BF2S Forums Self defense law

Pubic wrote:

If someone breaks into your house with a machette and starts hacking up your family, its time for Mr Shotgun

Excuse me, Mr. Intruder, could you please commence with hacking up my family so that I'm certain of your intentions before i turn your head into a canoe.

how bout this rule?  If you don't want to die don't enter my house uninvited.  pretty simple.

I pity the fuck who breaks into my house when I'm in it. I will kill them, threatened or not. Doesn't matter if they are just steeling my toaster.

Id then hang their naked bloody corpse on a post at the front of my house with their cock and balls stuck in their mouth to warn other potential thieves/fantasy

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

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.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Self Defense laws depend on the state you reside.  In Florida there is no responsibility for you to attempt to get away before you use deadly force to end a forcable felony.  Also the castle doctrine has been extended to one's automobile.  Yea!

It is a shame we have to celebrate the legalization of common sense, but there is so little of it in govt. that when it appears we take notice.

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

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?

Also, if you think it is fair and equal for a criminal to sue their victims when his plan failed, you are pretty much exactly the problem with the country.

Missed this one. I removed the first part because I failed to see its relevance.

I don't really know why you create and attack straw men and logical fallacies to sugar coat your arguments, because you sure don't seem to have a need to convince yourself. Just come out and say it. You want to kill people for entering your property. You aren't concerned about criminals suing because "their plan failed", you're concerned about criminals suing for being attacked with deadly weapons, with intent to kill. You don't have to wrap it up. The people you're trying to convince can see past the pink shades.

The phobia of people who can't play by the rules, and the eagerness to see them dead and buried reflects your view of the world. Your treatment of criminals on your property, and the administering and execution of your brand of justice can be directly compared to how the government and the country as a whole chooses to deal with identical situations, and the broad legislative consensus is that your mentality is what's wrong with the country.

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

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. Care to give any actual examples?

Also, if you think it is fair and equal for a criminal to sue their victims when his plan failed, you are pretty much exactly the problem with the country.

Missed this one. I removed the first part because I failed to see its relevance.

I don't really know why you create and attack straw men and logical fallacies to sugar coat your arguments, because you sure don't seem to have a need to convince yourself. Just come out and say it. You want to kill people for entering your property. You aren't concerned about criminals suing because "their plan failed", you're concerned about criminals suing for being attacked with deadly weapons, with intent to kill. You don't have to wrap it up. The people you're trying to convince can see past the pink shades.

The phobia of people who can't play by the rules, and the eagerness to see them dead and buried reflects your view of the world. Your treatment of criminals on your property, and the administering and execution of your brand of justice can be directly compared to how the government and the country as a whole chooses to deal with identical situations, and the broad legislative consensus is that your mentality is what's wrong with the country.

ummmmmmm huh?

"create and attack straw men and logical fallacies to sugar coat my arguments?"

I don't have a burning desire to kill anyone. I am not barricaded in my home hoping and praying someone breaks in so I can kill them. In fact, you are the one who has the problem, if you are going to dismiss my argument as such. It would appear you have to make such a ridiculous argument because a real down to earth legitimate argument for NOT protecting yourself or your family is so elusive to your peace at any price, pacifistic, Kumaya, fantasy world.

the only reason I will shoot to kill is because when it comes to my family, I will not gamble on a criminals big heart not to hurt them or me.  If you put that much faith into a criminals intent then please by all means, let him in.