Oh Portland?

[ilikegunspdx]

I think the threshold is fairly straight forward: Would a reasonable person believe their life is in danger?

Let's say u and ur family are in ur house. A mob breaks some of your windows and starts throwing burning flares through those windows in order to burn u and ur family alive. What reasonable person would say their life is not in danger?

 

[albin25]

The article points out that this is the FOURTH time his house has been targeted...

.... what the heck's wrong with these lazy idiots??

Everybody knows it shouldn't take more than 2 attempts to burn a city officials house down!
Are they just trying to pad their timecards?

 

[NW Backpacker]

Is it or is it NOT.....a shooting situation?

It is legal to shoot to prevent commission of arson per Oregon Law, specifically ORS 161.225:

ORS 161.225 – Use of physical force in defense of premises

A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the…

www.oregonlaws.org

ORS 161.225¹

Use of physical force in defense of premises

• Text
• News
• Annotations
• Related Statutes

(1)A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what the person reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.
(2)A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (1) of this section only:
(a)In defense of a person as provided in ORS 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person); or
(b)When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser.
(3)As used in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a) of this section, "premises" includes any building as defined in ORS 164.205 (Definitions for ORS 164.205 to 164.270) and any real property. As used in subsection (2)(b) of this section, "premises" includes any building. [1971 c.743 §25]

 

[edzz]

So... would it be justifiable to use a flame thrower in self defense to prevent an arsonists attack?

 

[HaveGun]

Just today, I was talking to my leftist daughter about where the Air Force was sending her and her husband next and she said she really hopes it's not New Jersey. I asked why not; it's a leftist utopia and point out that all leftist-controlled cities eventually crumble into decay and chaos.

She rebutted that Portland was nice.

I laughed out loud. I asked her if she actually had been to Portland the past few years. Nope. She lived in Seattle a few years ago and admitted that it was not safe anymore. I pointed out that she was voting for the destruction of communities and eventually the entire country by supporting leftists. She is too blind to see the truth. It's truly sad.

 

[CountryGent]

So... would it be justifiable to use a flame thrower in self defense to prevent an arsonists attack?

Though a flamethrower would be significantly less than subtle, it would get the message across that the activity should stop. Some have even employed said due to relationship issues.

 

[ma96782]

I think the threshold is fairly straight forward: Would a reasonable person believe their life is in danger?

Let's say u and ur family are in ur house. A mob breaks some of your windows and starts throwing burning flares through those windows in order to burn u and ur family alive. What reasonable person would say their life is not in danger?

The problem starts.........
With you proving........
That only THE INDIVIDUAL that was actually harmed (shot)......
Was throwing such an incendiary (intentionally/knowingly meant to kill/harm you and/or your family).

Rrrrright.......
The LEFTIES will deny that poor ol' Johnny was involved with this. He was just there to peacefully protest injustice.

YOU just shot indiscriminately into the crowd of peaceful protesters. At least, that's what the DA will try to claim.

Either way, you'll spend your family's future away, in an attempt to defend yourself.

And, don't forget about what happens NEXT. Even IF, you were found NOT GUILTY. Obviously.......it's a losing situation.

Rrrrright......there is a Police Force. HA, Ha, ha....call 911.

Or maybe, sue the City and PD for "Failure to Protect". LOL. Remember, that the Jury consists of Portlandians (such reasonable people).

SOME MIGHT/WILL BE.......THINKING MAYBE?

Well, your house is burning. So, run outside. No one has to get shot over this. Not to mention (for the case at hand).......that YOU deserved this (it was a reasonable and common sense response) for voting against, THE PEOPLE. Besides.....just like the businesses that were looted, burnt or suffered some form of destruction......you got insurance.

Aloha, Mark

 

[nwslopoke]

To me, if a group of insurgents come to my house wearing masks and try to burn it down I would call that an act of domestic terrorism.

I want to say Ohio, a few years back. A gang of Latino men came and threatened a black man at home where his family was. He came out with his AK and fired some rounds. I don't recall if he hit anyone or not. But he got arrested. Ultimately he was released but the police and at least the story I read was against his actions.

Rarely in the PNW do we hear a positive story of self defense. When did this idea of being responsible (implied having a job) enough to pay for insurance make it ok for someone to destroy my property? Arson used to be a jailable offense. Most offenses were until recent years. Call it 2015. Outside of work I carry +95% of the time. Seven to eight years. Never came close to using it but never regretted one day of doing it.

 

[Capn Jack]

They told us at the meeting that this sign was bullet proof......

 

[jim97701]

I think the threshold is fairly straight forward: Would a reasonable person believe their life is in danger?

Let's say u and ur family are in ur house. A mob breaks some of your windows and starts throwing burning flares through those windows in order to burn u and ur family alive. What reasonable person would say their life is not in danger?

sounds like a good case of lead poisoning would be in order

 

[Ringo]

Make sure you call me too!
PLEASE CALL ME TOO !!! I'M NEVER TO BUSY TO WATCH YOUR 6...

 

[P7M13]

What are these people thinking?
Protesting "not defunding the police" by attacking a council member's house.
Let's follow a hypothetical - council member has snapped, his family is scared. Mob shows up again, he goes on the offensive with his own, home-made flamethrower. Goes out on the front lawn and Traegerizes the mob with his own concoction of napalm.
I can hear the cries, "CALL 9-1-1 !!!"

 

[Bruce Jolly]

Here's another look...

Portland leaders denounce vandalism after Commissioner Ryan's house targeted

PORTLAND, Ore. — Portland city commissioners, including re-elected Mayor Ted Wheeler, are denouncing the vandalism in North Portland on Thursday after Commissioner Dan Ryan's house was targeted. On Thursday, the city council voted to reject a proposal that would have cut $18 million from...

katu.com

I like the way tod wahlen thinks anybody cares what comes out of his mouth.

They must, they re-elected him.

 

[Bruce Jolly]

What are these people thinking?
Protesting "not defunding the police" by attacking a council member's house.
Let's follow a hypothetical - council member has snapped, his family is scared. Mob shows up again, he goes on the offensive with his own, home-made flamethrower. Goes out on the front lawn and Traegerizes the mob with his own concoction of napalm.
I can hear the cries, "CALL 9-1-1 !!!"

Maybe they'd be put on hold.

 

[Mikej]

They must, they re-elected him.

Ideally very few people should have voted for either the "Loser tod" OR the "Psycho antifa" lady. Sadly, we had to make sure that antifa lady didn't get the job. So we were basically forced to vote for *"tod Whalen"*.


**: Some months ago when potland was burning downtown every night, President Trump was bringing our formerly great city, and feckless mayor up in news clips. In one clip he referred to the mayor as "TOD" Wheeler. And in another clip, several days apart, referred to him as Ted "Whalen".

 

[tac]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1324579471710543874

'Oppressed people'? WT* do these cretins know about oppressed people? If they were 'oppressed' they wouldn't even be allowed to THINK about holding a 'protest'.

 

[Ringo]

Ideally very few people should have voted for either the "Loser tod" OR the "Psycho antifa" lady. Sadly, we had to make sure that antifa lady didn't get the job. So we were basically forced to vote for *"tod Whalen"*.


**: Some months ago when potland was burning downtown every night, President Trump was bringing our formerly great city, and feckless mayor up in news clips. In one clip he referred to the mayor as "TOD" Wheeler. And in another clip, several days apart, referred to him as Ted "Whalen".

he should of referred to him as"DUMB SH^T and REALLY DUMB SH^T"

 

[frank linkh]

Shotguns are fun, ammunition is cheap and the undertaker works for his money

 

[Dungannon]

When you get in bed with thugs and anarchists, it's just endless S&M. Portland city council are like parents that buy their kids drugs and are actually surprised when those same kids respond by stealing their money and trashing the house.

 

[nwslopoke]

'Oppressed people'? WT* do these cretins know about oppressed people? If they were 'oppressed' they wouldn't even be allowed to THINK about holding a 'protest'.

If you can riot, burn a city and eat a cheese burger on the same night, you ain't oppressed. You'll never convince these smooth brains.