|
Author
|
Topic: Castle Doctrine
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
DrA writes: The Castle Doctrine seems designed to appeal to people who would like one day to shoot someone, get away with it, and feel smug about it. Personally I hope I never have to shoot someone, but I would to protect myself or others. If I did ever have to shoot someone it would only be as a last resort to stop a threat.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 5 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-09-2010 9:47 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: The case of Tony Martin
JUC writes: I understand you can only do this for personal defence, not for defence of any property. I.E. If you attack someone simply for the fact that they broke into your house or your car, when there was no immediate risk to anyone’s safety, then you can and almost certainly will be prosecuted for that. If someone breaks into a house is that not a sufficient indication that there is a risk to the safety of those in the house?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 28 of 453 (573191)
08-10-2010 10:37 AM
|
Reply to: Message 27 by Dr Jack
08-10-2010 10:31 AM
|
|
Re: The case of Tony Martin
Mr Jack writes: That, and because he shot them in the back as they were fleeing. Well, shooting them in the back may be a little extreme, but a shot in the ass should always be seen as a legitimate reminder.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 27 by Dr Jack, posted 08-10-2010 10:31 AM | | Dr Jack has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Even if true, is there a problem with that?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
But none of those are applicable in the case of breaking into someones home. It is not a property crime, it is an invasion. It is not substituting suspicion for proof, the person broke into someones home. It is not uniting in one person the office of plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner, it is protecting ones home. And yes, the parents of that kid did feel bad and I'm sure that even the person that shot the boy felt sad, BUT as happened in that case, the only crime committed was breaking into someones house.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 43 of 453 (573294)
08-10-2010 7:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 41 by Dogmafood
08-10-2010 6:40 PM
|
|
Dogmafood writes: Does a hungry man deserve to die because he tried to steal some of your food? But that is unrelated to the issue. No one says someone deserves to die for stealing food, no one even said anyone deserves to die. The question is whether or not you have a right to protect your home from invasion?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 41 by Dogmafood, posted 08-10-2010 6:40 PM | | Dogmafood has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Dr. A writes: No, in that case the only crime committed was walking up someone's driveway and ringing his doorbell. But because Peairs suspected for no reason whatsoever that the kid might be going to commit a felony, he shot him and the law was on his side. Is that a good law? I can't say whether the ruling (judgment/verdict) was right or not. The law seems fine to me. And breaking into someone else house is the crime, regardless of why someone breaks in.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
I have said I don't know the specifics of the case and it could well be a miscarriage of justice as well as poor judgment. BUT, I still don't see the problem with the Castle doctrine.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 52 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-10-2010 8:40 PM | | jar has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 59 of 453 (573430)
08-11-2010 11:55 AM
|
|
|
On using a firearm for defense.
I think I need to point out one thing that is a basic in every self defense class I know of. The goal, whether it is martial arts, shooting, knife fighting is NOT to kill someone, it is to stop the threat.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Trayvon Martin
Is there some reason you used the term "murdered" instead of the more honest term "shot?"
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Trayvon Martin
Whether YOU think it is murder, fortunately, is irrelevant. It's not murder until it is judged to be murder in a court of law in the US, thank God.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Trayvon Martin
But so far you have presented no facts to support your use of the term murder. You may think it was murder, but that fortunately is irrelevant.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Trayvon Martin
Well, no, you have not presented all the important facts, except perhaps, all the facts YOU consider important. For example, you did not present the fact that the incident has not yet been presented to a grand jury and that that is already scheduled for next week. Edited by jar, : take out excess 'o'
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 433 of 453 (656650)
03-20-2012 5:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 432 by NoNukes
03-20-2012 5:39 PM
|
|
Re: Trayvon Martin
And if that is the case, then it is not 'murder'.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 432 by NoNukes, posted 03-20-2012 5:39 PM | | NoNukes has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Trayvon Martin
No, in that case it would not be murder. Sorry but them's the facts. Cain is not relevant since neither Cain or Able are an American, living today under US Laws.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
™ Version 4.2