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.
When someone turns his back, traditionally, he is no more threat. In fact you become the threat if your intent is to kill him.
So, could a mugger justifiably turn around again and kill you?
I am surprised at the ruling. The "stand your ground" law was not meant to authorize shooting someone in the back.
In the old days you'd have to drag the burglars back into the house to finish them off, but with this new law you can shoot them anywhere, but not in the back. The work-around to this problem is to let them rob you, and when they turn their back to leave, you pull your gun and yell "hey, you forgot the Rolex". When they turn back for the watch, you shoot them in the chest. Problem solved.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 08-19-2009 at 05:50 PM..
Shotgun *** vs. Illegal alien Home Invaders:
11 year old girl stood her ground in Butte Montana
Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez, 23, and Enrico Garza, 26, probably
believed they would easily overpower home-alone 11 year old Patricia
Harrington after her father had left their two-story home.
Shotgun *** vs. Illegal alien Home Invaders:
11 year old girl stood her ground in Butte Montana
Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez, 23, and Enrico Garza, 26, probably
believed they would easily overpower home-alone 11 year old Patricia
Harrington after her father had left their two-story home.
No longer do you have to allow the criminal to flee after he attacks or robs you! You can shoot him in the back and kill him dead on the spot!
Court OKs Force Against Retreating Attackers - News Story - WFTV Orlando (http://www.wftv.com/news/20463816/detail.html - broken link)
I have mixed feelings - I support it if the attacker was trying to personally do great harm to your person in an unprovoked attack - like the Bronson 'Death Wish' brand of justice, they had it coming. But if someone was just caught burglaring your home and you see him running out, don't shoot to kill... shoot to maim.
I have mixed feelings - I support it if the attacker was trying to personally do great harm to your person in an unprovoked attack - like the Bronson 'Death Wish' brand of justice, they had it coming. But if someone was just caught burglaring your home and you see him running out, don't shoot to kill... shoot to maim.
Sorry I don't see maiming as an option, you would have to live with one eye open for him, his brothers or friends as someone would have to take care of him the rest of his life. Dead well he got caught and paid the price.
Sorry I don't see maiming as an option, you would have to live with one eye open for him, his brothers or friends as someone would have to take care of him the rest of his life. Dead well he got caught and paid the price.
Hmm... you don't see it as a moral violation to shoot a common burglar and kill him. I do. And the rest of the family would be a lot MORE pissed if you killed him, or do you suggest wiping out the entire family?
I have mixed feelings - I support it if the attacker was trying to personally do great harm to your person in an unprovoked attack - like the Bronson 'Death Wish' brand of justice, they had it coming. But if someone was just caught burglaring your home and you see him running out, don't shoot to kill... shoot to maim.
Nope, shoot to kill. Maiming simply invites a lawsuit that you will have to defend yourself from. It will more often than not, result in you taking care of the thieving ba$tard's medical bills for the rest of his, and your life.
Even the CCW instructor will tell you this.
"Keep firing until the threat has been neutralized, or you run out of ammunition" is the way he put it......He was a cop, BTW.
Hmm... you don't see it as a moral violation to shoot a common burglar and kill him. I do. And the rest of the family would be a lot MORE pissed if you killed him, or do you suggest wiping out the entire family?
That would be up to the "entire" family. How many of them would want to come after me? After the second or third time they might get the message.
That would be up to the "entire" family. How many of them would want to come after me? After the second or third time they might get the message.
Like I said, it is a moral decision. If I see someone confront me in my home, it's a 356 slug in his head. If I come home and see someone climbing out of my truck with a stereo I might not even shoot. I have been in that situation before, and chose not to shoot.
I have mixed feelings - I support it if the attacker was trying to personally do great harm to your person in an unprovoked attack - like the Bronson 'Death Wish' brand of justice, they had it coming. But if someone was just caught burglaring your home and you see him running out, don't shoot to kill... shoot to maim.
There is no such thing as "shooting to maim." Aim for center mass and don't miss. Anything that isn't dead can shoot back, and that will ruin your whole day.
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.
