The Real Hawkeye
member
I didn't say he was smart. You and I would have stood by the door with the scatter gun and blasted him when he smashed it. The question was did he commit a crime?
That is an interesting question. I suppose if you had erected physical barriers around your property (to prevent people from accidentally triggering your mines) and posted warnings, that the fire department would have let it burn or risk being maimed or killed. When one erects sturdy fences around ones property (as the wealthy often do), how does the fire department gain entry without permission of the owner? Oh right, they dont.
The fire department doesnt wander onto military bases or the estates of the wealthy without permission, so I dont see why the domiciles of private individuals should deserve any less legal protection.
Until the US military stops using mechanical ambushes (land mines and similar), why should the civilian population be held to a higher standard?
Even the US military no longer uses land mines.
The US military no longer uses conventional mines, IIRC, but they are considering using mines that "expire" after a certain amount of time, so that they aren't a hazard after combat is over. As well as networked/monitored minefields: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,77010,00.htmlEven the US military no longer uses land mines.
Not if TN protects homesteads like Florida does. OJ Simpson kept his NFL pension and FL house after the civil suit (the pension was protected by CA law and the FL house by FL law). He technically owes craploads of money, but none of his income or possessions can currently be touched.Bartholomew Roberts said:He was incredibly lucky to get off on the criminal charges. However, he will almost certainly lose his house and everything in it to the guy who got shot (or more accurately the personal injury lawyer who takes his case on contingency).
beerslurpy said:Not if TN protects homesteads like Florida does.
beerslurpy said:The fire department doesnt wander onto the estates of the wealthy without permission,
Andrew Rothman said:I must have missed the press release.
HankB said:Too bad the law favors the criminals in cases like these . . . a gun is noisy and it's hard to establish plausible deniability when a burglar is perforated. Better to leave something like a bottle of booze in your unoccupied shed or cabin wiped clean of your fingerprints and laced with something "special" . . . if you're inclined to do that sort of thing. (Disclaimer: This is an observation, not a recommendation.)
beerslurpy said:Until the US military stops using mechanical ambushes (land mines and similar), why should the civilian population be held to a higher standard?
beerslurpy said:What business would an emergency responder have on my property if I didnt summon him there myself? I'm smelling 4th amendment violations here.
molonlabe said:This is sort of nutty behavior. First he wasn't home so what if the house caught fire and a firefighter gets wasted because of this boneheads action.
Where in "Identify your target" or
"Be sure of what is behind your target" fit into this whole scheme?????
Am I the only one who finds this guy a little nuts...
You are only ethically and legally justified in using deadly force to protect yourself or another innocent from "immediate and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or serious bodily injury."