Log In
Home
22 Feb ’12
Offline
Good Stuff guys
15 Feb ’12
Offline
In the past I have been asked to be the LE rep for some CC classes and asked about a million times by general public wanting to know what ifs about using deadly force in their homes or on the street. There is no perfect answer for this question. My rule of thumb from a civilian stand point is If you are willing to spend the next twenty five years in prison, even if you did the right thing in regards to exercising the use of deadly force, then you are in the green.
As an example, I would rather defend myself and spend the next twenty five years in prison, than be stabbed to death by an intruder in my own living room. Clear cut right?
If I get mugged by an armed subject in the parking lot at night I would rather spend the next twenty five years in prison than bleed to death in the middle of a parking lot. No question about it.
How about two guys are having a fist fight outside of a bar and one pulls out a knife and is going to stab the other one. I am not going to spend the next twenty five years in prison to protect a drunken guy I dont know anything about outside a bar.
Its not a perfect tool to answer every what if scenario but the twenty five years in prison theory I think cuts through a lot of the haze. Regardless of the laws in each state there are too many variables involved in criminal and civil prosecution to use any other standard in my opinion. I would not want to get involved with a shooting in a stand your ground state that happens to have an anti gun DA with a political agenda. I have seen some crazy stuff happen with politically motivated DAs jury trials.
rinkus, do you remember that case several years back where that guy shot his fathers girlfriend and was acquitted? If my memory serves me right, she was trying to enter the home, she was asked to vacate the property she refused, he shot her with a shotgun and she died. You remember that?
That is just flat out murder.
4 Mar ’12
Offline
I don't own any guns, yet. But if someone was to break into my house I'd beating the living stuffing out of them with my baseball bat. No doubt. I wouldn't be concerned about going to jail. My main concern would be to protect myself and my family.
15 Feb ’12
Offline
In the past I have been asked to be the LE rep for some CC classes and asked about a million times by general public wanting to know what ifs about using deadly force in their homes or on the street. There is no perfect answer for this question. My rule of thumb from a civilian stand point is If you are willing to spend the next twenty five years in prison, even if you did the right thing in regards to exercising the use of deadly force, then you are in the green.
As an example, I would rather defend myself and spend the next twenty five years in prison, than be stabbed to death by an intruder in my own living room. Clear cut right?
If I get mugged by an armed subject in the parking lot at night I would rather spend the next twenty five years in prison than bleed to death in the middle of a parking lot. No question about it.
How about two guys are having a fist fight outside of a bar and one pulls out a knife and is going to stab the other one. I am not going to spend the next twenty five years in prison to protect a drunken guy I dont know anything about outside a bar.
Its not a perfect tool to answer every what if scenario but the twenty five years in prison theory I think cuts through a lot of the haze. Regardless of the laws in each state there are too many variables involved in criminal and civil prosecution to use any other standard in my opinion. I would not want to get involved with a shooting in a stand your ground state that happens to have an anti gun DA with a political agenda. I have seen some crazy stuff happen with politically motivated DAs jury trials.
rinkus, do you remember that case several years back where that guy shot his fathers girlfriend and was acquitted? If my memory serves me right, she was trying to enter the home, she was asked to vacate the property she refused, he shot her with a shotgun and she died. You remember that?
That is just flat out murder.
there was more to the story to it than that, it's why I asked rinkus for clarification, if I remember correctly, the woman and his father had broken up. The woman was given a no trespass warning to stay off the property, when she trying to break down the door, the son told her again to exit the property, she refused and was committing criminal trespass due to the fact she was already given a no trespass warning and a verbal warning by the son. I think that's why he got off, here is the maine statute on use of deadly force
§104. Use of force in defense of premises
1. A person in possession or control of premises or a person who is licensed or privileged to be thereon is justified in using nondeadly force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate the commission of a criminal trespass by such other person in or upon such premises.
[ 2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD) .]
2. A person in possession or control of premises or a person who is licensed or privileged to be thereon is justified in using deadly force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent an attempt by the other person to commit arson.
[ 2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD) .]
3. A person in possession or control of a dwelling place or a person who is licensed or privileged to be therein is justified in using deadly force upon another person:
A. Under the circumstances enumerated in section 108; or [1975, c. 740, §26 (NEW).]
B. When the person reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary to prevent or terminate the commission of a criminal trespass by such other person, who the person reasonably believes:
(1) Has entered or is attempting to enter the dwelling place or has surreptitiously remained within the dwelling place without a license or privilege to do so; and
(2) Is committing or is likely to commit some other crime within the dwelling place. [2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD).]
[ 2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD) .]
4. A person may use deadly force under subsection 3, paragraph B only if the person first demands the person against whom such deadly force is to be used to terminate the criminal trespass and the trespasser fails to immediately comply with the demand, unless the person reasonably believes that it would be dangerous to the person or a 3rd person to make the demand.
[ 2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD) .]
5. As used in this section:
A. Dwelling place has the same meaning provided in section 2, subsection 10; and [1975, c. 740, §26 (NEW).]
B. Premises includes, but is not limited to, lands, private ways and any buildings or structures thereon. [1975, c. 740, §26 (NEW).]
[ 1975, c. 740, §26 (NEW) .]
SECTION HISTORY
1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). 1975, c. 740, §26 (RPR). 2007, c. 173, §20 (AMD).
Most Users Ever Online: 698
Currently Online:
81 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
easytapper: 2149
DangerDuke: 2030
groinkick: 1667
PorkChopsMmm: 1515
Gravel Road: 1455
Newest Members:
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 12
Topics: 11482
Posts: 58640
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2
Members: 19842
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Administrators: K
