Tucker Carlson Piece - Worth Your Time (moved from Legal)

One of his best monologs. Arguing elections and Constitutional law is interesting. Tucker points out that once you surrender your arms and ask the State for protection it's going to be difficult. I never miss a Tucker episode.

P89DCSS said:

One of his best monologs. Arguing elections and Constitutional law is interesting. Tucker points out that once you surrender your arms and ask the State for protection it's going to be difficult. I never miss a Tucker episode.

Click to expand...

history shows that surrendering one’s arms is a one-way decision, which is only reversed by force of arms.

Tyrants have ever evolving ways to subjugate you to their desires, the latest is to charge anyone who defends themselves with the maximum crime possible because they do not like a populace that is willing to fight back, even against petty crime.

And there's no means of voting ourselves out of that reality because we've seen two elections now that prove it.

You can vote your way into socialism but you will have to shoot your way out.

I reiterate my long-held and often stated position that just about every creature on earth has the means of self defense.

You can therefore, by simple observation, claim that it is a natural right of every creature including humans.

As an aside, I note that in the world in general,there is no need to refer to it as a G-d-given right (which, let's face it, offends some people) but simply as a natural right.

And if you want, you can add "of all G-d's creatures" just to put in a good zinger for G-d.

After all, even kittens carry concealed weapons.

Terry, 230RN

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ac/92/a3/ac92a3aedb93bfb0d69a0c7423ab8232.jpg

(Pic credit in Propeties

I saw a tucker piece where people who defended themselves with their guns were sent to jail. A guy came to a restaurant and tried to rob some people but he got shot four time and a judge says he shot the perp one too many times.

One thing for sure , if you shoot someone you will have 2 court appearances , criminal and civil , even if you are found not guilt of committing a criminal act . I think that is wrong . Yes , I know the burden of proof is not the same .

Please take the time to watch Andrew Branca's analysis of the Carlson commentary linked by the OP, livestreamed 2/11/23:
Tucker Carlson FAILS on Self-Defense Law!
The video is almost 90 minutes, but well worth your time.
Primary message: Carlson got a whole lot wrong, in terms of legal self defense, in most of his commentary.
There are too many points for me to repeat here. Those who have taken Branca's Law of Self Defense training will understand fully the problems with Carlson's interpretations.

Added: Oops, sorry @Frank Ettin, I just spotted where you already linked to Branca's video.

Switup said:

A guy came to a restaurant and tried to rob some people but he got shot four time and a judge says he shot the perp one too many times

Click to expand...

That was the recent Houston taqueria robbery and shooting. The problem was not that the defender shot too many times. The problem was that after totally incapacitating the robber, and taking the gun away, the defender walked over and summarily executed the robber by shooting him in the head as he lay there motionless and unarmed. Branca had previously reviewed that video and then did so again toward the end of the video linked above.

Deleted

Be mindful with your posts, friends. The tacqueria thread got locked.

Craig_VA said:

The video is almost 90 minutes, but well worth your time.
Primary message: Carlson got a whole lot wrong, in terms of legal self defense, in most of his commentary.
There are too many points for me to repeat here. Those who have taken Branca's Law of Self Defense training will understand fully the problems with Carlson's interpretations.

Click to expand...

Didn't have to watch the video, it was pretty clear to me in the first 5 minutes that Tucker's interpretation of what constitutes "Self Defense" was skewed. Two things they emphasize in most SD classes, you can't shoot someone in defense of personnel property and you can't chase down someone and shoot them after the threat has diminished. If you take a verbal altercation to a physical attack, you are the aggressor and are making yourself a SD target. Hard to believe Tucker doesn't realize his propagation of false information, hurts our RKBA more than it helps.

red rick said:

One thing for sure , if you shoot someone you will have 2 court appearances , criminal and civil , even if you are found not guilt of committing a criminal act .

Click to expand...

Not in my state. First off, the DA has the power to define the shooting as Self Defense and not press charges. If you are charged and a jury finds you innocent, you cannot be sued in civil court for damages because of how our law is written. One confusing thing in my state is while we have "Castle Doctrine", we do not have "stand your ground". The big difference comes down to who started the initial confrontation. If you started the confrontation, you have a duty to retreat, before using deadly force. If the other person started the confrontation, you do not. This may have been part of the issue where the good guy in the store, got shot by the BG's girlfriend when he chased the BG outside the store. But then the only facts(if they are facts) I saw, were from Tucker about that shooting.

There is “media” on both sides of wrong. Fox has some type of crap tabloid show I watched for 5 minutes and it demonized the police and defended a clear criminal. I couldn’t believe they were SO wrong in what they were telling the public. But they have a target audience.

I didn’t watch the video in the OP but it wouldn’t surprise me that Tucker’s piece could be picked apart by lawyers. He has a target audience.

It’s almost like we’re ALL being played, manipulated and divided by the media. Good thing most of us here are fairly educated and have a moral compass to keep us from jumping to dumb conclusions in the real world.

<aside> I wish people would be more specific about their state or location. "My state" doesn't help much if it's not specified in one's profile. I realize the desire for anonymity, and you don't have to give your street address or "last four digits of your sosh," but it would help to know at least the State you're setting as an example without having your reader dig for it. </aside>

Terry, 230RN

230RN said:

<aside> I wish people would be more specific about their state or location. "My state" doesn't help much if it's not specified in one's profile. I realize the desire for anonymity, and you don't have to give your street address or "last four digits of your sosh," but it would help to know at least the State you're setting as an example without having your reader dig for it. </aside>

Terry, 230RN

Click to expand...

OMG..... AYSM?
It's Wisconsin. Happy? What difference does it make when YOU need to know the laws in YOUR state, not mine. I give out my location continuously here, generally in the hunting forum, so it has nuttin' to do with anonymity. I assume now you are going to do a Google search of my state's gun laws so you can disparage that too, eh?

buck460XVR said:

OMG..... AYSM?
It's Wisconsin. Happy? What difference does it make when YOU need to know the laws in YOUR state, not mine. I give out my location continuously here, generally in the hunting forum, so it has nuttin' to do with anonymity. I assume now you are going to do a Google search of my state's gun laws so you can disparage that too, eh?

Click to expand...

Take it easy. Just put your reader's head on your shoulders, is all. If you're really ticked at me for a general suggestion to solve a general problem, let's take it to PMs, OK?

Quite some time ago someone mentioned that "their State" only allowed straight-walled cartridges for deer hunting. That was a shock to me here in Colorado and I ultimately found out his State was Ohio, and, surprise, surprise, my Son1 had moved there about a decade ago, and surprise, surprise, Ohio wasn't the only state wirh this restriction.

Would have been nice to find that out up front without investigation.

Back to topic.

Terry, 230RN

Edited to correct "Son2" to "Son1."

Ed4032 said:

You can vote your way into socialism but you will have to shoot your way out.

Click to expand...

That's an excellent observation.
So true.