O/T: Protection

Page 2 of 7  
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:37:55 -0700, Mark & Juanita

You state that what I said is flat out wrong and then proceed to provide a lot of verbiage indicating that I'm right. Which is it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Since nothing that he said supports the notion that one should "shoot the perp in the leg", but all of it supports the notion that you "shoot to stop" in the center of mass, it is difficult to discern how you went about deciding that anything that he said supported your argument.
Quite frankly you're coming across as an idiot, and I'm not wasting any more time on you.
<plonk>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

The part where you say, "If you could stop somebody by shooting them in the leg, you might find yourself in deep trouble of you decide it's more fun to shoot them in the head." In this sentence, you imply that a person confronted in a situation in which the Castle Doctrine applies would be expected to select shot placement (leg vs. head) depending upon the circumstance. The fact is that once a person has judged that use of deadly force is needed (just to be clear here, the moment you point a firearm at another person implies intent to use deadly force), it doesn't matter what part of the perp you hit -- you are using deadly force. Your statement further implies that if the person using deadly force could pre-determine that shooting the perp in the leg would stop them, then any other shot placement would be criminal. In reality, once you start firing at a perp, you are engaged in the use of deadly force, you are justified to fire and keep firing at the perp so long as you feel you are still in danger (i.e., up to the point where the perp stops). Further, my point was that once the perp has stopped, you have achieved the objective for the use of deadly force and must then also stop. If the perp dies as a result of his aggression and your use of deadly force, that is not a criminal act on your part. Your statement implies that if it was determined you could have shot him in the leg to stop him but hit him elsewhere then you would be held criminally liable -- that is what is plain wrong.
--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

idea what he is talking about and has no want for and intelligent discussion. I plonked him a while ago.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Excellent idea.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya, chucklehead.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"CW" wrote:

You should see some of his stuff over on rec.boats.cruising & rec.boats.building.
It's while kill files were invented.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 16:09:04 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"

Yeah, everybody over there just LOVES Lewy.
LOL!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Oh NO!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In

who?<g>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Tell your mother I said hello.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think this can boiled down to a simple thought.
If you are in a close quarters conflict, requiring force, the first priority is to stop the son-of-a-bitch. Not pick legs, arms, heads, or toes. That usually calls for a dead-center torso shot.
RonB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RonB wrote:

Simplicity is eloquence. Well distilled. :-)

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mark & Juanita wrote:

"I walked over to kick the gun from his hand and he twitched. So, being in fear for my life, discharged my weapon one more time."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:
... snip

Don't know about the other states, but that is NOT true for AZ: <http://74.125.155.132/custom?q che:jb_JG7TnWq0J:www.azdps.gov/Services/Concealed_Weapons/documents/instructors_ccw_legal.pdf+%22castle+doctrine%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=google- coop-np>
Castle doctrine has been codified since 2006
... snip
--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

DAGS on "wasp spray for protection" (without the quotes), and you'll find numerous articles which state just that, and information that indicates that pepper spray is actually more effective and longer lasting. So while wasp spray sounds good, it's really not a good idea.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pepper spray in a small space (typical room) may be just as bad for the sprayer as the sprayee. The stuff does create a certain amount of mist which can cover a larger area than you may want.
Used outdoors and within a couple of feet of the target individual, pepper spray can be very effective.
If I'm close enough to use pepper spray (directly in an intruder's face), I may opt for the D-cell MagLight instead - at least swinging the MagLight doesn't irritate my eyes...
Maybe a Rottweiler as a guard dog instead of personally applied deterrents?
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@jecarter.us wrote:

My housekeeping is such that I fully expect that the first notice I'm going to have of an intruder is the crash as he trips over something and then "SNICK SNACK" from the 12 gage will take the rest of the fight out of him.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/18/2009 05:18 PM, J. Clarke wrote:

Here's a nice little snick-snacker:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXWoW3fw0IY

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:41:49 -0700, the infamous Doug Winterburn

Sweet! But at $1,100-$1,600, a bit out of my range. Hell, I could buy almost 1/3 of a Festeringtool for that price.
-- This episode raises disturbing questions about scientific standards, at least in highly political areas such as global warming. Still, it's remarkable to see how quickly corrective information can now spread. After years of ignored freedom-of-information requests and stonewalling, all it took was disclosure to change the debate. Even the most influential scientists must prove their case in the court of public opiniona court that, thanks to the Web, is one where eventually all views get a hearing. --Gordon Crovitz, WSJ 12/9/09
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.