|
|
TT, it is NEVER okay to walk up on ANYONE and shoot at them for no actual reason. You don't have any rights to shoot at someone for the hell of it. There is no defense here. It is a shame to humanity and law that they dropped the charges. The better thing to of done would have been to reduce the charge to some misdemeanor where the punishment is something like retaking some shooting safety courses and performing community service.
Minden and Ruston.
We shouldn't have any laws....according to atheists. Just a big free-for-all, do as you dern well please. No morals, nuttin! If it feels right, do it! If it feels good, do it! There is no higher being to sit in judgment of us. And certainly no other mere human being has authority to sit in judgment. Who are you to judge me? You are just flesh and blood like me....and like the animals of the forest. You are equal to the squirrel and to the gopher... the scurge of the golfing industry!
So, if I feel like walking into your house and blowing your sorry-azz head off, tough for you, and good for me! You can try to shoot me first....just don't judge me. You have no right.
Is that really what happened in this story? I think not. Again, and just for the record, where are you from or where did you grow up?Originally Posted by JuBru
Justin, pull your head out of your ass and stop trying to play the contrarian.
Some bastard in NH robbed a house. The homeowner shot a gun in the direction of the THIEF, yet did not hit the THIEF
The only issue with that is that the homeowner did not hit the THIEF with multiple rounds in the chest.
Originally Posted by champion110
I am less angry this morning and ready to get back up on the horse. That girl was a freak last night.
Originally Posted by champion110
In fact, I finally had to tell her to stop over the last weekend, because I was worn out and needed a break.
Yeah, that's twisting what they say. But I will say something I have said here before - your rights only go so far as to what someone else lets you have them.
Other animals may not be as intelligent man, but they have in a fashion some laws too.
Yes, it is. Read the story again. The shooter was not on his property. He walked up on the thief as he was leaving another house and shot at him. There is no right to shoot at him for that.
I already answered Minden and Ruston. You obviously don't pay too much attention to detail.
I'm not playing to be on the contrary. The homeowner was not home when he was robbed. He caught the guy somewhere else. He does not have a right to put a bullet in the thief.
If the thief was on the dude's property, you all would be correct that he could fire at him. But the thief and the shooter wasn't. That's end of discussion. You can't pull your weapon out and fire like that.
It will continue to be allowed (law or not) because it makes practical and real sense in all parts of America and definitely in the south. No jury in this country will ever convict a guy if he protects his neighbor and his neighbor's property like this guy did the other day. Just the facts.
And yes you have a history, in this forum, of trying to play the contrarian per DoctorEvil's comment.
JuBru comes off a little extreme but he's right about not firing shots in this case.
Warning shots are never "ok." You will get eaten up in court over warning shots.
I know we all want the thieves to get aerated but the best (and legal) thing to do is just call the cops.
Uh, no.
Only with you when you are wrong, so I guess it would make sense you think that.
If he had a right to be in the neighbors yard, then he was in his legal rights. Cause he was hiding in his closet waiting for the theif to break and steal everhthing in his house. When he heard the thief leave, he managed to get outside. And thoight he was safe. Just then the theif came running out of his neighbors house toward him. He then had no choice but to fire a shot at the CRIMINAL as he feared for his life. Unfortunately he missed but luckly the CRIMINAL heard the shot and fell to the ground were he remained until police arrived. At least that is the way I read it and I grew up in north LA.
No need to make up a story.
When there are liberal minded people like you in the courts? The article said everything I stated - I just filled in the blanks. How do you know it wasn't more in line to what really happened vs the mean wealthy homeowner picking on the poor victim who was just trying to get back his money. Cause we all know that the only way to get anything in this country is to take it from someone else. Luckily no unarmed lawful person was at home to get hurt and that is why if you shoot a gun, there should only be one story told.
You don't know me enough to make a stupid claim like that.
Again, there's no need to make up a story, or "fill in the blanks".
A while back some drunken idiots were on a 4-wheeler, on a rainy night, cutting donuts in a vacant lot in my subdivision. I know the owner, he lives in Texas and has asked me to kind of keep an eye on his property for him. Well, it's a vacant lot, so usually there's not much that can happen to it. In this case, I could see the mud flying and knew the morons were rutting it and tearing it up. I called the police.
The police officer first asked me if I were the owner of the lot. I said no, but...I couldn't finish the sentence, he cut me off saying ONLY the owner can call in a complaint. Of course I asked the flatfoot if it is department policy to watch vandalism occurring an do nothing. He did say that it is against the law to operate ATVs on public streets and it's also unlawful to operate any vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, so if they leave the lot (private property) he would do something. At that moment, the drunks did indeed drive into the street. So our hero the cop went after them pulling them over and arresting them for DWI and illegal operation of an unlicensed vehicle on a public street.
I called the owner who was pizzed. He called the police chief to register his gripes. The next day a police sergeant came by and told me the NPD does respond to vandalism and that the officer should have done something after he witnessed it. However, it was true that the police are powerless to act on such cases unless the property owner files a complaint. In other words, he is saying if I witness someone throw a rock thru your window I can't file a complaint, only you can as the property owner. I could be a witness, however. There's a fine line in there. Besides, I wasn't "filing" anything. I was witnessing a crime taking place and called it in.
Know what....to hell with the police. Let's just all take the law in our own hands. Yeah, now that's a good solution.
80, you should have blown out their tires. :icon_wink:
Yeah, I should have fired some shots. But, I might have missed and actually hit the tires.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
