O/T: Protection

Page 7 of 7  


NTM their criminal law.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not in this state (Washington) and others that have laws to prevent this.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CW wrote:

The specific wording of the Washington statute is: "(1) No person in the state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime as defined in RCW 9.94A.030."
The statute provides no non-judicial means for ascertaining whether a person was "protectiing by any reasonable means necessary . . .". So if you have not been tried in the criminal courts and acquitted on grounds of self-defense the relatives can still sue you and you still have to pay for a legal defense. Further, unlike a criminal trial there is no specific provision that you are due compensation for a civil trial in which it is ascertained that you acted in self-defense. So to actually obtain protection under the statute you have to persuade the district attorney to bring criminal charges and go to court so you can get acquitted by reason of self defense. It's going to be an uphill battle to persuade him to do that--generally DAs don't like to waste the state's money on cases that they know they are going to lose.
If the statute provided, for example, that an affadavit from the district attorney stating that he did not bring charges because he was certain that you would be acquitted on grounds of self-defense would suffice as evidence that you did so then things might be different, but there appears to be no such mechanism provided in the statute.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
LDosser wrote:

... snip

The OJ case wouldn't be applicable as an example here because self- defense was not an element of the case (at least not from OJ's frame of reference).
--

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
J. Clarke wrote:

You're right. A No Bill means the Grand Jury did not find "Probable Cause."
The standard of finding in a civil case is "Preponderance of the Evidence." Preponderance of the evidence (i.e., 51%) ranks below probable cause (but not much). It's possible the evidence in a civil case could reach 51%, but not reach the probable cause threshold.
It's a pretty small target to shoot at, though.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Not so. Many "castle doctrine" laws (it depends on the state) confer absolute civil immunity. For example, the Texas law reads: "A defendant who uses force or deadly force that is justified under Chapter 9 Penal Code, is immune from civil liability for personal injury or death that results from the use of force or deadly force..."
Every criminal law, including federal criminal law, must yield to the "exigent circumstances" rule. If a life is at stake, it is not only permitted to violate ANY criminal statute, it is meritorious to do so.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

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

Well, I guess if you live in a trailer and have no assets or prospects for a job, that is true. Sorry for not including your demographic!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Maybe some places but in Washington, if it was self defense, you can't be sued.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

[snip]
Wasp spray? Why not hair spray? Why not have the church receptionist pull out her Bible and invite the gremlin to pray with her?
If she's vulnerable, she should keep a GUN in her desk and SHOOT anybody who walks in that smells funny.
Wasp spray, whistles, stun guns, and other claptrap merely irritate a person who's irrational, doped-up, or a terrorist anyway. Best to just blow their furry butts to Kingdom Come and be done with it.
Remember the squint who walked in to a Colorado Springs mega-church last year bent on killing as many people as possible. A nice little lady greeter pulled out her heater and canceled the scrot's ticket before he could do any more harm (he had already killed a couple of people at another religious property). She got a medal instead of a wreath.
Police? Remember the gun-nut's mantra: "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away!"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

Uh, Bub, (my Dad's sister's nickname for him was "Bub" by the way--never did tell me the story that went with it), it's rhetoric like that that scares the elderly maiden ladies in pants who write our laws. Do be kind enough to tone it down. Heck, some of them get scared when you tell them what the cop who taught the class that was required in order to get a CCW told you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What class?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
CW wrote:

The one that the law says that you have to take. Do understand that everyone does not live in the same state you do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Aren't we lucky, it would get very crowded. Then again, I wouldn't mind having Montana to myself. In any case, it was a rhetorical question as I'm well aware of the requirements in other states.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

Your point is well taken.
I just get exercised when people entrust their lives to government-funded Dial-A-Prayer (911).
Maybe we could come up with a menu of alternatives to an attack, along with the probability of you living through the episode:
* Invite the goat-grabber to pray with you: 1% * Feign a fainting spell: 5% * Run away: 6% * Yell like somebody has a grip on you: 10% * Struggle and fight back: 12% * Squirt 'em with pepper spray: 15% * Squirt 'em with wasp spray: 20% * Sic a Rottweiler on them: 40% * Shoot the mope in the eye with a .44: 100%
We could title it: "Do You Feel Lucky?"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

How about "shoot the assailant twice in the center of mass, and if he doesn't stop then assume he's wearing a vest and try for the head, per standard police training protocols"?
"Shoot the mope in the eye with a .44" comes across as bombast, not reasoned response.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

I agree. That's why I carry a .45.
I carry a .45 because they don't make a .46.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

But they do make a .50Mag.
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.