More sacrifices to the 2nd Amendment

[gowlerk 1,902]

9 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

PS)  When I was a kid ( late 40's - early 50's ) we used to run through the neighbor's back yards day & nite.  No one ever got shot.

Garden and fruit tree raiding was an acceptable sport as long as you were 12 or under.

[lippy 764]

40 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Garden and fruit tree raiding was an acceptable sport as long as you were 12 or under.

Yeah, and once we hit 13 we realized what those other plants were, and started raiding those instead 

[gowlerk 1,902]

1 minute ago, lippy said:

Yeah, and once we hit 13 we realized what those other plants were, and started raiding those instead 

But....you could easily get shot for that.

[Phil1111 908]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

...PS)  When I was a kid ( late 40's - early 50's ) we used to run through the neighbor's back yards day & nite.  No one ever got shot.

 

For me it was stealing crab apples when they were ripe.

and another :"A six-year-old girl and her parents were allegedly shot by a neighbor after a basketball that the child was playing with rolled into the attacker’s yard, according to authorities and local media reporting.

The shooting occurred on Wednesday in North Carolina when several young children were playing with a basketball which rolled into the yard of Robert Singletary, who neighbors say was new to the area and often mad at the local children,"

New gun sales in the US have averaged 1.25 million per month for four years straight.

Thankfully republicans have made it a priority to protect children.

[BIGUN 1,048]

Alec Baldwin's gun from 'Rust' shooting found to be mechanically improper, sources tell ABC News

"Investigators effectively conducted an autopsy of the gun and found that there were worn joints. The trigger control was not functioning properly. Baldwin had said previously that he did not pull the trigger when the gun he was holding shot Hutchins."

I'm calling bullshit. 

 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

Alec Baldwin's gun from 'Rust' shooting found to be mechanically improper, sources tell ABC News

"Investigators effectively conducted an autopsy of the gun and found that there were worn joints. The trigger control was not functioning properly. Baldwin had said previously that he did not pull the trigger when the gun he was holding shot Hutchins."

I'm calling bullshit. 

 

I'd love to know what that 'autopsy report' REALLY said.

I know quite a bit about guns. I know how they function and operate.

I'm not aware of any mechanical "joints", and I don't know of any part called the 'trigger control'.

It's possible the sear was worn to the point that the hammer would drop without the trigger being pressed, but there's supposed to be a 'half cock' that prevents the gun from firing if that happens. Most modern guns (or modern replicas of older guns) also have an 'interrupter bar' that prevents the hammer from hitting the firing pin (or the firing pin reaching the primer on the cartridge) if the trigger isn't all the way back.

But, as noted previously, there should NEVER have been a live cartridge in the gun. Period.

Most instructors don't allow ANY live ammunition in the same room when using real firearms in a training situation.

[BIGUN 1,048]

41 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

I'm not aware of any mechanical "joints", and I don't know of any part called the 'trigger control'.

If any of the points fail - nothing happens.

https://youtu.be/TXliIJ_66FQ?t=27

 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

7 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

If any of the points fail - nothing happens.

https://youtu.be/TXliIJ_66FQ?t=27

 

Right. 

All of those parts have proper names.

None of those proper names include the word 'joint'.

And while the trigger does 'control' the hammer, I've never heard of a part called the 'trigger control'.

Kind of like how you can spot a whuffo because they use incorrect terms, you can spot a 'firearm ignorant' writer the same way.

I'm not saying the report was incorrect, I'm saying the news story had a lot of terminology errors. Not unlike the news reports of airplane or skydiving accidents.

That's why I'd prefer to see the actual report, not just news stories about it.
Not super likely, but it's really hard to figure out what happened & why with crappy information.
 

[BIGUN 1,048]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

trigger control

Trigger control is the action of squeezing the trigger so as not to jerk the weapon. But, you knew that somewhere in the deep recesses of your military mind. :)

Edited April 22, 2023 by BIGUN

[Phil1111 908]

4 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Alec Baldwin's gun from 'Rust' shooting found to be mechanically improper, sources tell ABC News

"Investigators effectively conducted an autopsy of the gun and found that there were worn joints. The trigger control was not functioning properly. Baldwin had said previously that he did not pull the trigger when the gun he was holding shot Hutchins."

I'm calling bullshit. 

 

Agree. Single action cocking, trigger mechanisms are simple and safe. Beyond that if the gun was capable of firing live rounds. pointing it a a person is wildly dangerous in itself.

Having said that if two prosecutors in the end gave up on prosecution. I'd call it a day on the issue.

[Phil1111 908]

2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

...That's why I'd prefer to see the actual report, not just news stories about it.
Not super likely, but it's really hard to figure out what happened & why with crappy information.
 

Yes

[billvon 2,380]

10 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Alec Baldwin's gun from 'Rust' shooting found to be mechanically improper, sources tell ABC News

"Investigators effectively conducted an autopsy of the gun and found that there were worn joints. The trigger control was not functioning properly. Baldwin had said previously that he did not pull the trigger when the gun he was holding shot Hutchins."

I'm calling bullshit. 

 

Reminds me of the skydiving "experts" who post on Facebook who see a high performance landing fatality and say "look it's perfectly simple!   His shoot didn't open when he pulled his string!  It was whoever packed his shoot that is to blame here."

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

Hi folks,

Add one more to the list:  Florida couple shot at after going to wrong house while delivering Instacart groceries (yahoo.com)

Not a big deal - no one got killed.

Jerry Baumchen

[billvon 2,380]

2 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

 

Not a big deal - no one got killed.

By Florida standards, being shot but not killed is . . . just Saturday night.

[StreetScooby 5]

On 4/5/2023 at 6:58 PM, SkyDekker said:

Depends completely on how the Castle Doctrine is written.

New York State does not have one.  If someone breaks into your house, and you kill them, you're going to jail.  And, their family can sue you.

 

Edited April 23, 2023 by StreetScooby

[lippy 764]

1 hour ago, StreetScooby said:

New York State does not have one.  If someone breaks into your house, and you kill them, you're going to jail.  And, their family can sue you.

 

I don't believe that's the case.  From what I understand, the law says that in a public place, or even on your own property but outside the house, there's a 'duty to retreat' as the first means of defence before resulting to deadly force.  If the attacker makes that not an option then the use of deadly force is justified.  

If somebody is attacking you inside your home, the use of deadly force is justified.

I'm no lawyer and I'm just parroting what I found in 5 minutes of the Goggles, but that seems to be what is stated on several NY law offices' descriptions and what I can understand from perusing NY State law 35.

[StreetScooby 5]

3 minutes ago, lippy said:

I don't believe that's the case.  From what I understand, the law says that in a public place, or even on your own property but outside the house, there's a 'duty to retreat' as the first means of defence before resulting to deadly force.  If the attacker makes that not an option then the use of deadly force is justified.  

If somebody is attacking you inside your home, the use of deadly force is justified.

I'm no lawyer and I'm just parroting what I found in 5 minutes of the Goggles, but that seems to be what is stated on several NY law offices' descriptions and what I can understand from perusing NY State law 35.

I'm just sharing what my law enforcement friends have shared with me.  At a minimum, you'll be sued for everything you have.  And, more than likely, you'll go to jail.  If not, your lawyer fees will bankrupt you if their relatives don't.  I didn't make it up...

Edited April 23, 2023 by StreetScooby

[timski 80]

On 4/17/2023 at 2:35 AM, Slim King said:

Israel solved the School Shooting Problem over 40 years ago. They haven't had one since. It's simple. It's disheartening when there is a simple solution and our politicians ignore it.

https://www.newsweek.com/what-if-american-schools-were-protected-like-israeli-schools-opinion-1712864

So plain, so clear and yet we simply choose NOT to provide that level of protection... Troubling, isn't it?

[Stumpy 254]

28 minutes ago, timski said:

So plain, so clear and yet we simply choose NOT to provide that level of protection... Troubling, isn't it?

I agree, reducing private gun ownership to less than 2% of the population like israel has would certainly go a long way to helping.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

2 hours ago, lippy said:

I don't believe that's the case.  From what I understand, the law says that in a public place, or even on your own property but outside the house, there's a 'duty to retreat' as the first means of defence before resulting to deadly force.  If the attacker makes that not an option then the use of deadly force is justified.  

If somebody is attacking you inside your home, the use of deadly force is justified.

I'm no lawyer and I'm just parroting what I found in 5 minutes of the Goggles, but that seems to be what is stated on several NY law offices' descriptions and what I can understand from perusing NY State law 35.

The concept of "Castle Doctrine" is that you don't have the 'duty to retreat' in your own home, and that forcible entry into an occupied dwelling constitutes 'intent to kill or do great bodily harm' to the occupants.
That 'presumption of intent' allows the occupants to legally use deadly force.

That doesn't mean there won't be consequences, it just means the burden of proof that deadly force wasn't justified falls on the cops & prosecutors, not the occupant.

2 hours ago, StreetScooby said:

I'm just sharing what my law enforcement friends have shared with me.  At a minimum, you'll be sued for everything you have.  And, more than likely, you'll go to jail.  If not, your lawyer fees will bankrupt you if their relatives don't.  I didn't make it up...

First off, cops aren't lawyers. And the only place to get valid legal advice is from a lawyer. Note: I'm not a lawyer either, so keep that in mind if you decide to follow anything I say (write). Also, laws and policies vary from state to state, and even within states.

But you're absolutely right that any use of deadly force will be very costly. 
You will likely get arrested. 

IIRC, AggieDave once quoted that for a 'no bill' civilian use of deadly force in Texas ('no bill' meaning the grand jury choses not to issue an indictment), the average cost to the shooter was around $20,000. 

Twenty thousand dollars. For a case that doesn't go to trial.

This is one reason that a decent training class is a very good idea for anyone contemplating carrying a gun.
And why the 'no permit concealed carry' laws are REALLY stupid.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

4 hours ago, lippy said:

I don't believe that's the case.  From what I understand, the law says that in a public place, or even on your own property but outside the house, there's a 'duty to retreat' as the first means of defence before resulting to deadly force.  If the attacker makes that not an option then the use of deadly force is justified.  

If somebody is attacking you inside your home, the use of deadly force is justified.

I'm no lawyer and I'm just parroting what I found in 5 minutes of the Goggles, but that seems to be what is stated on several NY law offices' descriptions and what I can understand from perusing NY State law 35.

I've posted this before but it's first hand factual so bears repeating. I'm the only person I know who has actually used a gun to capture an asshole in his domicile. The dude came in through a window and I had time to take a 300 Savage off the wall and put one in the chamber before moving to the room he was in and ending the event without firing. The idea that you need a loaded pistol, or any loaded gun for that matter, at the ready is stupidity. If that's your time frame you're already fucked.

[Phil1111 908]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

I've posted this before but it's first hand factual so bears repeating. I'm the only person I know who has actually used a gun to capture an asshole in his domicile. The dude came in through a window and I had time to take a 300 Savage off the wall and put one in the chamber before moving to the room he was in and ending the event without firing. The idea that you need a loaded pistol, or any loaded gun for that matter, at the ready is stupidity. If that's your time frame you're already fucked.

Well in Canada Canadians don't use guns. I used a sledgehammer to capture an asshole in my domicile. About 20 years ago a neighbor phones me and says there is a suspicious guy prowling by my garage. I go out to the garage door and its closed but the inside light is on. So i open the door and enter and the said asshole is holding a couple powertools and trying to force his way out the car garage door.

I grab him by the neck and arm and drag him outside. As I exit the door I take from him a 18lb sledgehammer that he had a hold of.  I use it to hold the mandoor open when its windy. I threw him to the ground and put the sledgehammer on the back of his neck. It had rained the day before so the ground was slightly muddy. So his face ended up half buried in the mud.

By the time the cops arrived I was starting to feel a bit sorry for him. The cops were quite happy when they found out I had removed the sledgehammer from him. Because that was another charge on him. "Assault with a weapon".

[jakee 1,254]

7 hours ago, StreetScooby said:

I'm just sharing what my law enforcement friends have shared with me.  At a minimum, you'll be sued for everything you have.  And, more than likely, you'll go to jail.  If not, your lawyer fees will bankrupt you if their relatives don't.  I didn't make it up...

But they did. At least to a large extent. 

[kallend 1,620]

Eight teenagers shot in Jasper, TX at an after-prom party.

Firearm incidents are now the leading cause of death for American children and teenagers, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Civilized societies (Europe, Canada, Australia) keep their children alive.

Edited April 24, 2023 by kallend
EDIT update, 9 shot.

[SkyDekker 1,120]

16 hours ago, StreetScooby said:

I'm just sharing what my law enforcement friends have shared with me.  At a minimum, you'll be sued for everything you have.  And, more than likely, you'll go to jail.  If not, your lawyer fees will bankrupt you if their relatives don't.  I didn't make it up...

That doesn't contradict what lippy wrote. You can do something legally and still get bankrupted or ruined in court.