User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:16:19 PM EDT
[#1]
In your own f'ing house?!?
Who made the decision to take this to the grand jury rather than just patting you on the back for your restraint and sending you on your way? Was it the DA? I'd have done everything in my power to see to it that he was voted out in the next election. I'm glad you all came through it relatively unscathed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:20:02 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: In your own f'ing house?!? Who made the decision to take this to the grand jury rather than just patting you on the back for your restraint and sending you on your way? Was it the DA? I'd have done everything in my power to see to it that he was voted out in the next election. I'm glad you all came through it relatively unscathed. Look at what state he's from jar.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:23:19 PM EDT
[#3]
I would have shot him.
Glad you guys are ok though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:24:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Jarhead_22
The police caught the guy 2 blocks from our house and he told them i pointed a rifle at him,they came back to our house and asked me if this was true ,still being a little shook up from the incident i said ,hell yeah i pointed a gun at him he was yelling that he was going to kill us all and grabbed a gun in his belt. They took my shotgun and placed me under arrest, teh captain at the police dept. asked why in the hell was i under arrest and one of the cops said he didn't know either. So they all got on dif. phones trying to reach a judge so i could go home with out any bail,thank God that got one who was in agreement that i should not have been charged in the first place,I guess once the charges are typed up and you are arrested things have to follow some sort of weird path. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 7:48:08 PM EDT
[#5]
I will say that you got lucky. In 99% of the cases you would be better off not testifying before the Grand Jury. The DA only had to prove that you pointed a gun to get the indictment. You going and testifying only helped prove his case. The Grand Jury doesn't determine guilt or innocence, it only determines if the DA has enough evidence to support the charge and for it to go to trial. He must not of pushed for the indictment to hard, I am glad that it all worked out for you in the end.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:01:52 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: I will say that you got lucky. In 99% of the cases you would be better off not testifying before the Grand Jury. The DA only had to prove that you pointed a gun to get the indictment. You going and testifying only helped prove his case. The Grand Jury doesn't determine guilt or innocence, it only determines if the DA has enough evidence to support the charge and for it to go to trial. He must not of pushed for the indictment to hard, I am glad that it all worked out for you in the end. VA-gunnut They had all the witnesses they needed that i pointed the gun at the guy,so what did i have to lose? He could have gotten the indictment with or withouit me there,right? He told me point blank he was trying to help me out and i looked into his face and i beileved him becuase he had nothing to gain by lying to me. But as it turns out NJ law allows you to use equal deadly force to meet deadly force. The scumbag that started this said and I quote "I'll kill you and your whole family right now mother fucker" as he was attempting to pull a loaded gun from his belt. That was what made the force i almost had to use legal,the fact there was no way to retreat and what he said and had the ability to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:03:44 PM EDT
[#7]
You know they never gave me back my shotgun :(
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:07:54 PM EDT
[#8]
go fight to get it back!! its probly still in police storage cuz you never came to claim it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:10:34 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: But as it turns out NJ law allows you to use equal deadly force to meet deadly force. That was what made the force i almost had to use legal,the fact there was no way to retreat and what he said and had the ability to do. Nope. NJ law says that you must retreat if it is possible. The DA could have argued that you could have retreated upstairs and could have fled the house via a backdoor or window. You are a lucky man. NJ is long on law and short on common sense. Where I am from, LA, we can shoot a heathen for being in our yard or approaching our car funny. Hmm, maybe that is why we don't have car-jackings anymore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:18:25 PM EDT
[#10]
Glad everything worked out for you, can you testify to keep him locked up?
Where in NJ were you living at the time? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:18:54 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: But as it turns out NJ law allows you to use equal deadly force to meet deadly force. That was what made the force i almost had to use legal,the fact there was no way to retreat and what he said and had the ability to do. Nope. NJ law says that you must retreat if it is possible. The DA could have argued that you could have retreated upstairs and could have fled the house via a backdoor or window. You are a lucky man. NJ is long on law and short on common sense. Where I am from, LA, we can shoot a heathen for being in our yard or approaching our car funny. Hmm, maybe that is why we don't have car-jackings anymore. I don't know about what the law says now and i know we could not have retreated that day and they knew it to,I think you are wrong ,we do not have to retreat like the law in virgina and other places,i just tried to look it up and couldn't find that anywhere ,can you tell me where you got that from so i can read it? There was a case in north jersey a few years back where a guy tried to kick open the door to kill this guys daughter and the father killed the guy where he stood on the front step armed with a 38. The father blasted through the front door with a shotgun and the guy died on the spot. Once the threat to kill is made and the perp has the ability at hand to do it ,the law says you can use deadly force. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:20:08 PM EDT
[#12]
NJ does have a duty to retreat law, but that isn't the point. You had already been charged with the crime, the Grand Jury doesn't decide guilt or innocence, so even if with or without your testimony they could of indicted you on the charge. The problem if you had been indicted is that you have another statement made under oath which could of been twisted and used against you.
I am glad that the DA wasn't out to screw you and I am glad that it all worked out for you in the end(even without getting your shotgun back), I am just pointing out that you should never go before the Grand Jury in most cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:22:34 PM EDT
[#13]
My buddy from Berkely Heights has been railing about that stupid duty to retreat thing for the past two years now. He is in a real hurry to get a new job and leave NJ to the wolves and the sheep. There is such a law. Call and ask a firearms instructor or go to the deadly force portion of NJ's state law.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:26:08 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Now how and why "I" was arrested is still a mystery to me,but the system worked for me that day and the riight guy went to jail(10 years) As it turned out he was on parol for armed robbery and pistol whipping an old lady,good thing for him i didn't know that on that day,other wise he would have been gone in a heart beat. I think he is coming up for parol this year and that is what made me revisit this memory. No, the system might have worked from your viewpoint; but did it really?. The real mystery here is why this POS is out in 10 years or less, when he should be serving a minimum of 25 years to life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:29:18 PM EDT
[#15]
2C:3-4 Use of force in self-protection. 2C:3-4. Use of Force in Self-Protection. a. Use of force justifiable for protection of the person. Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 2C:3-9, the use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion. b.Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force. (1)The use of force is not justifiable under this section: (a)To resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer in the performance of his duties, although the arrest is unlawful, unless the peace officer employs unlawful force to effect such arrest; or (b)To resist force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his behalf, where the actor knows that the person using the force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, except that this limitation shall not apply if: (i)The actor is a public officer acting in the performance of his duties or a person lawfully assisting him therein or a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest; (ii)The actor has been unlawfully dispossessed of the property and is making a reentry or recaption justified by section 2C:3-6; or (iii) The actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm. (2)The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if: (a)The actor, with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily harm, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or [blue](b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:[/blue] [red](i)The actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor; and[/red] I highlited the important parts and you would have a valid defense in your case but in the end that makes no difference to the Grand Jury because they don't decide if you had a valid defense or not, that is up to the jury in the criminal trial. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:31:48 PM EDT
[#16]
Here is the page that I got the info from:
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=77821&Depth=2&TD=WRAP&advquery=Duty%20to%20Retreat&depth=4&expandheadings=on&headingswithhits=on&hitsperheading=on&infobase=statutes.nfo&rank=&record={1355}&softpage=Doc_Frame_PG42&wordsaroundhits=2&zz= You will have to copy and paste the address to make it work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:34:29 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: My buddy from Berkely Heights has been railing about that stupid duty to retreat thing for the past two years now. He is in a real hurry to get a new job and leave NJ to the wolves and the sheep. There is such a law. Call and ask a firearms instructor or go to the deadly force portion of NJ's state law. [red](2)The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if: (b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:[/red] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:46:00 PM EDT
[#18]
VA-gunnut
Thanks for the link and you know what i was on firm ground. And you wanna know something else ,I don't care what the "law" says here or anywhere for that matter it didn't enter into my mind that day and it wont matter if someone trys to kill my family or me,I live by whats right and not what some idiots who never even held a gun say is right or wrong. The law couldn't protect me that day and it can not protect you on most days ,you have to protect you and your ,no one else can. The best way to say it is this, It is better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:47:29 PM EDT
[#19]
If you want to be a moral man be prepared to haul ass. The state hates men with morals.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:54:57 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: [red](2)The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if: (b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:[/red] So in order to retreat, you would have to know that "he can avoid the neccesity of using such force with complete safety by retreating" Well unless you are psychic you could never know that when you retreat the other person wouldn't pursue and continue the attack. Also what is "complete safety"? Very few residential structures offer cover from gunfire. The attacker could shoot thrugh a wall/door/window and kill you just as dead as you are retreating. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 8:57:51 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: It is better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6! I agree with that sentiment, I just find it better to have as much going for me if I have to face the 12. I can tell you this much, I have faced the 12 in a NJ court and standing in a court room waiting for the verdict isn't a pleasant experience at all. Luckily for me the Jury decided my grounds for self-defense were good enough to be found not-guilty. Just remember, always try to keep learning the rules of the game where you live, this will give you the best odds of winning in the end. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:00:36 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: [red](2)The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if: (b)The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:[/red] So in order to retreat, you would have to know that "he can avoid the neccesity of using such force with complete safety by retreating" Well unless you are psychic you could never know that when you retreat the other person wouldn't pursue and continue the attack. Also what is "complete safety"? Very few residential structures offer cover from gunfire. The attacker could shoot thrugh a wall/door/window and kill you just as dead as you are retreating. I agree but it would be up to you to show that you didn't have an avenue of escape and you would have to hope that the Jury agreed with your position. If the law didn't exist it would be one less thing to worry about. Don't believe the whole "Innocent untill proven guilty" stuff you see on TV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:08:39 PM EDT
[#23]
No I was considering how I would apply a law such as that before making a decision to arrest someone for using a weapon to defend themselves.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:09:04 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Jarhead_22 The police caught the guy 2 blocks from our house and he told them i pointed a rifle at him,they came back to our house and asked me if this was true ,still being a little shook up from the incident i said ,hell yeah i pointed a gun at him he was yelling that he was going to kill us all and grabbed a gun in his belt. They took my shotgun and placed me under arrest, teh captain at the police dept. asked why in the hell was i under arrest and one of the cops said he didn't know either. So they all got on dif. phones trying to reach a judge so i could go home with out any bail,thank God that got one who was in agreement that i should not have been charged in the first place,I guess once the charges are typed up and you are arrested things have to follow some sort of weird path. Always- ALWAYS be the first person to call the LEOs after an incident where you have to show a weapon. Always. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:14:33 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: go fight to get it back!! its probly still in police storage cuz you never came to claim it. [b]Riiiiiight![/b] [rolleyes] [img]http://www.canada.expo2000.gc.ca/images/Gunsculpture.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:14:45 PM EDT
[#26]
On a side note I'm not so sure about this story. Most State's have Statutes empowering/limiting police arrest powers. Then right after that most of them have an "un-arrest" Statute.
Meaning if an officer investigates an incident and has PC to arrest a subject, they may choose to do so. But if after the arrest the PC is diminised or disapears altogether, the officer has a DUTY to release that subject. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:15:52 PM EDT
[#27]
If I lived in that state, after it was all over , I'd tell New Jersey to STICK IT UP THEIR FUCKING ASS and move from that shithole.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:17:57 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: No I was considering how I would apply a law such as that before making a decision to arrest someone for using a weapon to defend themselves. Now if only all LEO's thought like that, then we wouldn't have these discussions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:18:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Interesting about the "retreat" clause.
I would imagine that if a person is making threatening remarks, or gestures (especially if you are armed with a concealed firearm and he is not visibly so) you could be expected to retreat to prevent escalation. However, the moment a firearm is presented, a good defense attorney could make mincemeat out of the requirement to retreat--most people cannot outrun a bullet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:23:03 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Quoted: Jarhead_22 The police caught the guy 2 blocks from our house and he told them i pointed a rifle at him,they came back to our house and asked me if this was true ,still being a little shook up from the incident i said ,hell yeah i pointed a gun at him he was yelling that he was going to kill us all and grabbed a gun in his belt. They took my shotgun and placed me under arrest, teh captain at the police dept. asked why in the hell was i under arrest and one of the cops said he didn't know either. So they all got on dif. phones trying to reach a judge so i could go home with out any bail,thank God that got one who was in agreement that i should not have been charged in the first place,I guess once the charges are typed up and you are arrested things have to follow some sort of weird path. Always- ALWAYS be the first person to call the LEOs after an incident where you have to show a weapon. Always. My wife had called the police a good 5 minutes before we knew the guy had a gun and the 911 operator had told my wife to keep the phone line open,they heard me tell my son to get the shotgun and heard me say to the guy that he didn't need that gun he was showing,he had lifted his shirt up and was in the process of telling us he could and would kill us all. That may have helped the responce time ,but it still seemed like a loooooooooong time for them to get there,he heard the sirens right after he heard and saw the racking of the shotgun and took off up the street where he was arrested at gun point by the police. One of my highschool friends who is a police officer and was enroute to my house told me later that one of the first officers to respond was stopped a block from my house and was waiting for back up and that he was called on this by the Lt. for it,I think it might have been the right thing to do ,not knowing how many people at the seen have guns and walking into something that might get you killed. I wouldn't have waited but i'm not a cop. sometimes i have more guts than smarts :) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:26:28 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Always- ALWAYS be the first person to call the LEOs after an incident where you have to show a weapon. Always. Also if they are so bad that you need to "fill your hand" ro deal with them the Constabulary may want to have a talk with them.............. If you had that meeting and instead of the cops finding him Mr Felon wandered down the street and injured or killed another person after you encountered him, How would you feel?? Would you have done your duty as a citizen to watch out for your fellow citiznes? The shotgun protected you, but it didn't really solve the problem, Mr. Felon out loose, from the larger perspective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:26:43 PM EDT
[#32]
Ugh, did you ever think about a civil suit for false arrest and imprisionment? What a bunch of benny hill cops! You know some people are alive simply because it's illegal to kill them. There ought to be a law against being liberal and stupid. In fact, make it a capital offense. Boy, what a world!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:30:17 PM EDT
[#33]
Benny Hill was funny. Fascist cops aren't.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:30:33 PM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: On a side note I'm not so sure about this story. Most State's have Statutes empowering/limiting police arrest powers. Then right after that most of them have an "un-arrest" Statute. Meaning if an officer investigates an incident and has PC to arrest a subject, they may choose to do so. But if after the arrest the PC is diminised or disapears altogether, the officer has a DUTY to release that subject. Yeah in a perfect world thats how it would be, in the state of NJ they have the attitude that arrest them all and let the courts sort it out. You know they all acted like they never unarrested anyone before,maybe they never did,I was down there at the police station for 5 hours before i was released. I was just glad i was going home to be with my wife and kids that night. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:34:43 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: Quoted: Always- ALWAYS be the first person to call the LEOs after an incident where you have to show a weapon. Always. Also if they are so bad that you need to "fill your hand" ro deal with them the Constabulary may want to have a talk with them.............. If you had that meeting and instead of the cops finding him Mr Felon wandered down the street and injured or killed another person after you encountered him, How would you feel?? Would you have done your duty as a citizen to watch out for your fellow citiznes? The shotgun protected you, but it didn't really solve the problem, Mr. Felon out loose, from the larger perspective. Ok so now what ,you wanted me to follow the guy down the street and what ,shoot him? I did my job and duty as a father and husband,I protected my own and the threat left. It's easy for some to say i should have done this or that ,the fact is it all happens so fast that i was glad i reacted the way i always thought i would and didn't blink. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:41:55 PM EDT
[#36]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you 18? I believe I remember reading that you were 18, or 19.
You have a wife and kids??????? Something doesn't add up here... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:47:06 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Ugh, did you ever think about a civil suit for false arrest and imprisionment? What a bunch of benny hill cops! You know some people are alive simply because it's illegal to kill them. There ought to be a law against being liberal and stupid. In fact, make it a capital offense. Boy, what a world! False arrest means there was no legal basis for the arrest. That would be tough to prove since this went to a Grand Jury. ' This is an application of law to a situation, thing that didn't quite work out. Technically several States would call it brandishing a weapon. Most people though would say armed guy, saying he will kill you...... it may technically be brandishing, but it was just courtesy to let the lad(Mr. Felon) know what he was in for........ Also as a practical matter, if he threatend you, and was arrested, and you were also arrested. How much more difficult does it make to prove the case against Mr Felon, since the homeowner could decide not to testify against Mr Felon because he might be incriminating himself in an assualt with a deadly weapon charge. Then again perhaps that is what the prosecutor was setting up. Mr Homeowner was taken before a Grand Jury, and the Grand Jury felt that no crime was commited by Mr Homeowner. If the Prosecutor hadn't done that the defense atty., for Mr Felon, could have brought up the Mr Homeowners possible crime that the police/prosecutor ignored, in order to RAILROAD MY CLIENT I demand an investigation, and beseech the jury to site my client free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:48:48 PM EDT
[#38]
Why haven't you gotten your gun back? Just haven't claimed it ?? [wacko] or did they give you a hard time about it? [jack-booted-thug]
(we need a good [JBT] smiley) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 9:51:45 PM EDT
[#39]
Jrzy, when I made my comment about the phone call to the Constabulary, you hadn't revealed that you in fact had a family member call 911 when the BG was at your house.
You just said the cops picked him up half a block away, not saying who called or why the cops found him. No chasing him down the street would be bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:20:28 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Why haven't you gotten your gun back? Just haven't claimed it ?? [wacko] or did they give you a hard time about it? [jack-booted-thug] (we need a good [JBT] smiley) They told me they needed the weapon incase the defense lawyer for the scumbag brought it into question and when the trial was over i would get it back,I guess i never followed up on it and i was never called to testify because he took a deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:21:24 PM EDT
[#41]
I probably would have shot him without thinking about the statutes/law. If he's in my house he's dead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:29:50 PM EDT
[#42]
im with WB, the cops would have found a dead man on my porch with a pistol in his hand. i applaud you though. it took a lot of courage NOT to pull that trigger
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:30:40 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you 18? I believe I remember reading that you were 18, or 19. You have a wife and kids??????? Something doesn't add up here... Me? I'm 46 and when i was 18 (1973 ) i was in the navy ,did my boot at greatlakes,want my ID.I'm One of the Admins At [url]http://www.hardcoretalk.com/[/url] I have a son who is 24 and is an FFL and if you want more proof ask FMjunkie from here he has been to my home and met me. And I have talked with several memebers here when doing deals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:37:57 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: im with WB, the cops would have found a dead man on my porch with a pistol in his hand. i applaud you though. it took a lot of courage NOT to pull that trigger You know the one very important thing i learned that day? It was the fact on that day i fould out i could pull the trigger if i had to ,he came close that day and was only a hairs breath away from me pulling the trigger and i knew at that moment that i would if he cleared his waistban with that pistol i would have killed him where he stood,scary and good feeling at the same time,when i look back on this whole thing ,i see it in a strange way ,like it's not me or in tunnel vision,it's a very weird thing and hard to discribe. And as many people who i talked to about simular things that happened to them it's something you have to experiance to know the feeling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 10:42:00 PM EDT
[#45]
This reminded me of long a forgotten action.
My wife. Yes my own wife, had me arrested! For...... assault with a dead weapon [;)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:16:24 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: Look at what state he's from jar.... Um... YUP! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:24:04 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: I have a son who is 24 and is an FFL. Whereabouts? I am looking for a NJ FFL to do some transfers. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2002 11:55:05 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: Quoted: I have a son who is 24 and is an FFL. Whereabouts? I am looking for a NJ FFL to do some transfers. Thanks. Check your PM or IM as we call them here |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2002 12:07:06 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: I probably would have shot him without thinking about the statutes/law. If he's in my house he's dead. Same here, I think in the "fog" of things, like your own personal survival, I doubt that I would say to the perp, "Time out, hold it while I consult the state penal on what is a justified shooting or not." The difference between you living and die would have been over in a few seconds. The people who write these stupid laws are lawyers, and have no understanding what is happening in the real world. Ugh!!! I HATE LAWYERS! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2002 6:50:32 AM EDT
[#50]
I've said it before and I'll say it again, ad infinitum. Fuck New Jersey. It's no place for a non-sheep to live. I grew up in Bernardsville, and I couldn't get the hell out of there fast enough.
QS |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
