What do you do if you're involved in a shooting?
- Thread starter Oregongundude
- Start date
- Status
BullfrogKen
Moderator Emeritus
Those are realistic perspectives? Realistic for whom? Being armed while carrying narcotics, or while drunk, or while high.
Those scenarios sound quite out of character for moral people, and most of the people here I'm persuaded are moral and law abiding.
That advice is some of the worst I've heard.
White_Wolf
member
When you talk about “us moral people” and I say “Moral people? What’s a moral person?”
I say realistic, because up until my scenarios, the scenario itself was like every other gun owner’s utopia event. Good guy who’s never been convicted of a crime, a regular pillar of the community, a regular saint, is approached by a mean looking person who hasn’t been able to stay out of jail for more than a month since he was 12 years old, and this person initiates the attack etc.
And then the debate became, after you turn yourself in for killing someone, how much information do you give to the police, and be sure to have your lawyer on speed dial. Ok, cell phones, established lawyers who already know you on a first name basis? I don’t know anyone who “has” a lawyer. I know people that have gotten lawyers to help them with a specific case, and I know people that get a public defender (or as we like to call them “public pretender”).
I don’t know what kind of white collar, house on the hill, with the white picket fence, living the American dream, high society, you’re from, but where I’m at, you’re always guilty of something. The difference between the guy walking down the side walk in front of my house and the one in jail, is one got caught and the other hasn’t yet.
Finding a man between 18 and 25 who is sober, from drugs and alcohol, and is typically sober on a week to week basis, is like finding a needle in a haystack.
I don’t use drugs or drink, but most of my friends smoke pot. Shouldn’t they carry a gun? Are they less deserving of life than the next guy? Are you prepared to say that the difference between a good guy and a bad guy is that one likes to smoke a joint?
What if you have a history of violence or any sort of criminal record that could indicate that you are a dangerous person? And what if that “dangerous person” status is what kept you from purchasing that gun legally and thus you are breaking two laws! You’re illegally owning, and illegally carrying a gun. And what is a dangerous person? When you decide to stop taking some bully’s crap, and you fight back, you are every bit as guilty of fighting as he is. And thus you’re record now goes right beside that bully’s record showing the world that “you’re dangerous”.
The system doesn’t stop “dangerous” people from owning a gun, they just stop whoever they can from owning a gun, and will use any excuse to do it. A dangerous person isn’t always a drug dealer or some television bad guy archetype; a dangerous person is also the person that fights back.
Never never ever fight back. You’re supposed to tell your mommy, or tell a teacher, or tell a police officer; but never defend yourself. You must always be overly reliant on a big government to defend you.
I said “realistic” because the scenario being given dealt with a “picture perfect” scenario.
And again, if you’re carrying a hand gun in Maryland outside of your own property, you are probably doing it illegal and thus you’re already guilty of that one crime. The judicial system is subjected to the will and whims of the media, and thus special interest groups. Among those special interest groups are the ultra liberal pseudo-communists that work around the clock to take away your first and second amendment rights. It’s bad public relations for a court to show the world that having a gun can save your life.
Look at TV, notice on basic cable television there are only two types of people carrying guns? The bad guys have guns, and the good guys with guns are always Law, military, government. Joe citizen does not use a gun, only government should own guns, and those non-government people that carry guns are called “criminals” and this is pumped into our heads everyday. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but you’ll notice the media is very anti-gun.
Notice that the news always tells you about a shooting that occurred in the act of murder, but you never hear about the good guy using his gun to save his own life. That’s not the image the mainstream media wants to show. On mainstream television you see public service announcements telling us about the poor little girl that got shot by her dad, all because he owned a gun. And how no matter where you hide your gun, it is first nature for children to seek it out, find it, and shoot themselves. DON’T OWN A GUN!
Now, where is the second side of this issue? Where is the commercial showing you the woman that protected herself and her family from a burglar by owning or even using a gun? The only “saved from a burglar” commercials you see are for ADT security systems.
The media is one sided. They want to show you how evil guns are. The courts obey the whims of the media because judges are a cross between a lawyer and a politician. It isn’t good PR to show the world that owning and using a gun can save your life. That is not the message the media, and thus judiciary, wants to portray.
I’d be really interested in knowing the statistics of males between the ages of 18 and 30 that plead self defense after shooting someone dead, and actually got off without any kind of punishment.
I never said you couldn’t possibly get caught.
But unless your license plate got on video, or was written down, or a witness knew your first and last name and or phone number and or address, you’re not getting caught.
And as far as DNA: if they don’t locate you, and brand you as a suspect, the DNA means nothing. Finger prints? As long as you don’t leave them on the murder weapon or the victim, your finger prints are going to be one of a million accumulative trace prints, or one out of a hundred thousand total prints in the area.
Oh yeah, and don’t spin wheels when driving away, a lack of tread marks is a lack of a lead, even if the parking lot is full of a hundred accumulative tread marks belonging to every one in the neighborhood.
Cops really don’t look too hard. They mark down a list of common candidates (friends, family, lovers) and cross off every one that has an alibi, and then concentrate on the others. You, will have no relations to this guy, and thus your name will not even make it on their list of suspects.
Again, you’re not getting caught unless you are identified by someone that knows you, or your license plate makes it on camera.
I think the real question that needs to be asked is: What are the statistics for males, who shot someone outside of his home, getting off without going to jail after claiming self defense and turning himself in?
There’s a dead body. His criminal record becomes irrelevant in the eyes of an overly eager DA trying to climb the ranks. You’re found with the smoking gun. You calling the cops on yourself to be a “good citizen” was an excellent alibi. That knife/gun on the dead man’s body isn’t registered to him; it could easily have been planted on him. Cops want someone to arrest, court wants someone to go to jail, and both the cops, and the court thinks the only reason Joe citizen owns a gun is to go out and murder people. I say you better have a hell of a lot more than some Public Defender.
I say realistic, because up until my scenarios, the scenario itself was like every other gun owner’s utopia event. Good guy who’s never been convicted of a crime, a regular pillar of the community, a regular saint, is approached by a mean looking person who hasn’t been able to stay out of jail for more than a month since he was 12 years old, and this person initiates the attack etc.
And then the debate became, after you turn yourself in for killing someone, how much information do you give to the police, and be sure to have your lawyer on speed dial. Ok, cell phones, established lawyers who already know you on a first name basis? I don’t know anyone who “has” a lawyer. I know people that have gotten lawyers to help them with a specific case, and I know people that get a public defender (or as we like to call them “public pretender”).
I don’t know what kind of white collar, house on the hill, with the white picket fence, living the American dream, high society, you’re from, but where I’m at, you’re always guilty of something. The difference between the guy walking down the side walk in front of my house and the one in jail, is one got caught and the other hasn’t yet.
Finding a man between 18 and 25 who is sober, from drugs and alcohol, and is typically sober on a week to week basis, is like finding a needle in a haystack.
I don’t use drugs or drink, but most of my friends smoke pot. Shouldn’t they carry a gun? Are they less deserving of life than the next guy? Are you prepared to say that the difference between a good guy and a bad guy is that one likes to smoke a joint?
What if you have a history of violence or any sort of criminal record that could indicate that you are a dangerous person? And what if that “dangerous person” status is what kept you from purchasing that gun legally and thus you are breaking two laws! You’re illegally owning, and illegally carrying a gun. And what is a dangerous person? When you decide to stop taking some bully’s crap, and you fight back, you are every bit as guilty of fighting as he is. And thus you’re record now goes right beside that bully’s record showing the world that “you’re dangerous”.
The system doesn’t stop “dangerous” people from owning a gun, they just stop whoever they can from owning a gun, and will use any excuse to do it. A dangerous person isn’t always a drug dealer or some television bad guy archetype; a dangerous person is also the person that fights back.
Never never ever fight back. You’re supposed to tell your mommy, or tell a teacher, or tell a police officer; but never defend yourself. You must always be overly reliant on a big government to defend you.
I said “realistic” because the scenario being given dealt with a “picture perfect” scenario.
And again, if you’re carrying a hand gun in Maryland outside of your own property, you are probably doing it illegal and thus you’re already guilty of that one crime. The judicial system is subjected to the will and whims of the media, and thus special interest groups. Among those special interest groups are the ultra liberal pseudo-communists that work around the clock to take away your first and second amendment rights. It’s bad public relations for a court to show the world that having a gun can save your life.
Look at TV, notice on basic cable television there are only two types of people carrying guns? The bad guys have guns, and the good guys with guns are always Law, military, government. Joe citizen does not use a gun, only government should own guns, and those non-government people that carry guns are called “criminals” and this is pumped into our heads everyday. There are a few exceptions to this rule, but you’ll notice the media is very anti-gun.
Notice that the news always tells you about a shooting that occurred in the act of murder, but you never hear about the good guy using his gun to save his own life. That’s not the image the mainstream media wants to show. On mainstream television you see public service announcements telling us about the poor little girl that got shot by her dad, all because he owned a gun. And how no matter where you hide your gun, it is first nature for children to seek it out, find it, and shoot themselves. DON’T OWN A GUN!
Now, where is the second side of this issue? Where is the commercial showing you the woman that protected herself and her family from a burglar by owning or even using a gun? The only “saved from a burglar” commercials you see are for ADT security systems.
The media is one sided. They want to show you how evil guns are. The courts obey the whims of the media because judges are a cross between a lawyer and a politician. It isn’t good PR to show the world that owning and using a gun can save your life. That is not the message the media, and thus judiciary, wants to portray.
I’d be really interested in knowing the statistics of males between the ages of 18 and 30 that plead self defense after shooting someone dead, and actually got off without any kind of punishment.
I never said you couldn’t possibly get caught.
But unless your license plate got on video, or was written down, or a witness knew your first and last name and or phone number and or address, you’re not getting caught.
And as far as DNA: if they don’t locate you, and brand you as a suspect, the DNA means nothing. Finger prints? As long as you don’t leave them on the murder weapon or the victim, your finger prints are going to be one of a million accumulative trace prints, or one out of a hundred thousand total prints in the area.
Oh yeah, and don’t spin wheels when driving away, a lack of tread marks is a lack of a lead, even if the parking lot is full of a hundred accumulative tread marks belonging to every one in the neighborhood.
Cops really don’t look too hard. They mark down a list of common candidates (friends, family, lovers) and cross off every one that has an alibi, and then concentrate on the others. You, will have no relations to this guy, and thus your name will not even make it on their list of suspects.
Again, you’re not getting caught unless you are identified by someone that knows you, or your license plate makes it on camera.
I think the real question that needs to be asked is: What are the statistics for males, who shot someone outside of his home, getting off without going to jail after claiming self defense and turning himself in?
There’s a dead body. His criminal record becomes irrelevant in the eyes of an overly eager DA trying to climb the ranks. You’re found with the smoking gun. You calling the cops on yourself to be a “good citizen” was an excellent alibi. That knife/gun on the dead man’s body isn’t registered to him; it could easily have been planted on him. Cops want someone to arrest, court wants someone to go to jail, and both the cops, and the court thinks the only reason Joe citizen owns a gun is to go out and murder people. I say you better have a hell of a lot more than some Public Defender.
That's it this one is through. Illegal acts are not advocated on THR. There are posts in this thread that advocate felony obstruction of justice. 
Jeff
Jeff
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
