myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Gun Nuts
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 63, 64, 65 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2630

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

boggsman1 wrote:
When liberals make comments that spark outrage, they result in death threats. When Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh do it, they make money from it.

Maybe that's because people view liberals as intellectual and take them seriously while viewing the likes of Coulter and Limbaugh as the opposite -- and so laugh at them, elevating them to entertainers.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johnl



Joined: 05 Jun 1994
Posts: 1160
Location: Hood River OR

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
Hard to say if the law is a deterrent since violent crimes are dropping in the state anyway. But, my understanding is that the law has been used successfully in most instances. Only a handful of cases have tested the law. I do not believe it will go away. In fact, last year a bill was introduced to expand the law to businesses. It did not pass. However, there was significant support.

Isobars does have an important point. Other states are not, necessarily, following Calif. lead.


Actually this got me curious so I did a little research online. This isn't anything new that is "sweeping the country", and in fact California (who Mike dissed) has it. WHAT DEFINES it is how the elements of the law are defined and how case law has further redefined them.

Most are requiring some type of attack, or fear of attack combined with the "imminent danger". You have to have all of these before you can just "pull the trigger".

So in Mike's state it says...

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or


As one who has been trained in law enforcement and the reading of laws and codes you learn to break it down to it's "elements". The important part of this one is...

"lawful defense"
"reasonable ground to apprehend a design"
"to commit a felony or do some great personal injury"
"immiment danger of such design being accomplished"

My purpose is not to play Supreme court and try to further define this with case law (I'm sure it already has been) but to show you can't just shoot somebody that breaks into your house. Even in Washington without all 4 parts above being true.

But what I found interesting is where they talk about the "effect on crime rates". According to Wikipedia the states with this have reduced murder by 9% and overall violent crime by 11%. Of course stats can be tweaked and misread, but still interesting....

Oh yeah, my source was a simple Google search.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4036

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Although in my neighborhood Robert Downey Jr. has been known to break into his neighbors home and fall asleep on the couch. He lives accross the street from me and I often wonder, would I pull a gun on him? It would be funny to force him to sit and listen to me blast him with conservative philosophy for a couple of hours at gunpoint.

He seems sober now. Too bad....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1925

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Recently, a drunk college girl broke into a house in Boulder. She was shot (not killed) by the owners. No prosecution of the owners and no liability for her injuries. Colorado "make my day law" is very lenient.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14024

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johnl wrote:
You obviously know every answer to every problem and everybody else is wrong. … since you know "so many LEO's", and know all the FACTS to all these cases, I don't see any point in discussing them with you since it is a waste of time.

… you have no real legal idea of what your rights are if you actually use it. I know you think you do, but like so many other things, you are wrong. Of course this assumes this is actually true and not just more made up BS..


So because my evolving facts and opinions are based more on the experience and peer reviewed teachings of internationally renowned LEOs and their tactical and legal mentors and star students than on a few anonymous internet kibitzers and one LAPD cop, all of whom apparently contradict those sources which include another LAPD cop, I’M the villain? No WONDER so many people here think I’m nuts; from their viewpoint I most certainly AM … Thank goodness!

I cited many sources; you cited only personal experience. You already know of my international icon sources (e.g., Ayood, Suarez, Eimer, Taylor), and at the bottom of the page are brief summaries of the credentials of just a couple of the numerous LOCAL instructors my facts and opinions are evolving from. In addition, I’m getting trained and certified next week for UT and OR CCW permits valid in 34 states … just about every mainland state I’m likely to visit again. How many civilians do you think take this stuff as seriously as I do? Maybe more important, what else CAN I Do?

(BTW, even CA law contradicts JohnL's initial comments about home intruder defense. "§ 198.5. Presumption in favor of one who uses deadly force against intruder: Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred. As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury." That's all I claimed in my initial Castle comment.)

“Of course this assumes this is actually true and not just more made up BS”?
You disappoint me. You cannot cite one example of anything I’ve ever made up online, so your comment looks just like the other empty accusations we see here by the hundreds.

If I actually did “think I have a real legal idea of what [my] rights are if [I] actually [carry]”, as you say I do, why would I and my wife be spending a thousand bucks on all these courses and books and asking all these questions?

A big difference between the opposing parties in these forums is that most of you discuss primarily others’ personalities and ancestries while some of us are trying to discuss topics and issues. The two groups speak different tongues and have very different objectives. In this particular thread I’m trying to exchange information and opinions about guns, while many of you are more concerned with personal crap. The result is a Tower of Babel.

Another major difference is that most of the people here demand their claims be taken at face value, without question; when asked for explanation or support, they either clam up or cry racist/liar/angry/BS, etc. Even when presented with authoritative peer reviewed documents cited and/or posted in full, they often attack both the person who posted the document and the source of the document (Harvard School of Public Health is a right wing whacko institute? Massad Ayoob is just a book writer or classroom teacher?). I try instead to quote experts, cite them when necessary, add logic and opinions identified as such when appropriate, debate the issue when honest opinions clash, and encourage any interested parties to do their own homework/research rather than accept my word for anything available in the public domain. That’s more or less how rational discourse works, IMO. (Acknowledging liberal spades as “spades” is just a perk.)

(I merely "dissed" CA? Crap; is that all I managed this time? Damn; I'm slipping.)

The condensed resume´s of a couple of my local trainers:

John Turner
Experience:
LAPD Police Officer (Ret)
Police Attorney; sole practice of representing LEO-Involved Shootings, Use of Force, and Critical Incident Aftermath.
• LEP embedded w/ US Army Combat Units in Iraq
• USPSA Competitor

Certifications & Training:
• LAPD Academy Graduate
• Basic, Intermediate, & Advanced California POST Certificates
• Gunsite / American Pistol Institute (LTC Jeff Cooper)
• Yavapai Firearms Academy (Louis Awerbuck)
• Front Sight Firearms Training Institute (Chuck Taylor)
(JohnL knows those legendary names)

Accomplishments:
• LAPD Commendations Recipient
• LAPD 9mm and .45 ACP Transition School "Top Gun" Class Awards
• Los Angeles Police Protective League Defense Representative of the Year
• Los Angeles County Police Officers Association Attorney of the Year


David Blosser 

Experience:
• Full time LEO 19 years.
13 years SWAT team member, Entry Team, Training Coordinator, Snipercraft Instructor and Team Leader, (a dozen similar lines snipped for brevity)
• USE OF FORCE INSTRUCTOR
DOE SPOTC Competitor (for you laymen, that’s serious federal nuclear weapon tactical protection “Top Gun” $#!+)
• USPSA Member & Competitor - Master Classified

Certifications & Training: (Much snipped)
• Firearm Instructor, handgun, rifle/carbine, & select fire
• Advanced Tactical Firearm Instructor, Washington Criminal Justice Training Commission
• WMD Tactical Operations, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
• Advanced Hostage Rescue, Triple Canopy
• Basic Police Sniper, Snipercraft
• A long list of local and national sniper certification

Accomplishments (much more snipped):
• SWAT Officer of the Year
• DOE SPOTC top 3 finish, both individual and team (Tom Cruise, eat your heart out)
• A long list of regional and national shooting championships in handguns and long guns.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coyotewindsurf



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: SF Bay

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rolling Eyes
Considering the above, I prefer talking dogs...
https://www.iwindsurf.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=202868#202868

_________________
mo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14024

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevenbard wrote:
you might have offered the CHP half of your sandwich instead of looking pissed.

Not pissed; stunned ... and, of course, fully compliant with a big guy with a badge, a gun, a ticket book, and handcuffs. That was about 25 years ago, and I haven't yet broken my vow that day never to return. I cannot in good conscience spend one more dollar in a police state which thinks individual rights come from the state, the federal government, or even the Constitution, rather than from their real source: birth within U.S. borders.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coyotewindsurf



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: SF Bay

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Did you know dogs are allowed at Lake Lopez but must be leashed at all times. They are also not allowed in the lake -- even if they were born in California.
_________________
mo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
windoggie



Joined: 22 Feb 2002
Posts: 2380

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jeeze iso! Would you just go out and SHOOT someone so you could relax a bit?
_________________
/w\
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1925

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coyotewindsurf wrote:
Did you know dogs are allowed at Lake Lopez but must be leashed at all times. They are also not allowed in the lake -- even if they were born in California.


But, in Colorado, my dog can "pack".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 63, 64, 65 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
Page 64 of 162

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group