Posted on 12/05/2014 5:58:11 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Let an unarmed man who is about 6’5” break into one of these idiots houses and begin to threaten their spouse and their story changes.
Self defense is always an appropriate justification for deadly force, including the use of firearms. When an “unarmed” man attacks a smaller man or a woman, or one with less training and experience, the victim of the attack may use deadly force if a reasonable person would believe there was a danger of death or of serious bodily harm. I always prefer that the thug end up dead, since that protects future victims from a known violent predator, although the person exercising force may legally only “stop the threat”.
Officers have side arms for self-protection, not taking down those resisting arrest. Look it up, this is true and proper.
People are innocent until proven guilty in a court of their peers. Police do not have the authority to perform summary executions. This is a very important provision in the Constitution. You do support the Constitution, don't you?
My response on NewsBusters:
Really, now? I’m 63 and I sure can’t take a punch the way I used to. So I have a simple rule that even thugs and liberals can understand: assault me or my wife and I will kill you. Without mercy, hesitation or remorse. I possess the means, the training and the will to do so.
It’s a simple calculus: my life or my wife’s life versus that of the violent thug who wishes to harm either of us.
Addendum: like me, my wife is always armed - if I should go down in her defense, she’ll finish what I started.
So now people are obligated to take a beating which could lead to their death?
Faced with attack from a couple of Pelican Bay “yard monsters” it would be nice to have a piece.
According to the NY Slimes, a 100 lb woman is now supposed to passively accept being violently assaulted, raped, and murdered if her assailant doesn’t have a weapon.
Oh, you are just too old. Those are just kids having a little fun. /sarc
‘There Can Never Be A Justification For Any Lethal Assault On An Unarmed Man’
And how many reports has the NYT done on Chicago murders?.
New York Times (pronounced: noo'yo'rk-teymz)
(ex. "Did you see that reporter? He went all New York Times on that person!")
(syn: insanity, madness, moonbattery, bias, unhinged)
(ant: sane, unbiased, sober)
Good photo. KeyLargo, does that look like a choke to you?
If the left can’t force complete disarmament upon citizens yet (though they’ll never stop trying), they can at least make it almost intolerable for citizens who may be required to use a gun in self-defense, and the same principle for LE.
And for that matter, if they really believe in this principle, why are they telling us (American citizens) first? They should be telling their usurper-in-chief, about his drone attacks.
According to the Second City Cop blog, he died an hour later of a heart attack, anyway. Not from any hold. And the whole time he was claiming to be out of breath, he was repeatedly shouting “I can”t breathe”.
The fastest round-house kick in the business except for Lew “Sugar Foot” Wallace. Even Bruce Lee couldn’t spin as fast.
Did you mean Bill "Superfoot" Wallace? Or was there actually a "Sugarfoot" Wallace?
Nope, age and years of not thinking about that ruined my memory.
Bill “Superfoot” Wallace is correct.
that’s the way I read it.
A gun is the great equalizer between thugs like Michael Brown and women. There is plenty of reason to use deadly force against a violent unarmed thug as occurred in the Brown case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.