It's difficult to be as general as that, there are enormous variations in the Untied States, geographically, politically and culturally. My parents-in-law who live in urban New Jersey wouldn't dream of owning any gun (not even a hunting rifle), guns are as alien to them as they are to me. On the other hand my sister-in-law and her family live in a house where loaded guns are left around the house so that they defend themselves at a moment's notice. They live in an upscale neighbourhood near Denver and as far as I am aware are under no particular threat but their pattern of gun ownership and use reflects all the members of my brother-in-law's family I have met. They always have a gun immediately to hand are are always alert to any perceived danger. I think they are paranoid and insane, I'm sure they think that I'm naive and unprepared.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
WV man standing his ground, except it wasn't his
- Thread starter KatieG
- Start date
It's difficult to be as general as that, there are enormous variations in the Untied States, geographically, politically and culturally. My parents-in-law who live in urban New Jersey wouldn't dream of owning any gun (not even a hunting rifle), guns are as alien to them as they are to me. On the other hand my sister-in-law and her family live in a house where loaded guns are left around the house so that they defend themselves at a moment's notice. They live in an upscale neighbourhood near Denver and as far as I am aware are under no particular threat but their pattern of gun ownership and use reflects all the members of my brother-in-law's family I have met. They always have a gun immediately to hand are are always alert to any perceived danger. I think they are paranoid and insane, I'm sure they think that I'm naive and unprepared.
RenaissanceBiker
Eats shoots and leaves.
It's shocking, I know. I've been told on this forum that, as a gun owner, it's only a matter of time. Sooner or later I'm going to either accidently kill someone with them or go on a killing spree. I'm a responsible gun owner until I'm not.YET!!!11!
NoahFence
Banned
The US in general doesn't care how the rest of the world feels about us. We're pretty high on the Jerk-o-Meter.
squealpiggy
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2012
- Messages
- 1,468
I suspect that there are plenty of pro-SYG people who similarly have no idea what it means. And they are the ones toting guns.
That's part of the issue. Laws often sound straightforward in principal and yet there is an army of well paid professionals whose job it is to interpret them and argue their meaning. So when you get a law that is characterised as "stand your ground" it's interpreted as "no need for me to back down" when that isn't what it means at all.
For my part I'm concerned about the notion of removing the duty to retreat. A self defense plea usually carries the test that the defendant was in fear of imminent fatal or grievous harm and it's really hard to argue that when no attempt is made whatsoever to remove oneself from the situation. SYG doesn't as far as I know supersede the castle doctrine and simply adds the caveat that you can be anywhere that you have lawful authority to be, meaning that if someone waves a knife at you in the street you can gun them down even if the opportunity to retreat is there. And I'm really not sure how that gels with fearing imminent harm.
Whatever happens it's not necessarily the law as is written, but the misinterpretation of the law that leads to a couple of road ragers shooting each other dead or a retired cop shooting a guy over a dispute about texting in a cinema.
I don't think anybody would describe you as a responsible gun owner. Not with that moustache.
Cainkane1
Philosopher
If they had been in his front yard he wouldn't have the right to shoot them. He deserves to be executed. He sounds like a psychopath th me.
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
It easier perhaps to understand the "shoot first, ask questions later" attitude if you're in a high crime area or rural location especially if law enforcement response isn't as quick or effective as it might be.
One of the most controversial cases in recent decades was the shooting of a burglar by a English farmer who claimed there'd been a history of robbery and that the police weren't up to scratch. Trouble was, the burglar had been shot in the back and the farmer had had his shotgun licence revoked for an earlier shooting incident.
But I think in this instance the shooter would have difficulty justifying his actions even if it were the Wild West.
One of the most controversial cases in recent decades was the shooting of a burglar by a English farmer who claimed there'd been a history of robbery and that the police weren't up to scratch. Trouble was, the burglar had been shot in the back and the farmer had had his shotgun licence revoked for an earlier shooting incident.
But I think in this instance the shooter would have difficulty justifying his actions even if it were the Wild West.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
Just think of it like marriage. You can't know if your marriage is a success until one of you is dead. So are you in a successful marriage? Well maybe but it could conceivably fail also.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,796
Well the wild west did have fairly serious laws against carrying guns in town. That is what the gun fight at the ok coral was started over. Damn gun grabbing Earps.
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2011
- Messages
- 1,848
Just for reference, this is apparently where the guy lives:
I thought it was in the middle of nowhere. The guy lives in a neighborhood.
I thought it was in the middle of nowhere. The guy lives in a neighborhood.
Last edited:
Maybe I have the wrong kind of attitude to be living in the country. My shed does not contain anything that's worth killing someone over. If someone's breaking into my shed and a shouted "Oi !" and a flash in the eyes with a torch isn't enough to dissuade someone from stealing something or anything from my shed then they're welcome to the contents of my shed.
My garage contains a couple of classic cars, a couple of thousand pounds worth of tools, a few hundreds of pounds worth of bikes and various other things and whilst I would much prefer that someone didn't break into my garage and steal it, it still isn't worth me taking a life over.
Now the standard response is that how do I know that they won't go on to break into my house and go on to kill and rape my wife so why shouldn't I engage them with deadly force. My response is that kind of thing is almost unheard of in this country (and presumably is vanishingly rare in any first world country).
RenaissanceBiker
Eats shoots and leaves.
High quality facial hair like mine is a sign of maturity and personal responsibility. Besides, chicks dig it.I don't think anybody would describe you as a responsible gun owner. Not with that moustache.
23 years and going strong. She's also a responsible gun owner with her concealed carry permit. If this marriage fails it will be spectacular!
Last edited:
Pup
Philosopher
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
- Messages
- 6,679
I had google-mapped it earlier too, and was surprised at that as well. It looks like a little suburb. There's a golf-course just off to the lower right.
Hardly relevant, never has ignorance of the law been a defense, and always has it been a problem. It cannot be otherwise for any law at all forever to the end of days. Why? You can bring a horse to water, but you cannot make him read and understand the laws.
Quick question, if YOU know better, but continue to state other than fact regarding the law to anyone who will listen, does that make you an agent provocateur? It seems to me those that know better that continue to foster falsehoods about the law must have an agenda beyond the truth . . .
Disgraceful, but also hardly interesting, each person is responsible for their own actions, and that is why the man who shot those two individuals is a murderer despite his knowledge or lack there of, it was his responsibility to know the law prior to pulling the trigger.
Last edited:
KatieG
Rootin' Tootin' Raspberry
I hadn't seen this. It makes the shooting even more heinous. The only property lines he'll need to worry about in the future are the dimensions of his cell. The looks like flat out murder any way it's turned.
Quite a lot of decisions are made between observing intruders and issuing deadly force.
That should be the point of this thread.
You can challenge the actions of others without getting even half way to deadly force.
I will ALWAYS check it out so long as I have the ability to gain cover (not just concealment) quickly, and the ability to retreat, AND the ability to dissuade an attack with non-lethal force.
Why? Because odds matter not, if it can happen your plan should account for it happening. What happens if the person breaking in is in distress, perhaps choking on something, or in diabetic shock, it has happened before, it will happen again. I might save a life, or what happens if it is the neighbors kids and I can help my neighbors be able to know they need to do something to intervene in there wayward youth . . . it takes a village after all (seriously, not tongue in cheek).
IMHO assuming anything without primary data is a mistake, and should only be done when the risk is acceptable (I guess this is where we all disagree on what is acceptable risk, and what mitigates that risk). This is true in all situations for ever to the ends of days no matter the topic.
Knowledge matters in decision making, and if you are ill prepared and thus fearful of what could happen and either act, or do not act when it is needed based on a lack of knowledge the answer is to get that knowledge, not to remain apathetic in hopes that everything will work out ok.
TL;DR
Tactics based on primary data should dictate what decisions are made, not fear.(ie the rate of occurrence might make you feel safe, but knowledge of risk and tactics is more important than how you feel in such a situation.)
Last edited:
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2006
- Messages
- 12,454
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
What?
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
I think you score an own goal in your gun advocacy argument there.
Ponderingturtle was obviously off the mark. It is clear form that photo that she loves you. The guy sitting next to you with the shades is a bit creepy though.
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2006
- Messages
- 12,454
In principle, that can be a distinction, but the key is "would a reasonable person make that mistake - is it credible that it was even a mistake, or is that a murderer's story?"
I get the impression the investigators don't consider it remotely plausible that it was a mistake, so are left with insanity or homicide.