jerry81 10
Recommended Posts
I need to remember that if you ever do anything for me, that I go out of my way to make sure you stay happy. I don't wanna get kneecapped.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
turtlespeed 212
I was wondering why there is no longer, but was, a space in the qual forms for a carrying concealed permit application that showed your score(out of 250). I'm not 100% on this, but I believe it, and it sounds feesible. And this is how F**KING stupid the court system is in this kind of situation.
A law suit was filed on a guy that protected his family in a manner very closely resembling what was described at the beginning of this thread. I'm not sure of the details. Supposedly the guy with the CC permit shot a criminal with a gun that was threatening him, and the perp died. Self defense. Then comes the civil suit. The perps family sues him because he shot a perfect 250 to qualify, as documented on his CC permit. The court found that since he was an expert marksman, he should have only wounded him, and he was forced to pay for wrongful death.
A law suit was filed on a guy that protected his family in a manner very closely resembling what was described at the beginning of this thread. I'm not sure of the details. Supposedly the guy with the CC permit shot a criminal with a gun that was threatening him, and the perp died. Self defense. Then comes the civil suit. The perps family sues him because he shot a perfect 250 to qualify, as documented on his CC permit. The court found that since he was an expert marksman, he should have only wounded him, and he was forced to pay for wrongful death.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
Then he sues you because it's your fault that he has no ability to run. A jury finds your action cruel and inhumane. Your attacker is awarded a 3 bajillion dollar judgement. You lose your house, you move under a bridge downtown, your wife leaves you for someone else along the way, your son becomes a crack addict, your job fires you because you are dirty (from living on the street) you can't pay your attacker the rest of the 3 bajillion dollars you owe him so he can continue to live in your old house while banging your old wife.
Eh, I'd just aim center mass with some Triton .45 and be done with it.
mike
Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.
Eh, I'd just aim center mass with some Triton .45 and be done with it.
mike
Girls only want boyfriends who have great skills--You know, like nunchuk skills, bow-hunting skills, computer-hacking skills.
jerry81 10
QuoteThen he sues you because it's your fault that he has no ability to run. A jury finds your action cruel and inhumane. Your attacker is awarded a 3 bajillion dollar judgement. You lose your house, you move under a bridge downtown, your wife leaves you for someone else along the way, your son becomes a crack addict, your job fires you because you are dirty (from living on the street) you can't pay your attacker the rest of the 3 bajillion dollars you owe him so he can continue to live in your old house while banging your old wife.
Hehe...another interesting turn of events. I guess my non-american logic fails here- that disabling an attacker can be worse than killing him simply doesn't compute.
JohnRich 4
QuoteIf I am going to draw my firearm, I am certainly going to discharge it... three times.
If your attacker sees you drawing your firearm, and turns to flee, are you going to shoot him three times in the back?
Blahr 0
I'm more inclined to take the knife away from him and stick it in his ear.
JohnRich 4
QuoteI guess my non-american logic fails here- that disabling an attacker can be worse than killing him simply doesn't compute.
That is a bad idea.
First of all, hitting your attacker in the legs is difficult, and increases your odds of being hurt by him, should you fail, which is likely. Shooting things out of people's hands only happens in Hollywood movies.
Second, his lawyer will argue that if didn't feel the necessity to shoot to kill, and had time to try and hit his legs, then you shouldn't have been shooting at him at all. And you're more likely to go to jail for an "unjustifiable" shooting.
The advice is not to shoot until you absolutely have to, when you fear for your life. And then you shoot to stop the attack, by aiming center mass.
As soon as the threat ceases, stop shooting. That includes if the attacker turns and runs away. Then he's no longer a threat to you, so any shooting is unjustified.
Sure is, but I'd be stopping the bastard without killing him and doing him a favor, since he'd probably never be able to run at anyone with a knife again and so his chances of being killed someday by a conservative or a southerner would be somewhat diminished...
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites