Woman shoots at shoplifter in parking lot

When self defense is used as a defense in court, with the elements present, impending danger etc. it's called a perfect defense. No legal arguement can supersede it. If this is present the judge must direct the jury to return a not guilty. Permit owners are instructed just to this level of the law. There are many nuances of the situation. When you approach someone in an auto and restricting their movement you are committing assault, one of the reason the cop makes you sit in your car when you get pulled over. When you pull a gun on someone it can be assault with a deadly weapon and one of the reasons many cases of use of deadly force for defense are not reported. This would be one of the elements present if a ccw pulled a gun to help in a movie theatre.
The lady may be in one of the gray area, but the instructor who said these where the only conditions is wrong, sorry.
the article was written by the Wpost and got someone or worded it out of context for their already stated anti gun agenda. They then connected with a whacko in Oregan under the typical media straw man technique to lead the reader. That should be obvious. I can produce gun instructors lawyers to tell you that.
 
Ameriscot said:
Unfortunately, you are right.
Click to expand...

Fortunetly the FBI reported Sept. As the all time high for gun purchases in the U.S. Looks like abunch of somebodys read this guys letter and took up the slack.

the anti gun culture cannot define responsible gun laws. They have been trying since the Clinton era. None of those laws worked and they still can't give a specific law to stop a specific event. More laws aren't going to help.
Criminals don't follow the laws by definition.
 
Ameriscot said:
Question for those of you who have a gun in your home for protection: would you shoot someone that broke into your house and didn't have a weapon and wasn't threatening anyone's life and was clearly only there to steal your 'stuff'?
Click to expand...

Again you bring up the question of the use of lethal force except in this case you have removed the threat component and expect some rational answer. If you or anyone chooses to opt out that's your choice. And again don't expect the folks who haven't to be listening.
 
Ameriscot said:
Question for those of you who have a gun in your home for protection: would you shoot someone that broke into your house and didn't have a weapon and wasn't threatening anyone's life and was clearly only there to steal your 'stuff'?
Click to expand...

That would depend on the situation at the time. Just breaking into my home would be threat enough for me. Even if he didn't come in with a weapon, he can pick up one of my knives, hammers, ropes for strangling, break a bottle for cutting, or hit me over the head with a fry pan and light me on fire. He could be a fighter or martial artist, head butt me and knock me unconscious. I imagine if he was completely submissive (lying face down on floor), I would contain him until the cops arrived. But he would have to be very calm and non-threatening at all for me to consider it. I certainly wouldn't risk my life in any way with guessing games in a moment of home invasion like that which could end my life or the life of my family members.
 
Opt out? How can anyone expect anti gun people to respect responsible gun owners although, not agreeing with their stance, when choosing not to be armed is seen as a weakness/cop out? This is the twenty first century, not everyone, including many gun aficionados want to live in a "High Noon" environment.
 
rt3 said:
Again you bring up the question of the use of lethal force except in this case you have removed the threat component and expect some rational answer. If you or anyone chooses to opt out that's your choice. And again don't expect the folks who haven't to be listening.
Click to expand...

Choose to opt out? If you haven't noticed I don't live in the US. I don't need one, nor could I even obtain a gun. Hunting rifle maybe, but that's it. In my area there is NO crime. None of my neighbours, some who have lived here 40 years can remember a crime in my village. And even if there was and I was allowed to buy one, I wouldn't own a gun.

Your last sentence makes no sense so I can't address it.
 
please don't pretend to speak for gun owners. sheeple yes. Yes it is the Modern ages what ever that means, let's look at Syria, rest of world and thank something that you live in a great country where ever that may be. Now what was your point?
 
Wow, says the therapist in me. Projection/transference? Sheeple? What an inappropriate, arrogant remark. Since when is one person the arbiter of what constitutes true strength? What happened to choice? All persons who do not own guns are not wimps. I have

never owned a firearm in my life. Most people in UK, Australia, and my beloved Canada don't. Somehow, we manage to have a much lower incidence of gun homicide than America. Yet, we avoid personally calling you derogatory names. I immensely

prefer courtesy to the tedious presumption that packing guns equals some great moral imperative. I thought an armed society was supposedly a polite society? Apparently there are exceptions. As for the point of Annie's post, were it any sharper, it would cut.
 
Ameriscot said:
Choose to opt out? If you haven't noticed I don't live in the US. I don't need one, nor could I even obtain a gun. Hunting rifle maybe, but that's it. In my area there is NO crime. None of my neighbours, some who have lived here 40 years can remember a crime in my village. And even if there was and I was allowed to buy one, I wouldn't own a gun.

Your last sentence makes no sense so I can't address it.
Click to expand...

it makes no sense because your not listening

i can hear you. Your anti gun ok . It is not going to change what I do or the things going on here. Folks in the U.S. Have the 2nd Amd. So they at least have the option of not carrying or owning a gun. You don't even have that so it is understandable. Opt. Short for option.
 
Shalimar said:
Wow, says the therapist in me. Projection/transference? Sheeple? What an inappropriate, arrogant remark. Since when is one person the arbiter of what constitutes true strength? What happened to choice? All persons who do not own guns are not wimps. I have

never owned a firearm in my life. Most people in UK, Australia, and my beloved Canada don't. Somehow, we manage to have a much lower incidence of gun homicide than America. Yet, we avoid personally calling you derogatory names. I immensely

prefer courtesy to the tedious presumption that packing guns equals some great moral imperative. I thought an armed society was supposedly a polite society? Apparently there are exceptions. As for the point of Annie's post, were it any sharper, it would cut.
Click to expand...

please stop with the therapist as if something in it Instills great insight. If you want to to do a point by point blow from one therapist to another let's take it to s new post. I'll match point for point.
 
Shalimar said:
This is the twenty first century, not everyone, including many gun aficionados want to live in a "High Noon" environment.
Click to expand...

You're right Shalimar, I don't want to live in a high noon environment at all, and I don't want to see crazy shooters like this woman pull a Zimmerman and want to play hero in a situation that is none of her business. The security people from the store were already on alert, and in the Zimmerman case, the cops told him to let them do their jobs and keep his nose out of it. If he'd listened, the innocent young man he shot and killed for no valid reason would still be alive today.
 
As far as a polite society, you were part of a previous post here, and you know this comment is a straw man arguement.
 
SeaBreeze said:
You're right Shalimar, I don't want to live in a high noon environment at all, and I don't want to see crazy shooters like this woman pull a Zimmerman and want to play hero in a situation that is none of her business. The security people from the store were already on alert, and in the Zimmerman case, the cops told him to let them do their jobs and keep his nose out of it. If he'd listened, the innocent young man he shot and killed for no valid reason would still be alive today.
Click to expand...


so much for due process and day in court. Boy that anti gun fever sure is tricky.
 
Yes, I get the keys (sometime wonder if it's the only difference between the workers and the needy) do the therapies and control the drugs. ( please no comments about taking them it would show your lack of knowledge on how they are controlled and inventoried)
 
Shalimar said:
No thanks, Rt. I am not competitive. Great or not, I certainly hope my being a therapist instills some insight, or I am doing my clients a huge disservice. I did not realise you were a therapist. Interesting.
Click to expand...

so is passive/aggressive behavior
 
rt3 said:
it makes no sense because your not listening

i can hear you. Your anti gun ok . It is not going to change what I do or the things going on here. Folks in the U.S. Have the 2nd Amd. So they at least have the option of not carrying or owning a gun. You don't even have that so it is understandable. Opt. Short for option.
Click to expand...

Do you really think your posts make sense? Try proofreading before you post.

Thanks, but I know was opt means. I'm quite happy to live in a country where everyone isn't armed to the teeth, even the cops. If you bothered to look in the right corner you'll see that I'm from the US and live in Scotland.

Shali, don't know about you but this is just getting to be too much work. I'm outta here. Talk to yourself rt3. :eek:nthego:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top