Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 46
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,050


    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    The proper action in that scenario, where your life isnt actively being threatened is to call the police, not put two in his head then do it. that is exactly what a vigilante is and still is supported by the castle doctrine which states that fear of death is imminent. It cannot be imminent in a scenario where hes the one hiding. You just made yourself judge, jury and executioner of a guy because of what he did to somebody else, not what he was doing at the time, to you. A lot of states you can shoot somebody inside your house for just about anything and have just cause, outside your house and that changes drastically because its no longer imminent.

    I hope youre wrong about that and he gets the death penalty but really im not sure if theres reason to think one way or the other on it at the moment. Curious but why do you think he wont?
    No, that is not what a vigilante is nor is that an accurate interpretation of the Castle Doctrine.

    Wicked's definition is vigilante is spot on and the precise legal interpretation. The Castle Doctrine allows anyone to defend their home AND property against any person who the OWNER feels is threatening. Granted, a few Castle Doctrine states have an imminent peril clause in them, but most do not. I know in Texas, if a person is on your property and engaged in a felony, deadly force is authorized.

    Take the exact same scenario with the terrorist suspect is hiding on your property and is armed, you're free to dispatch him in any manner you see fit -- deadly force or call the police; it's the property owners prerogative. Him having a weapon makes it a no-brainer. You can, and it seems like you are, argue that the *safest* thing to do may have been to retreat and call the police, but from a legal standpoint, 50 states in the country would have have found the property owner justified in using deadly force against an armed person on his property.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  2. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,050
    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    dont make it seem so horrible... .

    Id agree, you look in and the guy sees you and goes for his gun... pull the trigger, no questions asked.
    Didn't see this until after my last post.

    I think we may have been arguing apples and oranges. I was speaking from more of a specific legal standpoint.

    Yes, assessing the situation and acting in the safest manner is always best and it appears that's what this home owner did. But I also agree with NC. If he was passed out, and by all accounts he was at some point, yeah, retreat back and call the cops. Had I peaked in and this douche looked up with a gun in his hand, he'd be room temperature along with his brother.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  3. #27

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Didn't see this until after my last post.

    I think we may have been arguing apples and oranges. I was speaking from more of a specific legal standpoint.

    Yes, assessing the situation and acting in the safest manner is always best and it appears that's what this home owner did. But I also agree with NC. If he was passed out, and by all accounts he was at some point, yeah, retreat back and call the cops. Had I peaked in and this douche looked up with a gun in his hand, he'd be room temperature along with his brother.
    im not sure if i misinterpreted your saying of "two in the head and then call the police" as if shooting him on sight at his mere presence rather than if he actually was a threat to you. i didnt know the guy actually looked and saw him, merely that he saw the boat door open. to me that warrants a call to police and not going in with guns ready to kill him on your own accord, which to me is being a vigilante, even if its just your way of protecting your property. considering the circumstances of a known intruder being hunted, youre kind of asking to be in that situation at that point. I think theres a fine line as to what is deemed necessary for protection and what isnt when using deadly force. Ive grew up in the wooded hills where a stranger walking through your yard with a gun isnt exactly uncommon, especially in hunting season. if im inside, that threat is pretty much voided unless they do something to change that obviously. I go outside after them, I just eliminated the protection of my home between us. This guy for everything he did, which was horrible and would be considered dangerous, didnt do anything to that actual boat owner besides trespass. be on alert, sure, have your gun ready, but i think the call to police comes before you shoot in that particular scenario.
    -JAB




  4. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,050

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    Multiple outlets are reporting now that the dude in the boat DID NOT have a gun.

    This is getting creepy now. How far did the Boston police go? If they fired on an unarmed person, that's inexcusable.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  5. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Detroit Michigan
    Posts
    1,906
    Wow. This just got a whole lot more interesting.
    “Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.”

    –Eleanor Roosevelt




  6. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    25,680
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Multiple outlets are reporting now that the dude in the boat DID NOT have a gun.

    This is getting creepy now. How far did the Boston police go? If they fired on an unarmed person, that's inexcusable.
    Alex Jones is probably eating this up.



    Where are they getting this info from?

    Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  7. #31

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Where are they getting this info from?
    The police:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/single...o%2FWCsZYVLfOw




  8. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,253

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Multiple outlets are reporting now that the dude in the boat DID NOT have a gun.

    This is getting creepy now. How far did the Boston police go? If they fired on an unarmed person, that's inexcusable.
    From the thermal image that helicopter had of him, it sure looked like he had one.
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  9. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    22,050
    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    From the thermal image that helicopter had of him, it sure looked like he had one.
    It sure did. Maybe it was a boat oar.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  10. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,253

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    It sure did. Maybe it was a boat oar.
    Could have been. I'm not a boater (despite being born in the sailing capital of the world) so I honestly don't know, do most people keep an oar on a motorboat???
    We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid. - Benjamin Franklin




  11. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Mt. Arrogance in the middle of the .11 rolling acres of The Windbag Estates
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    The War on Terror is stupid, at least in name, because it is a war on a tactic.

    The war should be against the people using the tactic, but stating it in those terms is not politically correct. We are not allowed to say "The War Against Militant Islamism."

    I really don't have too much of a problem with shutting down a city while a bomber is tracked down in a heated chase. While it shouldn't be mandatory I think most people, when informed, would voluntarily stay home, out of the way and more importantly out of the line of fire.

    Searching homes willy-nilly is something to which I am opposed. If need be they could have a judge or two with them (or available by phone) as they try and track the guy down and have the judge issue search warrants where the law and Constitution allow.




  12. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    11,317
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: The War on Terror - What Are We Doing Here?

    This adds new meaning to the term "nanny state" which USA has become.

    After arriving in the US, the bombers family received over $100,000 in state benefits
    ranging from cash to food stamps to Section 8 housing.

    Immigration reform will immediately put many if not most illegals on well fare.

    Ron Paul said the manhunt for the bombers was scarrier than the attack.

    http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion...0g_in_benefits

    RON PAUL:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3014029/posts
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 04-30-2013 at 09:25 AM.
    UBER RAVENS FAN AND HISTORIAN GURU.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland