Please Help FR Complete THIS FReepathon THIS Month!
Contribute Today, no matter the amount.
Posted on 04/14/2013 9:29:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The beam from the intruder's flashlight pierced the blackness of the bedroom at 4:45 a.m., sweeping across the down comforter and into Eric Martin's eyes. Outside, the streets of his Utah subdivision lay still and silent.
But as Martin rolled to the floor, reached into the nightstand drawer and drew out his 9 mm pistol, the 46-year-old executive's mind raced with calculation: Would this man harm Martin's fiancee or her son? Was an accomplice outside waiting? What if he pulled the trigger and hit the sleeping 8-year-old across the hall?(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Why didn’t the ‘rat popo’s save him?
Sorry but anything from ABC news is only propaganda so why bother! Why bother...
I agree. The “news” item is likely just a fluff piece; it begins in dramatic storytelling fashion.
I read it, just to see if you were right. You were right.
But I’m not sorry I read it. I’m studying the propaganda intentionally these days. Just to see how they’re approaching it.
Main thing with this article I noticed is what they don’t talk about. They never speak of it as a right, grounded in the Constitution, and bigger than just personal self-defense. Instead, they implicitly put the burden on gun owners to use crime statistics to justify the risk of owning a gun. Which of course is bass-ackwards.
The other thing I noticed is, with all the crime statistics they throw around, no one seems even a little curious about deterrence effect, i.e., could the big drop in violent crime actually be correlated, not to actual use of a firearm in self-defense, but the change of behavior among criminals where conceal carry and other good gun laws are in place, just knowing people can defend themselves. Instead, they seem fixated on how, because violent crime is dropping, doesn’t that mean people who want guns for safety are just being paranoid? Positively Orwellian.
Crime goes up? We need to take the guns away!
Crime goes down? No one needs guns!
The real problem is the number of folks who accept this shallow logic because they are incapable of critical thinking (or are too lazy to do it).
As is typical, the story they tell is dramatic, but questionable. The victim brandishes a weapon, the burglar runs off, AND THE GUY CHASES THE BURGLAR OUTSIDE HIS HOUSE, holding him at gunpoint after the thief stumbles and falls.
Use of a firearm like this is illegal in many states. Many states have an “imminent fear” clause governing when use of a firearm is legal. In my state, you can't use a gun on a burglar if he runs away. If the guy had plugged him in the bedroom, that would be OK, but as soon as the burglar ceased to be an immediate threat, the home owner can't even brandish his weapon.
Just resending this fragment to those involved in a similar discussion a few days ago. Thanks for your factoid statement here.
However, the original article here does not indicate if the burglar was armed or not, as to the implementation of gun defense.
But in my case, it would not be likely if I was faced with such a situation, that the burglar would be leaving my quarters under his own power.
I would not be asking myself as the homeowner did in this title article:
"Is that self-defense or is that me just trying to let off a little bit of steam at that point? That changes the whole dynamic of everything."
What a dumb question. "Shoot, or shoot not. There is no maybe." (in this scenario)(after Yoda)
What is immediate? I would define that as the time period before which the police arrive. It is impossible to judge why someone is moving. Are they diving for cover before pulling a gun? Who knows.
A perp who doesn't want to be shot can lay down on the floor and put their hands on their head.
But a multiple-perp situation greatly complicates the issue of what constitutes a threat. What are you to do when one perp is in front of you with his hands raised and you hear another perp start to assault your wife or children?
I place all blame on the perps.
Worth note that the states that greatly limit the use of deadly force by the their citizens have much more reasonable guidelines for their LEOs.
They make a big deal about a drop in crime, but it is well-known that crime statistics are very unreliable due to the pressure by politicians to under-report crime in their constituencies, for PR purposes.
Rights of Self Defence cannot and will not be compromised
because as a free people , we will not tolerate it.
Let the fluff pieces fly. Those rights go back to the
Magna Carta and the Declaration of Abroath,and the US Declaration of Independence, which formed the underpinnings of the US Bill of Rights:
Declaration of Abroath, Scotland:
.....”Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.”
***************
Declaration of Independence:
............”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
********************
Do these liberal fascists think they can trump the course of history? They will rue the day they even made the attempt.
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.