BF2S Forums Self defense law

Essentially Mac, you may not use deadly force unless you believe and can prove your life is in danger.


Use it and not prove it go to jail as murderer.


_{oh fuck, iI am still drunk from last night}

NJ, so I have to run away or give up my car, tv, wallet, etc. before I can use force. -_-

Lovely.

Macbeth wrote:

Serious reply's that's why it's in DST.

₁Anyway, as far as self defense law goes if I'm attacked by someone in public to what extent do I get to defend myself? Also in my own home or on my property. ₂Or if someone was trying to steal something of mine like a car, motorbike, etc?

₃For instance somebody shows up to my house and tries to start a fight with me. I tell them to nicely leave they refuse. Can I shoot them or stab them at that point? Or use like a baseball bat to hit them?

₄What if I'm out in public and I'm attacked by someone? Could I use whatever blunt object that is within reach and go for head shoots? If so if I end up causing brain damage would I be liable?

₅If someone tries to steal my car from my drive way can I pull a gun from them and tell them to get the fuck out of the car? If so and they refuse am I allowed to shoot?

₆If I catch someone breaking into my house at night am I allowed to kill them? I mean it is my house and they shouldn't have been there right?

I'm being 100% serious here.

1: I'd go with maximum force, depending on how serious it looked.
2: If they're stealing and running, I'd just report it.
3: Since it's already face-to-face, deterrence with a weapon and a call to the police would be in order. If deterrence fails you could try to run (at your own risk) or strike.
4: Enter melee at your own risk. If you're going to shoot, you want body shots, not head shots. Head shots are too easy to miss. A body shot has a higher percentage of survival which would win you more sympathy with a hostile jury. If you take it to the 'one to the head' step after he's incapacitated, the court battle may be a bit longer.
5: You may be putting yourself at risk. You don't know how well his eyes are adjusted to the light level or if he's armed as well. You also don't want to have to run him down and deal with that spot of bother. Know the make, model and license plate of your car and memorize any distinctive markings. The police have interceptors and you have insurance.
6: Shoot them before they twist their ankle on a slippery floor and sue you. But in all seriousness, assume that anyone who breaks into an occupied home is prepared for violence. Run, fight, whatever. It's your bag. In this case, if it was a fight, I'd want to use lethal force.

I'd probably consult local law enforcement about technicalities like this rather than a gaggle of rednecks on BF2S, but if you think for a moment that your life is in danger, the last thing you should be thinking about is how much trouble would you get in for defending yourself with whatever means are at hand.

ATG wrote:

Essentially Mac, you may not use deadly force unless you believe and can prove your life is in danger.

Use it and not prove it go to jail as murderer.

It's a really broad call, relying on a ton of environmental and situational issues.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-07-05 10:04:35)

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Welcome to Saudi America, where criminals have more rights than their victims.

I did not get that joke
Criminals In saudi - guilty or not guilty - gets the chop! they have basically 0 rights.

Macbeth wrote:

Beduin wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Welcome to Saudi America, where criminals have more rights than their victims.

I did not get that joke
Criminals In saudi - guilty or not guilty - gets the chop! they have basically 0 rights.

I think he was referring to the whole "the rape victim gets lashes" thing.

ahh, roger

mikkel wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Well you see, criminals are just people in need of some rehabilitation (which we all know is so effective) so they actually have more rights than victims. If someone attacks you or breaks into your house, unless you live in a state with its head on straight like Texas you can't hurt him! He's obviously just a misled person and doesn't really MEAN any harm.

Welcome to Saudi America, where criminals have more rights than their victims.

More rights than victims? Care to elaborate on that?

I've heard plenty of stories of people who break into a person's home and get shot, and then sue the person and win.

Or so-called juveniles (please, at 15 years old I knew that you're not supposed to do this shit) getting off easy:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/23/ba … er-jailed/
(gotta love how even with a previous record, the punk just has ot go to a 'treatment facility' instead of the big house)

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

Well you see, criminals are just people in need of some rehabilitation (which we all know is so effective) so they actually have more rights than victims. If someone attacks you or breaks into your house, unless you live in a state with its head on straight like Texas you can't hurt him! He's obviously just a misled person and doesn't really MEAN any harm.

Welcome to Saudi America, where criminals have more rights than their victims.

More rights than victims? Care to elaborate on that?

I've heard plenty of stories of people who break into a person's home and get shot, and then sue the person and win.

Uh, and if the burglar had shot the resident, the burglar could've been successfully sued as well. That seems just about equal to me. I believe you were talking about inequality of rights favouring criminals. Care to give any actual examples?

I still find it laughable someone will condone deadly force for the theft of a TV

mikkel wrote:

Uh, and if the burglar had shot the resident, the burglar could've been successfully sued as well. That seems just about equal to me. I believe you were talking about inequality of rights favouring criminals.

The burglar should have given up said right to sue because he was posing a potential lethal threat by breaking into an occupied home. By the laws of things that just make sense, the offender (or his family) shoudn't be on equal footing with the victim like that, since it was by said offender's actions that both parties were put into a position of conflict in the first place.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2009-07-05 11:33:20)

lowing wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

I still find it laughable someone will condone deadly force for the theft of a TV

I find it tragic that someone would lay down instead of protecting their property or themselves.

Depends how much of a bastard you are i guess. Is a human life (however misguided) worth £400 of electronics?

In my book, no.

Detain him, hand him over to the pigs fair enough. Put four rounds into him, your call. makes you less of a human.

it's slang in belfast (and indeed northern England). I mean no offence by it.

FatherTed wrote:

it's slang in belfast (and indeed northern England). I mean no offence by it.

It is slang here as well, and it does give offense, and shows disrespect. Try calling a cop a pig when you get pulled over. Might as well get your pen ready to sign a ticket.