want to exceed the amount and type of force for any given situation.
This would include beating the snot out of someone.
I read a lot of people here that are for shooting and killing people that steal property.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that they don’t have the responsibility of carrying a concealed pistol like I do.
Would you really shoot a dumb kid in the back if he was hauling away the television he stole from you?
I might slap the snot out of him but I couldn’t bring myself to kill him unless my safety was at issue.
Dumb kids, dumb people are the same to me and I carry a pistol for safety.
The key word is safety, not punishment.
As far as the idiots running San Francisco?
Yes I agree that there are a bunch of dumb asses located in city hall.
In the back? Heck no. And I can’t imagine a jury would be okay with it, either. I wouldn’t bother trying to assault him at all.
"Defending property" shouldn't mean that cops become violent. Get an alarm system.
And exactly what would that accomplish?
Stores have "alarm systems" at the point of entry that goes off if you bring something through that hasn't been paid for. Shoplifters don't care...they just keep going. The only ones I see stop are the HONEST people who bought something and the cashier forgot to deactivate the tag.
If you really believe a thief cares about alarms, tell me how many times you have made the effort to see why a car alarm was going off. Then as a bonus question, what would you do if you did and actually caught someone taking a car?
All stores should close in all inner cities. Problem solved.
That is happening, but we need to build walls around them "Escape from LA" style, else the thugs will simply move to where we are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC
Of course not.
He only wants the criminals to use guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom
40 years ago making such a statement would have resulted in getting a new "hug yourself" jacket and sedation. Now we elect the crazy people.
It should be assumed, at this point, that anyone who is employed by or runs under the title of Democrat, is a criminal. Or possibly, insane. But, more likely, a criminal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MechAndy
Ha ha, I sound like a bleeding heart liberal.
...
That said,
I have been trained by multiple government agencies and am required to do continued education on use of force requirements.
Not to give to much away but there is a legal diagram or flow chart if you will on use of force procedures and techniques.
The amount of use of force in a situation can and will constantly change.
Like a quick tide it can change and you legally need to properly react to that change.
You never want to exceed the amount and type of force for any given situation.
This would include beating the snot out of someone.
Those are all rules made by bleeding heart liberals. We need to get back to a simple rule, as is outlined in the Bible. If you kill them in the process of a crime, no problem. Follow them, and kill them later, and charges will be brought.
Quote:
I read a lot of people here that are for shooting and killing people that steal property.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that they don’t have the responsibility of carrying a concealed pistol like I do.
I don't any more, but as former military, I had to think through what it would mean to shoot someone. I actually became more at ease with it, once I got away from the military, and learned more about right and wrong.
Quote:
Would you really shoot a dumb kid in the back if he was hauling away the television he stole from you?
I might slap the snot out of him but I couldn’t bring myself to kill him unless my safety was at issue.
...
While I wouldn't shoot a dumb kid in the back for stealing a TV (lawyers cost more than TV's) if I were on a jury and judging someone for that, I would acquit, no matter what some snowflake said about it.
"Defending property" shouldn't mean that cops become violent. Get an alarm system.
Clueless. Absolutely clueless.
Just as a hint, when my apartment got burglarized in Austin a few years ago, they stole the alarm system, just for good measure. (Took the cops over 45 minutes to get there.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821
In the back? Heck no. And I can’t imagine a jury would be okay with it, either. I wouldn’t bother trying to assault him at all.
Assault? Seriously? Assault!
The above two posts are exactly why we have huge problems with crime, in Leftist controlled areas of the country. (And in some parts of America that simply have to put up with Leftist rules.)
Clueless. Absolutely clueless.
Just as a hint, when my apartment got burglarized in Austin a few years ago, they stole the alarm system, just for good measure. (Took the cops over 45 minutes to get there.)
Assault? Seriously? Assault!
The above two posts are exactly why we have huge problems with crime, in Leftist controlled areas of the country. (And in some parts of America that simply have to put up with Leftist rules.)
I don’t understand why my post is problematic for you. I have stated that as a woman, I’m not in a position to try to be taking down anyone, really, and it was suggested that a simple whooping would suffice for the thief kid trying to get away. And shooting someone in the back as they leave is not going to hold up under stand your ground. But I absolutely would pull a gun and not be afraid to shoot if they enter or attempt to enter my home.
I don’t understand why my post is problematic for you. I have stated that as a woman, I’m not in a position to try to be taking down anyone, really, and it was suggested that a simple whooping would suffice for the thief kid trying to get away. And shooting someone in the back as they leave is not going to hold up under stand your ground. But I absolutely would pull a gun and not be afraid to shoot if they enter or attempt to enter my home.
Your post reads, to me, that you consider shooting a perp, in the commission of a serious crime, to be assault.
I have a problem with calling it assault.
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.
.
