Quantcast

victim of attempted robbery shoots perp, but charged for no carry permit

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by old lady new shooter, Dec 1, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    11,386
    from the link, emphasis added:
    Prof David Wilson said Martin became a powerful and divisive symbol, held up both by those who believed his actions were justified and those who did not.

    "Was he defending his home from intruders or simply a vigilante taking the law into his own hands?" said Prof Wilson, emeritus professor of criminology at Birmingham City University.

    "I don't think any journalist missed the opportunity to frame that story in the way that suited their readership."

    Despite those interpretations, Martin was found guilty - and the impact of his case has not changed the legal facts, Prof Wilson said.

    "The law has not changed. You are allowed to take reasonable steps to defend yourself and your property.

    "The test of what's reasonable was not felt to have been met in Martin's case because the intruders were running away."
     
    alsaqr likes this.
  2. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,582
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    -So did many of Al Capone's boys.
    Chicago. Go figure.
     
  3. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,281
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I said defend yourself. I said nothing about concealed carry firearms until the mention of equal force. I was being literal as the poster I replied to, made no mention of firearms in the prosecution of self defense. Not my fault it wasn’t caught. A spy should pay closer attention.
     
    bdickens likes this.
  4. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,455
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
    And if you would have read a little closer, I never said otherwise, did I? Now that the pedantic garbage is out of the way and you are worried about rights in other countries and equal force, again, I ask you, maybe you would like to share with us all the European countries that allow for self defense concealed carry to the general population without permits? How about any western countries in general?
     
  5. BigBore44

    BigBore44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,281
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    I don’t think you did. I NEVER made mention of other countries’ citizens defending themselves with ANY FIREARMS. Other countries don’t have the Second Amendment. We do. So I’m not sure where your question is derived from.
     
  6. Dewey 68

    Dewey 68 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    193
    Location:
    Corrupt Illinois
    To obtain a FOID in IL I believe you have to pass a background check from the state police. When you lose your FOID card you're supposed to surrender your weapons, but the shooter at the Henry Pratt plant in Aurora in February of 2019 shouldn't have had a FOID card due to a previous felony. His FOID was revoked. but no law enforcement agency confiscated his firearms, which makes the entire program pointless IMO.
     
  7. JERRY

    JERRY Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2003
    Messages:
    2,637
    if you live in Chicago you have to expect this.
     
  8. Steve S.

    Steve S. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2014
    Messages:
    890
    Location:
    Missouri
    Gentle people, we are constantly criticizing the anti’s for embellishing the wording and intent of the Constitution and legislated law and as I read this thread, I see the same skewed perspective here - our hypocrisy knows no bounds.
    The defender was not in possession of a CCL as required by law - she broke the law of that land regardless of the righteousness of the activity. I am not professing right or wrong however right or wrong, fair or unfair, like or dislike - she broke the law and should be processed like everyone else governed by this law - if the law is not enforceable in this case, she will be acquitted. She broke the law (period) - if it is not right, then change the law. We have to stop rationalizing our cause - she was not issued a CCL which was required by the law.
     
    desmobob, alsaqr and Madcap_Magician like this.
  9. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,096
    Location:
    MN
    Again, Czechia does.
     
  10. boom boom
    • Contributing Member

    boom boom Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,694
    Location:
    GA
    The problems with statutes is that they normally fail to have flexibility required for justice until outrages occur that force the legislature to rewrite the laws. The opposite approach is to write vague general statutes and rely on customs, reasoning by analogy using preceding cases, etc. by judges which is what the common law did. Over time,statutes have crowded common law out of the picture in criminal justice.

    Law itself is a means to an end which is an approximation of justice accepted by society and keeping the peace among residents by limiting conflict over personal disputes. By its written universal nature, it is designed to be both knowable and allow citizens to conduct themselves in compliance to it. But, the limitation of a written law is that it should serve a valid purpose that does not interfere with individual rights that are protected by the higher laws of the constitutions of states and the national government.

    Law is simply a way of resolving disputes so that individuals do not have to resort to self justice which tends to exceed the tolerance of societies (few can reasonably serve as a disinterested judge of their own conduct in their particular case against another). A particular law is not by itself something worthy of worship nor are lawmakers or judges or even the citizens willing laws into existence. Each have been the source of injustices in the past and will do so in the future. Ideally the law and justice should coincide in producing the same result, however, just like statistics, the average application does not mean that facts at either extreme of a cases involving the law does not involve some degree of injustice. Monsters often get less punishment than they have earned by right of their evil deeds and good people often get punishments that they did not deserve.

    Justice in this particular case, to me, would dictate not punishing the victim of the assault assuming that the facts of the story are true. If anything, the failure of Chicago to protect its citizens from such actions by violent felons is injustice. Getting hit up the side of the head and a reasonable fearing for one's own life taken by a firearm dwarfs the petty charge of carrying without a concealed carry permit. We cannot forget that Chicago is a city with a corrupt judicial system which fails in its basic job to protect the public except for the connected and wealthy.

    However, the problem in American jurisprudence as it has evolved, is that the statutory law does not give the alternative or flexibility to the judge and jury to do justice. Thus, we have the prosecutors making these selective prosecution decisions which vary by jurisdiction and arguably deny equal protection of the laws. Personally, I believe that we may have to go back to the system in the past in some colonies where the jury ultimately determined both law and fact as applied to a specific case. Either that or create separate courts of equity to negate the injustices created by application of the letter of the law by statutes. Too much power is given to individual prosecutors whose decisions are not in an ordinary sense reviewable. I would rather trust the rough justice of a jury in a case or the outside perspective of a court of equity reviewing petitions of injustice than trusting the tender mercies of a prosecutor.

    This case is an example of how we end up with more and more laws and less and less justice. The justice of a personal right to self defense against another seeking to rob someone has more or less been universally applied throughout the millennia in various cultures, regimes, etc. Even during the worst periods of Stalin, the courts in Russia recognized the right to self defense of one's life against common criminals. Thus, following Chicago's example in the case, is how more and more criminals who are sympathetic to a significant portion of the population are put into the system and suffer a loss of liberty. The disgusting saga of Chicago's resistance to court orders to implement concealed carry is in of itself a gross miscarriage of justice and the laws fall most heavily on the poor who typically live in the most dangerous neighborhoods https://www.usacarry.com/chicago-increase-concealed-carry-permits/ and http://www.chicagogunsmatter.org/concealed-carry/28-concealed-carry-license-q-a. This is also the land of DA Foxx who purposefully interfered with the investigation of a celebrity that was so egregious that the judge in the case ordered a special prosecutor to conduct the investigation.

    What most of the posters above are indicating is that justice is not being served putting someone who had to defend their live in extreme circumstances on trial for violating a licensing provision that obviously has been widely ignored by prosecutors when it involves gang members. The law itself was allegedly made for the purpose of protecting society, not the robber, and thus society should have some say in how it is prosecuted. This is not expressing a sense of lawlessness by the posters supporting the crime victim but rather that the facts in this particular case do not warrant prosecution by compounding the suffering of the robbery victim in this particular case.
     
  11. skeeterfogger

    skeeterfogger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2019
    Messages:
    723
    Not guilty if I was on the jury.
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  12. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,582
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    Jury nullification can be a beautiful thing - it killed Prohibition, for example... .
     
    P5 Guy and BigBore44 like this.
  13. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,582
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    BTW, as long as judges are elected and can run by party affiliation then places like Chicago will continue to be what they are - political machines with no ethics, morals or respect for their ordinary citizens.
     
    BigBore44 likes this.
  14. bdickens

    bdickens Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,089
    Location:
    Hockley , TX
    That's two of us.
     
  15. Robert

    Robert Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Location:
    Texan by birth, in Colorado cause I hate humidity
    Steve S summed it up pretty well, THR will always advocate for following the law and seeking to legally change the laws that are anti- gun and anti gun owner.
     
    RetiredUSNChief likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 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.
    Dismiss Notice