• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

A couple scenarios

S

sega18

New member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

Thanks for all the responses! I'll definitely read up on the matter of carrying a weapon and use of a weapon in self defense before I purchase a pistol. And I'll always take advise with a grain of salt as well.

I live in the East Bay area, near Oakland.
 
stuckinchico

stuckinchico

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
506
Location
Stevenson, Alabama, United States
imported post

Citizen wrote:
stuckinchico wrote:
Alright I hate to burst this love fest bubble. But SHOOT TO KILL every TIME a dead man tells no tells... It his word against yours.. IF he is dead , he can not talk, if he cant talk he cant lie.
Click to expand...
Sega18,

The above quoteis a perfect example being guarded aboutadvice on an internet forum.

That is very dangerous advice. It also paints us as bloodthirsty/vindictive/willing to kill to avoid possible non-lethal legal consequences, etc.

The law varies from state to state, but most all of them as I understand it only authorize shooting to stop the threat.

I have never read ofa law that lets someone keep shooting after the attackis stopped just to make sure the bad guy is dead and unable to testify or sue.

If you continue shooting in order to kill after the threat stops, you could be in very deep hot water legally. Heck, you could be in very deep hot water even if you stop shooting once the threat is over, depending on a hostile prosecutor, lying witnesses, insufficient evidence to corroborate your story, etc.

Modern forensics may be able to tell that the defender "shot to kill" beyond the shots firedto stop the threat. In which case, here comes the manslaughteror murder charge.

Once the threat is over, stop shooting.
Click to expand...
Thats exactlywhat I was trying to say shoot for vitals not for the leg or arm
Click to expand...
 
R

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

femoral artery is a vital... just saying:D

but yea center mass is still easier to hit and alot more effective
 
C

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
stuckinchico wrote:
SNIP Guilty til proven innocent??
Click to expand...
Literally.

Remember that in many states, self-defense is an affirmative defense. Meaning you have to prove it was self-defense, not the other way around. Meaning you are guilty until you prove it was self-defense. As one of the gun law books puts it, "Remember that, 'I shot in self-defense' starts with 'I shot'." When you say "I shot", you just admitted to killing that dead body.

You understand that proving your innocence may cost anywhere from $20-50 thousand dollars in criminal defense legal fees, perhaps more.

This is not a subject for superficial examination and half-thought ideas.

Please take the time to read up on the subject.
Click to expand...
In California, we have a sort of Castle Doctrine. If a stranger enters your home uninvited, the court has to presume that you acted in reasonable fear for your life. The prosecuting attorney would have to prove that you were not in fear for your life.

Note that this only applies in your home, so SD shooting on the street you'd probably need to prove your innocence.
 
mjones

mjones

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
976
Location
Prescott, AZ
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
Citizen wrote:
stuckinchico wrote:
SNIP Guilty til proven innocent??
Click to expand...
Literally.

Remember that in many states, self-defense is an affirmative defense. Meaning you have to prove it was self-defense, not the other way around. Meaning you are guilty until you prove it was self-defense. As one of the gun law books puts it, "Remember that, 'I shot in self-defense' starts with 'I shot'." When you say "I shot", you just admitted to killing that dead body.

You understand that proving your innocence may cost anywhere from $20-50 thousand dollars in criminal defense legal fees, perhaps more.

This is not a subject for superficial examination and half-thought ideas.

Please take the time to read up on the subject.
Click to expand...
In California, we have a sort of Castle Doctrine. If a stranger enters your home uninvited, the court has to presume that you acted in reasonable fear for your life. The prosecuting attorney would have to prove that you were not in fear for your life.

Note that this only applies in your home, so SD shooting on the street you'd probably need to prove your innocence.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they also have to enter 'with force' not simply uninvited.

Someone walks in through your unlocked front door - no presumption of great bodily harm.

Someone kicks in your front door - or forces there way in when you open it - presumption of great bodily harm.

--------------------

198.5. Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or
great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to
have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great
bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that
force is used against another person, not a member of the family or
household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and
forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or
had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.

As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant
or substantial physical injury.
 
K

KS_to_CA

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2008
Messages
443
Location
National City, CA, ,
imported post

"In California, we have a sort of Castle Doctrine. If a stranger enters your home uninvited, the court has to presume that you acted in reasonable fear for your life. The prosecuting attorney would have to prove that you were not in fear for your life.

Note that this only applies in your home, so SD shooting on the street you'd probably need to prove your innocence."

One reason I miss Kansas. In KS, your private vehicle is an extension of your home. You can carry openly with the gun on the dashboard or shoot through the window if somebody is trying to get into your car.
 
Decoligny

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

r6-rider wrote:
oh just wondering. we were always taught to kill first and then the guys behind us will collect the injured as POWs
Click to expand...

Combat training under the Laws of Armed Conflict is a totally different thing than Self-Defense in your own home.

In a war-time situation "KILL, KILL, KILL". The only good enemy combatant is a dead enemy combatant. (Enemy Combatant isspecifically defined and is a limitedscopemilitary term.)

In a self-defense situation, shoot to stop the threat. If the threat is dead because of you attempt to stop the threat, fine.

If anyone posts something along the lines of "If anyone ever breaks into my house I am going to kill them!", then they are giving the District Attorney the ammuntion that he needs to press with PREMEDITATED MURDER charges.

I will say, to stop a threat, shoot center mass twice, then if the threat hasn't been stopped, one to the head, repeat as necessary. This will most likely have the end result of a dead person, but, the intent was only to STOP THE THREAT, not to kill an intruder.
 
Decoligny

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

crazyinca wrote:
I thought you had to be 21 to own a handgun in Ca.


http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php#30
Click to expand...

No, you only have to be 21 to BUY a handgun in CA.

You can be given a handgun as a gift through the intra-family transfer. If you dad wants to buy you a 1911 for your 18th Birthday, he can wrap it up and hand it over. You then only have to fill out a form and send the fee in to DOJ.
 
R

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

decoligny - i know, i was referring to any situation that would take place in country when reacting to contact

i would NEVER want to kill anyone that broke into my house and threatened my life;) why cant we just be civil about this and kindly ask him to leave:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top