Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Firearm Laws & Legal' started by Nick Burkhardt, Mar 7, 2018.
All cops are trigger happy A-holes, but only cops should have guns...
My wife was with me - she hates it when I engage with these idiots - but then again, while she's a more liberal than I am, but also refused to sign the petition. AND she supports the LEOs and the 2nd amendment, so...
This is a solution to a non-existent problem—a “feel good” solution. Where is the problem? Is it too many shootings? Is is racial? One cop charged out of over 200–which is pretty low for the years it covered anyway. I am not advocating for the OK Corral, but some common sense has to be used—and I’m not talking about the cop. If you decide to bum-rush a police officer, you deserve to get shot. If you decide to act like an idiot and threaten an officer with your actions—you pay the price.
We will see what happens when police officers quit in droves.
So you are saying that it is ok to shoot an unarmed ‘suspect ‘ if you can get away with it? I say suspect because we are all innocent until proven guilty, at least the law says so the last time I checked.
No, I’m saying the law requires that deadly force be used in some situations regardless of whether the person is armed or not, in high risk situations. People aren’t well educated about this and the first instinct is to be unhappy the person wasn’t armed. Prison escapees, breaches of government property of a sensitive nature, and certain hostage situations are examples.
A person who does not have what would be considered a deadly weapon but who uses a motor vehicle in a reckless manor can be considered armed, and those kind of people have in fact murdered people. So the families of those people now get to tie up the courts for years with wrongful death suits. There is pain on both sides, and the courts should not be the venue to decide which side has the most pain. Certainly not the juries.
I am like you Squidly. I am old, 68 small, 5'9" disabled, 40% with a bad back and osteoporosis... and I pretty much want to shoot anyone that attacks me or rushes me with intent to do harm. I'd probably have to do time for shooting some A hole that attacks me; how can it be that we have to suffer for the idiots? It just isn't right and probably never will be.
350lb unarmed 20yr old man physically assaults you, a 180lb 45yr old man, breaks your face with his fists, tries to take your firearm, and is coming back for round two... good shoot or bad shoot? Is he really unarmed?
I had the same realization when I started carrying. My wife noticed the change in my behavior. Granted, I live in a very safe neighborhood. The risk of work place violence is also nearly nonexistant, so I don't expect trouble But the thought of being procecuted for defending myself has significantly improved my situational awareness (notice everybody around you, and subtly acknowlege their presence). The wife loves it. It makes her feel safer because she also understands that it reduces the likelihood of a dumbass trying to assume his natural state. Use your imagination on that one.
At first glance, sounds like it would be good shoot.
I'll play. Good shoot regardless of size since there was an attack.
How about face down on the ground with hands behind your back and 3 people (officers ) have guns drawn on you and shoot. Clean shoot or bad shoot?
Yep, I'm too old to run but too young to die and that will be my defense.
Size mismatch, physical prowess, skills/training, injuries incurred during the altercation, mental state, and possible substance impairment are “Graham” factors recognized by the courts identified in Graham V. Connor which establishes what is a reasonable use of force.
In a situation like the one posted it depends on a few factors. Which LEO questions you, where you are at as in which D/A or such makes the choice, and probably the biggest one, can you keep your yap shut once they read you your rights. Wait for a lawyer. Almost every time you read about someone getting in a "jam" over a shoot it starts with the one who is in a jam unable to to shut up. Once you are told "anything you say will be used against you" it's time to stop talking. A shocking number just keep talking themselves into court.
Can you find a shoot like this where ANYONE is saying this was good? If so I would like to read it and see just who is saying this kind of shoot was "good".
It was a trick question... this was the situation that Darren Wilson was put in by one Michael Brown of Ferguson, MO. Officer responding to a call and spotted the subject, the subject eventually beat the officer inside the patrol car thru the open door, breaking the officer's eye socket and grappling for the officer's firearm. The officer shot the man when the subject was returning to the patrol car and menacing the officer. Wilson successfully defended himself again in court. At least he is alive, but the case lives on in infamy.
I understand. It is hard to call what happened "good", but I think it depends on ones perspective. The officer survived the encounter = good. The BG is deceased = good. The officer was badly injured = not good. The community and indeed the nation is still in an uproar = not good. But whose fault is this? IMO the BG, the activists, the people, the media.
I'm with those that say "I want to live"!!!
I wholeheartedly agree.
Criminals will sleep better at night!
I always thought that "Hands up don't shoot" was fake news.