Thread: Legitimate defence of property, or cold-blooded murder?

Originally Posted by Hollywood

WTF? A folding knife in his pocket, 5 folding knives in his pockets, a folding knife OR a non-folding knife strapped to his ankle, or stuck up his ass or whatever. What difference does it make?
How are you not understanding the guy was NOT presenting an immediate threat to the safety of the shooter?

He probably saw that the people he was planning to rob had guns and tried to high tail it out of there.

Originally Posted by meridian5455

He probably saw that the people he was planning to rob had guns and tried to high tail it out of there.

Duuuuuh...... thus proving he was NO IMMEDIATE THREAT to the life and/or sefety of the shooter. Thank you for finally agreeing.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Duuuuuh...... thus proving he was NO IMMEDIATE THREAT to the life and/or sefety of the shooter. Thank you for finally agreeing.

I still don't agree. This idiot brough a knife to a gun fight. The people that shot him should be given medals for helping to clean out the gene pool.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Duuuuuh...... thus proving he was NO IMMEDIATE THREAT to the life and/or sefety of the shooter. Thank you for finally agreeing.

Personally, I think it's unfair to expect a person being robbed to assess the threat level, if you find somone on your property breaking or stealing, all bets should be off.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Sure you're allowed to stop a felony in progress. Just so long as you don't use deadly force. T he letter of the law can be tricky. Let's say I see a street robbery in progress, a guy pointing a pistol at a woman and demanding her purse. I pull my concealed carry and order him to drop the weapon. He drops the pistol and turns and calmly walks away. If i shoot him I'm going to arrested, tried and most certainly convicted of murder.
If he does NOT drop the pistol and I shoot him dead. When the cops arrive my getting arrested and charged hinges on my answer to the question "why did you open fire"? IF i am dumb enough to say "well, the asshole was committing an armed robbery", then I'm in deep shit. If i answer " i was in fear of my life, he turned and pointed the pistol at me". Then I'm home free. In Missouri the determining factor is did I have a legimitae reason to fear for MY life and NOT was the guy committing a serious crime. Understand?

In Oklahoma...

The scene at that point where I bolded it puts the woman being robbed at the expense of her life. Her life is in danger from that point. In my state, you would have been completely justified in pulling your concealed, take careful aim and blowing him away. You do not order, speak or give commands or any warnings. When you pull a concealed weapon you are permitted to carry, it's to use it. They teach you that. You are saving the victim's life as the victim is under threat of death from the criminal's weapon. There would be no ifs, buts or anything of the sort.

Also in Oklahoma is the "Make My Day" law. It is highly compatible with our "Stand Your Ground" law. Here is an older article that explains it very nicely, and shows what the other states have...and don't have.

Which states have a "Make my Day" law inspired by "Dirty Harry"?

In Oklahoma (according to the Oklahoma State Courts Network), the amendment changes a number of other aspects of the Oklahoma Self Defense Act, the statutes concerning justifiable homicide. As 21 O.S. 2001, Section 1289.25 now lists circumstances in which it is presumed that a person who uses deadly force "reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." In addition, it helps to protect law-abiding citizens from arrest when using deadly force. Law enforcement agencies must now have probable cause to believe that the use of deadly force was unlawful before an arrest can be made.

What that means, if the asshat in Colorado had pulled the same crap and got blown away in Oklahoma instead, there would have been no civil case what so ever. I would highly recommend that the business owner relocate to a state like Oklahoma. You don't care for the laws in one state but like the laws in another, you can move there.

Originally Posted by meridian5455

I still don't agree. This idiot brough a knife to a gun fight. The people that shot him should be given medals for helping to clean out the gene pool.

Riiiiight, the guy knew in advance that they were waiting for him armed with rifles and he decided to bring a knife. Sure.
If you're going to debate using lines from Hollywood movies at least pick ones that make some sort of sense.
that's it pal, no more late night Rambo movies for you.

Originally Posted by Oberdan

In Oklahoma...

The scene at that point where I bolded it puts the woman being robbed at the expense of her life. Her life is in danger from that point. In my state, you would have been completely justified in pulling your concealed, take careful aim and blowing him away. You do not order, speak or give commands or any warnings. When you pull a concealed weapon you are permitted to carry, it's to use it. They teach you that. You are saving the victim's life as the victim is under threat of death from the criminal's weapon. There would be no ifs, buts or anything of the sort.

Also in Oklahoma is the "Make My Day" law. It is highly compatible with our "Stand Your Ground" law. Here is an older article that explains it very nicely, and shows what the other states have...and don't have.

Which states have a "Make my Day" law inspired by "Dirty Harry"?



What that means, if the asshat in Colorado had pulled the same crap and got blown away in Oklahoma instead, there would have been no civil case what so ever. I would highly recommend that the business owner relocate to a state like Oklahoma. You don't care for the laws in one state but like the laws in another, you can move there.

I think I have already explained, several times, that I am talking about Missouri law. I've also acknowledged, several times, that laws vary from state to state.

Sigh! There were two would-be burglars. Upon being confronted with three men, at least one of whom was armed with a gun, one scaled a fence and ran away, while the younger ran and took shelter in a shed. Irrespective of how they may or may not have been armed, neither wannabe burglar acted aggressively, nor did either present a threat to anyone. They were both retreating.

This was not a 'home invasion', this was an attempt at petty theft from a second hand car yard. No one's wife, son, or daughter, was in any possible danger of rape, or other form of harm, as they were not present.

So can we avoid the hypothicals (and the hyperbole,) and address what actually happened (as far as we are aware).

Originally Posted by Leo2

Sigh! There were two would-be burglars. Upon being confronted with three men, at least one of whom was armed with a gun, one scaled a fence and ran away, while the younger ran and took shelter in a shed. Irrespective of how they may or may not have been armed, neither wannabe burglar acted aggressively, nor did either present a threat to anyone. They were both retreating.

This was not a 'home invasion', this was an attempt at petty theft from a second hand car yard. No one's wife, son, or daughter, was in any possible danger of rape, or other form of harm, as they were not present.

So can we avoid the hypothicals (and the hyperbole,) and address what actually happened (as far as we are aware).

Lord knows I've been trying. But some people are fear based and overly-emotional. They would rather deal with "what if's" and "maybe's" rather than the reality of what is actually being discussed and what actually happened.
I give up on them, they are hopeless and clueless.

Originally Posted by Leo2

Sigh! There were two would-be burglars. Upon being confronted with three men, at least one of whom was armed with a gun, one scaled a fence and ran away, while the younger ran and took shelter in a shed. Irrespective of how they may or may not have been armed, neither wannabe burglar acted aggressively, nor did either present a threat to anyone. They were both retreating.

This was not a 'home invasion', this was an attempt at petty theft from a second hand car yard. No one's wife, son, or daughter, was in any possible danger of rape, or other form of harm, as they were not present.

So can we avoid the hypothicals (and the hyperbole,) and address what actually happened (as far as we are aware).

If you wish to avoid hypotheticals, fine. Let Hollywood know. He/she started it. The post quote is below, the hypothetical area started around the time Hollywood typed "Let's say I see..." For sake of accuracy, I'll underline that part where I quote Hollywood. My response was to that. This was in no way an attempt to derail a thread in my response to that post.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Lord knows I've been trying. But some people are fear based and overly-emotional. They would rather deal with "what if's" and "maybe's" rather than the reality of what is actually being discussed and what actually happened.
I give up on them, they are hopeless and clueless.

You were the one who came up with a hypothetical model for a behavior type 'what if' discussion, as I was responding to you.

Originally Posted by Hollywood

Sure you're allowed to stop a felony in progress. Just so long as you don't use deadly force. T he letter of the law can be tricky. Let's say I see a street robbery in progress, a guy pointing a pistol at a woman and demanding her purse. I pull my concealed carry and order him to drop the weapon. He drops the pistol and turns and calmly walks away. If i shoot him I'm going to arrested, tried and most certainly convicted of murder.
If he does NOT drop the pistol and I shoot him dead. When the cops arrive my getting arrested and charged hinges on my answer to the question "why did you open fire"? IF i am dumb enough to say "well, the asshole was committing an armed robbery", then I'm in deep shit. If i answer " i was in fear of my life, he turned and pointed the pistol at me". Then I'm home free. In Missouri the determining factor is did I have a legimitae reason to fear for MY life and NOT was the guy committing a serious crime. Understand?

Sound familiar? It's your own 'what if' and 'maybe' situation you created, and if you don't like seeing responses like mine, then by all means stop posting hypothetical situations. It's as easy as that. And as for saying it varied state by state, um, no duh? It's why I said "in Oklahoma" and provided a link that shows what it's going to be like in other states. But then, you don't care for continued dialog on a subject course you intiated. The fault is not with me or my response. Go look in the mirror for the culprit on this one.