FL-NC
Member
I think I would rather have a lawyer do that. One that I paid.I also will be explaining it to a jury at some point.
I think I would rather have a lawyer do that. One that I paid.I also will be explaining it to a jury at some point.
In what capacity?have seen a few homicides
Are you a lawyer?my expertise nor my knowledge of law
Let's get right down to it. Your ability to read and understand context is apparently lacking. You're arguing points that I -- and others, in the other thread -- have not attempted to make. At this point, I'm probably not the only one reading your posts who has a concern about your inability to understand that one must first identify a subject -- anytime, anywhere, even in one's own residence -- as a potential (or immediate) threat and secondly, time and circumstances permitting, utilize other options other than immediately resorting to deadly force. Your presumed "expertise" is not at issue here -- it's some concerning statements you've made. As far as knowledge of law, a superficial knowledge of statute means nothing when not viewed in the context of real-world results.So verbalization during an encounter within the confines of your home in the middle of the night not knowing if you are addressing one or multiple assailants is the correct scenario that was done recently and the homeowner was met with a hail of gunfire. I wouldn't use gunsite as the know all be all agent concerning deadly force you would be better to speak to your SAO and review some shootings from your state as they are in a much better position legally to address the shootings than a for profit company like you have suggested. however its a free country and you can claim that as a defense me I have seen a few homicides and yes they are all homicides even after being cleared by the state that fact does not change. But for the ones who maligned me saying I was shooting through a door or at someone in my yard you do not know my expertise nor my knowledge of law and therein is your shortfall not mine.
So verbalization during an encounter within the confines of your home in the middle of the night not knowing if you are addressing one or multiple assailants is the correct scenario that was done recently and the homeowner was met with a hail of gunfire. I wouldn't use gunsite as the know all be all agent concerning deadly force you would be better to speak to your SAO and review some shootings from your state as they are in a much better position legally to address the shootings than a for profit company like you have suggested. however its a free country and you can claim that as a defense me I have seen a few homicides and yes they are all homicides even after being cleared by the state that fact does not change. But for the ones who maligned me saying I was shooting through a door or at someone in my yard you do not know my expertise nor my knowledge of law and therein is your shortfall not mine.
Pepper spray has been identified as causing permanent injuries and even fatalities in some instances.Both are deadly force. For a trained practitioner, so is kick-boxing.
It is a good idea to carry pepper spray for occasions when deadly force is not appropriate.. I would not characterize the purpose as one of "escalation of force".
There isn't a less lethal force option that doesn't carry those risks. That's why they are appropriately classed as Less Lethal options and not non-lethal options. There was a spate of lawsuits against LE agencies when OC started being used in the wake of the Rodney King incident. There was a spate of lawsuits when Tasers came into widespread use.Pepper spray has been identified as causing permanent injuries and even fatalities in some instances.
... At this point, I'm probably not the only one reading your posts who has a concern about your inability to understand that one must first identify a subject -- anytime, anywhere, even in one's own residence -- as a potential (or immediate) threat and secondly, time and circumstances permitting, utilize other options other than immediately resorting to deadly force.....
Let's get right down to it. Your ability to read and understand context is apparently lacking. You're arguing points that I -- and others, in the other thread -- have not attempted to make. At this point, I'm probably not the only one reading your posts who has a concern about your inability to understand that one must first identify a subject -- anytime, anywhere, even in one's own residence -- as a potential (or immediate) threat and secondly, time and circumstances permitting, utilize other options other than immediately resorting to deadly force. Your presumed "expertise" is not at issue here -- it's some concerning statements you've made. As far as knowledge of law, a superficial knowledge of statute means nothing when not viewed in the context of real-world results.
What you have suggested, in the previous thread, is that anyone that is within the confines of your house uninvited will be summarily shot by you, with no attempt at identifying the individual(s),no attempt at any sort of verbal intervention (you say it's not necessary), and further, that this action by you is fully supported by statute, that you would be found justified in use of deadly force with no charges filed.
Some of us have disagreed. Don't take it personally. We all have different experiences.
The SAO is the State Attorneys Office, The second part of your question I WAS ACCUSED OF SAYING I WOULD SHOOT THROUGH A CLOSED DOOR THAT IS ALSO A LIE The third part was I was quoted as shooting randomly within the confines of my home. Let me address/ this in the middle of the night with me and my spouse in the bedroom and I hear a intruder in the dark in my house I AM NOT GONNA ASK WHO IS THERE? I HOPE YOU KNOW THE REASON FOR THAT. Have you had any military training if so when you are in country on patrol in the middle of the night do you give away your position by asking who is there? Or do you wait( SILENTLY) until you can identify? this is not like being at the front gate where you say (halt who goes there). There are many cases of a homeowner yelling out and the response with some of them has been GUNFIRE. There is one person on here who espoused his gunsite training (thousands of dollars) until I brought up the fact one of these so called (instructors) shot himself in the leg holstering a weapon and later on shot a kid with a airsoft rifle in a field in broad daylight that was removed within minutes of posting as of 2022 this guy was still an instructor at gunsite so pay your money and take your chances. As a post note I took it as a given that most on this site have had some training evidently the training they received or not probably depends upon whether they are unfortunate enough to encounter an armed intruder in their domicile or multiple armed persons once the element of surprise is gone and contact made it isn't a what if anymore. Hence my refusal to give away my position.I'm having a difficult time understanding exactly what you're recommending here.
First, who is my SAO? What is an SAO?
Second, are you advocating shooting through your door without knowing who is on the other side?
I'm not a lawyer, but shooting at a target you haven't identified seems like a bad idea.
No one accused you of that.I WAS ACCUSED OF SAYING I WOULD SHOOT THROUGH A CLOSED DOOR THAT IS ALSO A LIE
Have you had any military training if so when you are in country on patrol in the middle of the night do you give away your position by asking who is there? Or do you wait( SILENTLY) until you can identify? this is not like being at the front gate where you say (halt who goes there).
No innuendos slung towards you.There is one person on here who espoused his gunsite training (thousands of dollars)
"Verbal judo" or "tactical verbal skills," along with training on recognizing attack indicators and confronting EDPs should be high on the list of any citizen gun-carrier after initial basic firearms safety training and before spending thousands on a week at Gunsite.
Thank you for the tips. No one has implied you are stupid.anyone who believes that an unwanted/unknown person in your home in the middle of the night in the dark is from the welcome wagon you may be in for a real shock. The real truth is criminals real criminals don't give a damn if you are armed and they don't give a damn if you are calling the police they will hurt you in a heartbeat you can take that advice anyway you want to to include saying I don't know what I am talking about so be it I did not live to be over 70 years of age by being stupid
Anyone who believes that an unwanted/unknown person in your home in the middle of the night in the dark is from the welcome wagon you may be in for a real shock.
The real truth is criminals real criminals don't give a damn if you are armed and they don't give a damn if you are calling the police they will hurt you in a heartbeat
I am not going to vocalize to do so cost you any element of surprise. As
That's really not what we mean by deescalation.Consider see a person near you. It that person a possible threat, a probable threat, a definite threat or no threat. One could deem a person to be a probable threat then realize there is no threat. At that point we are deescalation
A several members have said, the civilian has little business "escalating" force; that's for the sworn officer on duty, acing to effect compliance. The civilian acting lawfully will employ reasonable force--and no more--for justified defense.The opposite would be escalation.
element of surpriseFirst I've got to say, Punctuation and paragraphs is a thing Bro, It's almost impossible to read your WALLOFTEXT posting style.
Having said that,
Anyone who opens up on an unknown person in their home at (really any time) in the middle of the night may also be in for a real shock when they realize they just shot their spouse returning to bed or their kid coming in late (or if the kid doesn't live at home possibly coming home for an unannounced visit). Or maybe your neighbor's drunk kid.
There was a homeowner in Boulder several years ago who woke up in the middle of the night and found someone in his bedroom and shot them.
Then found out it was a drunk college girl who walked right through his unlocked front door because she thought it was the house she was staying at (his neighbor).
No, he wasn't charged, Yes the DA decided he was 100% justified but he still killed a kid he didn't have to kill and unless he is completely without a conscious he's going to carry that for the rest of his life.
Google "Accidentally shoots his child he thought was an intruder" and see how many hits you get
I am 100% in agreement here but you're not issuing a challenge to scare off the "real" criminals.
You're issuing a challenge to make sure you don't kill your Spouse, Child, Drunk Neighbor kid or some Crackhead petty burglar who hears you say that and leaves before you have to kill them.
What "element of surprise" ? It's not like they don't know you're in the house.
That has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.As I stated before a unwelcomed person in the dark in my house in the middle of the night has already committed a forcible felony and as explained I will not give up my position of cover....
Deadly force is not always necessary, nor reasonable, within the context of law.I will use the force necessary to defend myself and family against such encroachments set upon me by uninvited person/persons with questionable intent.