Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: When seconds count, the police are only an hour and a half away.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Billy D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    detroit
    Posts
    56

    When seconds count, the police are only an hour and a half away.

    http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news...ay-20111215-ms

    DETROIT (WJBK) - Marvin Denha says scrap thieves have stripped his family business properties. What wasn't stolen was vandalized in the deli, laundry and collision shops that operated side-by side until six months ago on West Seven Mile at Hershey in Detrioit near the State Fairgrounds. All three businesses were for sale, but scrap thieves robbed them blind.

    "I was happy to get both at the same time, but it was scary at the same time because I've got two guys to watch and it may sound funny... but I've got two firearms pointed two different ways," Denha explained.

    He has a concealed gun permit. He likes to carry two guns and he pulled them both. One scrap thief laid down. The other hesitated.

    "He refused to get on the ground for like about a good five minutes until I showed him that I wasn't playing around. I put the gun directly at him and made him lay down," Denha said.

    His cousin called 911 several times. Denha began holding the bad guys at gunpoint at 4:30 p.m.

    "I told them you [aren't] going anywhere until the cops come. I'm going to make sure you go to jail," Denha told FOX 2. "I'm dialing 911. I tell them I've got one guy at gunpoint, and the other, the second [I'm] on the phone he books it. So, I'm not going to shoot him in the back."

    Police hadn't arrived. Denha heard a noise outside. He thought the bad guys were getting help. His cousin does not have a gun permit.

    "I left him alone. I can't give him my firearm," said Denha. "I heard the noise and I got worried about I was getting trapped in [the] building."

    "I didn't want [anybody] to come in on us, so I walked out to go cover that," he added."[My cousin] ends up getting hit in the face and the guy books it."

    In the end, both thieves got away. Denha and his cousin drove off at 6:00 p.m., which was an hour and a half after their first 911 call.

    FOX 2 asked Detroit Police for comment. They said they did respond to the scene, but did not find any trouble. Due to computers being down, they couldn't tell what time they arrived.
    Last edited by Billy D; 12-16-2011 at 05:39 PM.
    My 2nd amedment rights trump some paranoid persons ignorance.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Outdoorsman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Genesee County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy D View Post
    http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/dpp/news...ay-20111215-ms

    DETROIT (WJBK) - Marvin Denha says scrap thieves have stripped his family business properties. What wasn't stolen was vandalized in the deli, laundry and collision shops that operated side-by side until six months ago on West Seven Mile at Hershey in Detrioit near the State Fairgrounds. All three businesses were for sale, but scrap thieves robbed them blind.

    "They took the heating and cooling. They took the electrical panels. They took the air conditioning unit off the roof. We even bought a new cage for the guy because he's still open at the end and they ripped that cage up and stole the heating and cooling stuff again," said Denha.

    He was checking on the properties at 4:30 p.m. Thursday when two guys with tools broke in.

    "I was happy to get both at the same time, but it was scary at the same time because I've got two guys to watch and it may sound funny... but I've got two firearms pointed two different ways," Denha explained.

    He has a concealed gun permit. He likes to carry two guns and he pulled them both. One scrap thief laid down. The other hesitated.


    "He refused to get on the ground for like about a good five minutes until I showed him that I wasn't playing around. I put the gun directly at him and made him lay down," Denha said.

    His cousin called 911 several times. Denha began holding the bad guys at gunpoint at 4:30 p.m.

    "I told them you [aren't] going anywhere until the cops come. I'm going to make sure you go to jail," Denha told FOX 2. "I'm dialing 911. I tell them I've got one guy at gunpoint, and the other, the second [I'm] on the phone he books it. So, I'm not going to shoot him in the back."

    Police hadn't arrived. Denha heard a noise outside. He thought the bad guys were getting help. His cousin does not have a gun permit.

    "I left him alone. I can't give him my firearm," said Denha. "I heard the noise and I got worried about I was getting trapped in [the] building."

    "I didn't want [anybody] to come in on us, so I walked out to go cover that," he added."[My cousin] ends up getting hit in the face and the guy books it."

    In the end, both thieves got away. Denha and his cousin drove off at 6:00 p.m., which was an hour and a half after their first 911 call.

    FOX 2 asked Detroit Police for comment. They said they did respond to the scene, but did not find any trouble. Due to computers being down, they couldn't tell what time they arrived.
    Un-freaking-believable!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,929
    They said they did respond to the scene, but did not find any trouble. Due to computers being down, they couldn't tell what time they arrived.
    Because it's so hard to tell what time it is when you are surrounded by watches, cell phones, car stereos...Unless they were in a 1985 DeLorean, that excuse doesn't fly.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Badger Johnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,217
    Zip ties FTW?
    A gun in a holster is better than one drawn and dispensing bullets. Concealed forces the latter. - ixtow

    Hi, I'm hypercritical. But I mean no harm, I just like to try to look deeply at life

  5. #5
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Badger Johnson View Post
    Zip ties FTW?
    There is no way in hell I'm going to play Mr. Macho citizen cop and get close enough to try to zip tie their hands/feet putting myself in a position where the criminal can wrestle/fight/grab me and/or my gun. Screw that.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Englewood, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    654

    Cool Time piece..

    That one Delorean had a time piece... it was attached to the Flux-capistore...

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Outdoorsman View Post
    Un-freaking-believable!
    Doesnt surprise me at all.

  8. #8
    Regular Member HKcarrier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    831
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    There is no way in hell I'm going to play Mr. Macho citizen cop and get close enough to try to zip tie their hands/feet putting myself in a position where the criminal can wrestle/fight/grab me and/or my gun. Screw that.


    I agree with this... but the article mentions a 2nd 'good guy' who was punched in the face after the other 'good guy' with 2 guns left him unarmed wiht one of the perps.... 2nd gg should have been armed by 1st gg as well as try to restrain the guys with zip ties or duct tape or whatever...


    Personally I can't think of any situations where I would EVER detain someone in this manner, or at all... Not that it would be impossible, but I would hope that my 'detainees' (read attacker) were being detained while sporting a few new body modifications...
    Last edited by HKcarrier; 12-16-2011 at 01:11 PM.
    When you put the gun in the holster, put the ego in the gun safe.

  9. #9
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Once again affirming that the police have no duty to protect anyone not in custody.
    I hope the cousin gets a carry permit soon, but question the assumption that it would have been illegal for him to possess the pistol (exigent circumstances, lesser harm, necessity... whatever).
    Isn't carry on private property legal in MI, even without a permit?
    And since it's a family business, he has even more legal protection.

    ETA: You're probably going to get dinged for a "fair use" copyright violation for posting the whole article. Trim it to the salient points & let people use the link to see the rest of it.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 12-16-2011 at 01:16 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    He could have carried, or held the gun, but NOT concealed it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    He could have carried, or held the gun, but NOT concealed it.
    Not in the store or once the owner of the pistols went outside...and not for defensive purposes.

    28.422

    (12) This section does not apply to a person who possesses a pistol if all of the following conditions apply:

    (a) The person is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a pistol.

    (b) The person is at a recognized target range or shooting facility.

    (c) The person possesses the pistol for the purpose of target practice or instruction in the safe use of a pistol.

    (d) The owner of the pistol is physically present and supervising the use of the pistol.
    It appears that, according to this law, in order for me to run somebody through the basics of pistol handling and safety I must do it at a shooting range.

    Bronson
    Last edited by Bronson; 12-17-2011 at 01:36 AM.
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Interesting to note, that a juvenile can use a handgun in self defense at their own residence. You're right, but I find it suprising that an adult cant defend him herself without a CPL, (not withstanding the explicit and specific language in Article 1 Section 6), while a child can shoot someone at home.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Interesting to note, that a juvenile can use a handgun in self defense at their own residence.
    Cite please. In the link to 28.422 posted above juveniles have the same restrictions with the addition that the parent or guardian must be present.

    So again no allowing the kids to handle the guns at home in order to teach them function and safe handling; you must be at a shooting range.

    Unless, per 28.432, you were to teach them with an antique firearm...what a dumb-ass law.

    Bronson
    Last edited by Bronson; 12-17-2011 at 03:22 AM.
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

  15. #15
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    well,,, just wow!!

    the OP is soooo full of fail...
    I dont want to rag on the guy, but...
    it takes 5 minutes to get the second BG to lay down..
    when he calls 911 on the fone, the second BG gets up and runs away.
    why didnt he shoot that guy when he got up to run away, or attack me?
    the OP leaves his friend unprotected with a BG, to check... sounds ....
    the last of the BGs get up and attacks his friend and then escapes.

    I.. maybe would have shot the BG that didnt want to lay down for 5 minutes.
    I.. wouldnt have left my friend unprotected with the other BG to check sounds.

    When I put on a gun for defense of myself and others...
    I am prepared to shoot bad guys with it!

    If you arent ready to shoot bad guys with your gun,,, maybe you shouldnt carry...
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  16. #16
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    the OP is soooo full of fail... I dont want to rag on the guy, but... it takes 5 minutes to get the second BG to lay down..

    And how would a person who is already holding a bad guy at gun point make him lay down when the bad guy simply refuses to lay down? A bad guy who is NOT attacking but is simply refusing to do take orders is not legal justification to shoot.

    when he calls 911 on the fone, the second BG gets up and runs away. why didnt he shoot that guy when he got up to run away, or attack me?

    Hmmmm..... since the only legal justification for using deadly force is to stop an immediate threat of death, grave bodily harm, or unwanted sexual penetration.... how would someone running away but not shooting at anyone present a threat of any of those things?


    the OP leaves his friend unprotected with a BG, to check... sounds .... the last of the BGs get up and attacks his friend and then escapes.

    Without a doubt leaving an unarmed guy to watch a bad guy was, in my opinion, foolish.


    I.. maybe would have shot the BG that didnt want to lay down for 5 minutes.

    Again.... refusing to obey an order while NOT ATTACKING is not justification for the use of deadly force against anyone... even a bad guy that stopped his attack.

    I.. wouldnt have left my friend unprotected with the other BG to check sounds.

    Agreed.


    When I put on a gun for defense of myself and others... I am prepared to shoot bad guys with it! If you arent ready to shoot bad guys with your gun,,, maybe you shouldnt carry...

    I won't judge whether or not someone should, or shouldn't, carry... but I will strongly suggest anyone who carries a gun be damn sure they understand the law, and what is.. and what isn't... a threat.
    My responses are in blue above.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 12-17-2011 at 10:30 AM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  17. #17
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    The problems with making responses inside a quote are:
    1) can't be quoted, must be copied & pasted
    2) makes for a blippin' long post

    "A bad guy who is NOT attacking but is simply refusing to take orders is not legal justification to shoot."
    Ask your friendly (or not-so-friendly, depending on where you are) neighborhood LEA if their employees could shoot (or have shot) someone for refusing to do what they said in a similar situation.

    "to stop an immediate threat of death, grave bodily harm, or unwanted sexual penetration"
    The last is equal to the second.
    Ask anyone who's survived it.

    ETA: in some states there are other specific crimes for which shooting is a legal response, most of which are presumed to lead to death or injury, but that doesn't have to be immediately threatened.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 12-17-2011 at 10:45 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    That's Fed. law, the law in MI seems to make it illegal. It's a reverse of the med. marijuana problem. So the Feds won't prosecute because it doesn't break Fed law but the State may still be able to bring suit.

    Not a lawyer, just my take.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    So your 15 year old girl shoots and kills her rapist, and they lock her up.

    cute.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    The problems with making responses inside a quote are:
    1) can't be quoted, must be copied & pasted
    2) makes for a blippin' long post

    I always considered copy and paste as sometimes a necessary way to respond to a post????

    Ask your friendly (or not-so-friendly, depending on where you are) neighborhood LEA if their employees could shoot (or have shot) someone for refusing to do what they said in a similar situation.

    The folks involved in the incident under discussion in this thread are not LE and would not enjoy the same legal protections an LEO would. So I'm not sure how that would be relevant?

    The last is equal to the second.
    Ask anyone who's survived it.

    ETA: in some states there are other specific crimes for which shooting is a legal response, most of which are presumed to lead to death or injury, but that doesn't have to be immediately threatened.

    I'm well aware that the laws differ from State to State. However the incident under discussion happened in Detroit Michigan.... Hence Michigan law would apply.
    Please do not take my response as a snub for anyone who doesn't live in Michigan but please understand that if it happened in Michigan then Michigan law applies.

    And I still stand by my earlier statement that applies regardless of which State a person might be in................

    -> I will strongly suggest anyone who carries a gun be damn sure they understand the law, and what is.. and what isn't... a threat. <-

    Also MKEgal... my best wishes for a favorable outcome in regards to your recent incident with Milwaukee LE.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  21. #21
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    Please do not take my response as a snub for anyone who doesn't live in Michigan but please understand that if it happened in Michigan then Michigan law applies.

    And I still stand by my earlier statement that applies regardless of which State a person might be in................

    -> I will strongly suggest anyone who carries a gun be damn sure they understand the law, and what is.. and what isn't... a threat. <-

    Also MKEgal... my best wishes for a favorable outcome in regards to your recent incident with Milwaukee LE.
    I believe our Castle Doctrine law considers anyone who breaks into private property to be a threat to life, thereby allowing justifiable homocide.
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  22. #22
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by hamaneggs View Post
    I believe our Castle Doctrine law considers anyone who breaks into private property to be a threat to life, thereby allowing justifiable homocide.
    Here's what the law says. It seems you are correct hamaneggs.

    PRESUMPTION REGARDING SELF-DEFENSE Act 311 of 2006
    780.951 Individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force; presumption; definitions.
    Sec. 1. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:
    (a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.
    (b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision (a).
    (2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if any of the following circumstances exist:
    (a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used, including an owner, lessee, or titleholder, has the legal right to be in the dwelling, business premises, or vehicle and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order, a probation order, or a parole order of no contact against that person.

    SELF-DEFENSE ACT Act 309 of 2006
    (2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  23. #23
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by hamaneggs View Post
    I believe our Castle Doctrine law considers anyone who breaks into private property to be a threat to life, thereby allowing justifiable homocide.
    I'm confused????

    Are you saying that the Castle Doctrine would "allow" the property owner in the OP incident to shoot the criminals who broke into the property at any time the criminals were still in the property they broke into? As in anytime they were at gunpoint the property owner could decide to just shoot them because the Castle Doctrine considers anyone who breaks into private property to be a threat to life? And that it would be "justifiable homicide" to shoot the one running away because he broke in and is therefor a threat to life because he broke in?

    If I understand the "Castle Doctrine" law correctly all it does is remove the duty to retreat as long as a person is not committing a crime and is in a place that is legal for them to be. It is my understanding that the "Castle Doctrine" does not give carte blanc to shoot someone just because they are breaking in or have broken in.... and that, as always, the totality of the circumstances would determine whether the homicide was justifiable or not.

    Or maybe I don't understand the "Castle Doctrine" correctly. If that is so then I sincerely (no sarcasm!) ask for clarification.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    PRESUMPTION REGARDING SELF-DEFENSE Act 311 of 2006
    780.951 Individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force; presumption; definitions.
    Sec. 1. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), it is a rebuttable presumption in a civil or criminal case that an individual who uses deadly force or force other than deadly force under section 2 of the self-defense act has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur if both of the following apply:
    (a) The individual against whom deadly force or force other than deadly force is used is in the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business premises or committing home invasion or has broken and entered a dwelling or business premises or committed home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business premises, or is unlawfully attempting to remove another individual from a dwelling, business premises, or occupied vehicle against his or her will.
    (b) The individual using deadly force or force other than deadly force honestly and reasonably believes that the individual is engaging in conduct described in subdivision (a).
    -snip-
    It would appear to me that the words "rebuttable presumption" would indicate that the prosecutor can "rebut" the "presumption" that the belief of imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur.... is..... under the circumstances.... an "honest and reasonable belief".

    So if the prosecutor can prove that the circumstances surrounding the break in would not lead to an honest and reasonable belief of a threat requiring a deadly force response then he can "rebut" the "presumption".... which, if the prosecutor were successful, would make this particular law not apply.

    Also, the words "rebuttable presumption" would mean that the law does NOT "allow" folks to shoot criminals who break in just because they broke in... there would have to be more involved... like an "honest and reasonable belief" of a threat of death, sexual assault, or grave bodily harm that would stand up to a prosecutor's rebuttal...

    Would that be correct?
    Last edited by Bikenut; 12-17-2011 at 05:59 PM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  25. #25
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    It would appear to me that the words "rebuttable presumption" would indicate that the prosecutor can "rebut" the "presumption" that the belief of imminent death of, sexual assault of, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another individual will occur.... is..... under the circumstances.... an "honest and reasonable belief".

    So if the prosecutor can prove that the circumstances surrounding the break in would not lead to an honest and reasonable belief of a threat requiring a deadly force response then he can "rebut" the "presumption".... which, if the prosecutor were successful, would make this particular law not apply.

    Also, the words "rebuttable presumption" would mean that the law does NOT "allow" folks to shoot criminals who break in just because they broke in... there would have to be more involved... like an "honest and reasonable belief" of a threat of death, sexual assault, or grave bodily harm that would stand up to a prosecutor's rebuttal...

    Would that be correct?
    If you feel your life is in danger,how can a prosecutor rebut what you feel in the moment?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •