Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.
I have the right to defend myself, not to be a vigilante dispensing justice at my whim.
If the bad guy flees then I did my job, which is to defend myself. Now its time for the police to do theirs, which is to track him down and apprehend him.
Choice Votes Percentage of 1634 Votes
Yes, it is an extension of self defense. 1369 84%
No, gun violence doesn't solve anything. 41 3%
Perhaps, it all depends on the intruder. 224 14%
The poll is worded to get a response not on your opinion of self-defense but on gun control, vigilantism or racial profiling.
Question #1: The only straight yes option, implies you believe you have the right to shoot anyone you perceive as a criminal, whether or not your life is in immediate danger.
Question #2: The only straight no option, implies the only reason not to shoot the BG is because you don't think guns should be used to stop attacks.
Question #3: The "maybe" option lets you determine whether or not to shoot based in the "intruder". This means the only information you have on determining whether or not to shoot the fleeing BG are his criminal actions (ie do you want some payback?) or appearance (ie a race or category you may be frightened of or simply don't like too much).
Am interesting legal case could be made of this by any veteran. Although probably worded differently by each service, one of the justifications for the use of deadly force that was drilled into my head in the Corps is "in defense of property not involving national security but inherently dangerous to others." NOW suppose the thief, showing himself to be a scofflaw, just stole a gun/knife/lead pipe.....
"But honest, your honor, I thought he would kill somebody with it..."
"Damn, we wouldn't want to violate the criminal's rights. Check out Great Britain's laws and lawsuits. If you bleeding heart liberals are allowed to win, that's where we're headed."
What a riciculous defense of your own blood-thirsty desires, Nemo.
Not even English Common Law, from which the castle doctrine is derived, gave the castle owner the kinds of rights you're attempting to claim.
But, I guess that stance, along with the fact that I abhore taxes and large government, despise the Democratic Party (at least what it has become in my life time), hate abortion, and favor the death penalty just makes me a bleeding heart liberal.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.