Poll: What is self defense?

[gothuevos]

An interesting facet of vigilantism. The more it's done, the more people will be convinced it's necessary, since there's no capable law enforcement stopping it. You're supposed to make examples of vigilantes to restore order.

To me it's not even "vigilantism" as much as it is just being extremely nosey and intrusive into other people's lives.

Which is rich coming from the "don't tread on my freedoms" crowd in the first place.

 

[shortylickens]

As a defender of democracy, and based on the Rittenhouse verdict, shooting any current Trump supporter, who is anti democracy, is self defense. The defense against an attack on our democracy.

One of these days when I get even more depressed I'm gonna make out a will, grab my rifle and a rainbow tactical vest, go to a republican shithole, and do something really nasty. Then you guys can watch as the worlds greatest hypocrites try to tell America I had no right to do it.

In the mean time everybody better pray my SSRI's hold out.

 

[pmv]

In America's political landscape, conservatives have decided to appropriate the "comply or die" powers they previously gave to law enforcement to themselves. They are celebrating the Rittenhouse verdict because they believe it gives them the power to act like law enforcement, including to kill like law enforcement, whenever they choose to.

In theory though, if the legal argument is applied consistently, it gives pretty much anyone carrying a gun the right to legally shoot-dead anyone else. If antifa want to turn up at Trumpist or Proud Boys rallies, toting rifles, they would be able to shoot any Trumpist they thought looked as if they were planning to grab their gun. It seems like a recipe for a return to the Wild West.

 

[shortylickens]

In theory though, if the legal argument is applied consistently, it gives pretty much anyone carrying a gun the right to legally shoot-dead anyone else. If antifa want to turn up at Trumpist or Proud Boys rallies, toting rifles, they would be able to shoot any Trumpist they thought looked as if they were planning to grab their gun. It seems like a recipe for a return to the Wild West.

yeah, in theory.

In practice we all know the vast majority of gun nuts in America are also hardcore republican zealots. Your imaginary scenario will never happen. And if the next civil war ever comes it wont be a declared war with organized armies. It will be people shooting their neighbors with almost no warning.
America is in deep trouble. We are slowly turning into Saudi Arabia.

 

[pmv]

yeah, in theory.

In practice we all know the vast majority of gun nuts in America are also hardcore republican zealots. Your imaginary scenario will never happen. And if the next civil war ever comes it wont be a declared war with organized armies. It will be people shooting their neighbors with almost no warning.
America is in deep trouble. We are slowly turning into Saudi Arabia.

Yeah, I know the chances are that, as in Weimar Germany, the legal system will apply different standards, depending on who is doing the shooting. In any case the Rittenhouse verdict certainly doesn't bode well for the country.

 

[MrSquished]

yeah, in theory.

In practice we all know the vast majority of gun nuts in America are also hardcore republican zealots. Your imaginary scenario will never happen. And if the next civil war ever comes it wont be a declared war with organized armies. It will be people shooting their neighbors with almost no warning.
America is in deep trouble. We are slowly turning into Saudi Arabia.

Good interview yesterday on NPR with a guy who enjoys guns and was part of the gun community. His new book is called Gunfight. He basically goes into how these people fetishized and turned guns into a religion, vs respecting them as a tool.

He hunts and also shoots his guns with his sons regularly at the range, but the right considers him a traitor and anti gun, because he isn't a fucking loon like they are.

The right is a clear and present danger to all that is good in this nation in so many phases.

 

[nOOky]

Good interview yesterday on NPR with a guy who enjoys guns and was part of the gun community. His new book is called Gunfight. He basically goes into how these people fetishized and turned guns into a religion, vs respecting them as a tool.

He hunts and also shoots his guns with his sons regularly at the range, but the right considers him a traitor and anti gun, because he isn't a fucking loon like they are.

The right is a clear and present danger to all that is good in this nation in so many phases.

It's funny, really. Responsible gun owners get it from both sides, and they are the only ones being reasonable about using their guns. The leftist wimps that spout about how no one needs a gun for anything, and how we are going to hell as a nation and are so vocal here and all over chiding responsible gun owners and lumping them in with the gun crazies by default. And then the extreme right wackos that claim if you don't support the 2nd amendment without exception that you are not a real patriot. Meanwhile some people just want to hunt, teach responsible gun handling and ownership to their kids, and protect themselves legally as the constitution allows.

 

[Ken g6]

Let's break this down.

puts his hands on me.

OK, that's simple assault. But with no witnesses, we have to...follow the evidence.

(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)

(Too many CSI reruns on TV lately. )

A fight breaks out

This needs more details. Did you struggle to get away from his hands on you? That leaves bruises. Did he hurt you more than just putting his hands on you?

I start to beat his ass he has cuts and bruises.

With cuts, blood spatter will tell who punched who and from what position. It sounds like you are using excessive violence at this point. If you punch him once to distract him, then run, it's not self-defense if he shoots you in the back from several feet away. Bullet trajectory, gun shot residue, and spatter would tell all that. If you beat him down, and he shoots facing you at close range, especially if he shoots up at you, that's very likely to be ruled self-defense.

P.S.

Dead men tell no tales.

Bullshit.

 

[HomerJS]

Let's break this down.

OK, that's simple assault. But with no witnesses, we have to...follow the evidence.

(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)

(Too many CSI reruns on TV lately. )



This needs more details. Did you struggle to get away from his hands on you? That leaves bruises. Did he hurt you more than just putting his hands on you?



With cuts, blood spatter will tell who punched who and from what position. It sounds like you are using excessive violence at this point. If you punch him once to distract him, then run, it's not self-defense if he shoots you in the back from several feet away. Bullet trajectory, gun shot residue, and spatter would tell all that. If you beat him down, and he shoots facing you at close range, especially if he shoots up at you, that's very likely to be ruled self-defense.

P.S.

Bullshit.

He puts his hands on me attempting to stop my progress through the neighborhood. I push back to continue refusing to turn around. Pushing continues and then a fight breaks out.

 

[Ken g6]

He puts his hands on me attempting to stop my progress through the neighborhood. I push back to continue refusing to turn around. Pushing continues and then a fight breaks out.

I guess what I'm saying you should do in this situation is, don't fight like a man. Fight like a scared little girl. Meaning try to get away any way you can. Especially in states with stand-your-ground laws, that may mean going in a direction other than past the guy.

I also see one scenario where it was definitely self-defense. If you were walking down the street, went to the inside of some ropes, and the guy was a bouncer standing in front of a club entrance.

 

[pcgeek11]

But in the last post, you just said "many of us"....lol

I was responding to a poster that had specifically targeted me with his post.

When I stated many of us in was in a general context.... Us being conservative people.

Duh.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I was responding to a poster that had specifically targeted me with his post.

When I stated many of us in was in a general context.... Us being conservative people.

Duh.

Sure, your words mean something until then don't. That's like, your jam.

 

[HomerJS]

I guess what I'm saying you should do in this situation is, don't fight like a man. Fight like a scared little girl. Meaning try to get away any way you can. Especially in states with stand-your-ground laws, that may mean going in a direction other than past the guy.

I also see one scenario where it was definitely self-defense. If you were walking down the street, went to the inside of some ropes, and the guy was a bouncer standing in front of a club entrance.

So your answer is 2021 in the USA acquiesce to someone who says "boy you don't belong here, leave"

I should just lower my head and go back home? Is that the progress this country has made? Good if you are white I guess.

 

[ivwshane]

It's funny, really. Responsible gun owners get it from both sides, and they are the only ones being reasonable about using their guns. The leftist wimps that spout about how no one needs a gun for anything, and how we are going to hell as a nation and are so vocal here and all over chiding responsible gun owners and lumping them in with the gun crazies by default. And then the extreme right wackos that claim if you don't support the 2nd amendment without exception that you are not a real patriot. Meanwhile some people just want to hunt, teach responsible gun handling and ownership to their kids, and protect themselves legally as the constitution allows.

What you fail to see is that “wimps” (nice projection btw) recognized a long time ago that a) if the responsible gun users didn’t speak up and take action to stop the gun nuts they would ruin it for everyone b) a heavily armed populace is bad for democracy.

I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase, “one bad apple spoils the whole bunch”, well that applies here.

It’s also why the bogus interpretation on the 2nd amendment in heller was so bad. It’s taken less than 15 years to get to this point.

 

[ivwshane]

Let's break this down.

OK, that's simple assault. But with no witnesses, we have to...follow the evidence.

(•_•)
( •_•)>⌐■-■
(⌐■_■)

(Too many CSI reruns on TV lately. )



This needs more details. Did you struggle to get away from his hands on you? That leaves bruises. Did he hurt you more than just putting his hands on you?



With cuts, blood spatter will tell who punched who and from what position. It sounds like you are using excessive violence at this point. If you punch him once to distract him, then run, it's not self-defense if he shoots you in the back from several feet away. Bullet trajectory, gun shot residue, and spatter would tell all that. If you beat him down, and he shoots facing you at close range, especially if he shoots up at you, that's very likely to be ruled self-defense.

P.S.

Bullshit.

Lol! I suggest you stop watching CSI as literally everything you just said has recently come under fire for being complete bullshit and pseudo science.

Pick your source:

Google Search

 

[ivwshane]

I guess what I'm saying you should do in this situation is, don't fight like a man. Fight like a scared little girl. Meaning try to get away any way you can. Especially in states with stand-your-ground laws, that may mean going in a direction other than past the guy.

I also see one scenario where it was definitely self-defense. If you were walking down the street, went to the inside of some ropes, and the guy was a bouncer standing in front of a club entrance.

Cool, so you support tyranny or anarchy where those who are armed get to control others. How anti American of you.

 

[nOOky]

What you fail to see is that “wimps” (nice projection btw) recognized a long time ago that a) if the responsible gun users didn’t speak up and take action to stop the gun nuts they would ruin it for everyone b) a heavily armed populace is bad for democracy.

I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase, “one bad apple spoils the whole bunch”, well that applies here.

It’s also why the bogus interpretation on the 2nd amendment in heller was so bad. It’s taken less than 15 years to get to this point.

Again, it's the responsible gun owners fault for not speaking up isn't it according to you? I say wimps, because you all piss and moan about it, but you've never done anything about it either. Let me know when a bunch of people whining on a message board is credited with stopping gun violence. Perhaps if these people had some basic training in learning how to handle a firearm the noise and thought of one wouldn't be so scary to them. Feel free to continue your assault on the responsible gun owner if it makes you feel better about your position. And by the way, liberals are buying guns like candy these days too.

Kyle Rittenhouse does not represent American gun owners today

 

[ivwshane]

Again, it's the responsible gun owners fault for not speaking up isn't it according to you? I say wimps, because you all piss and moan about it, but you've never done anything about it either. Let me know when a bunch of people whining on a message board is credited with stopping gun violence. Perhaps if these people had some basic training in learning how to handle a firearm the noise and thought of one wouldn't be so scary to them. Feel free to continue your assault on the responsible gun owner if it makes you feel better about your position. And by the way, liberals are buying guns like candy these days too.

Kyle Rittenhouse does not represent American gun owners today

Never done anything about it? You mean like elect politicians that support gun control and pass legislation? Do you know what country you are in? Do you know how legislation is passed? Because it’s not the people who want control that are the problem.

Oh and btw, the assault on responsible gun owners isn’t coming from non gun owners, it’s coming from the gun nuts just as was predicted!

What a fucking stupid thing to say!

 

[Ken g6]

Lol! I suggest you stop watching CSI as literally everything you just said has recently come under fire for being complete bullshit and pseudo science.

Pick your source:

Google Search

Some forensics has been discredited after further research. It's an evolving science. Blood spatter analysis might be flawed, but I haven't heard about it, and I believe everything else I mentioned is sound. Don't throw trajectory analysis out with bullet metal analysis, just like we shouldn't throw out vaccines just because Theranos did bad biological testing.

So your answer is 2021 in the USA acquiesce to someone who says "boy you don't belong here, leave"

I should just lower my head and go back home? Is that the progress this country has made? Good if you are white I guess.

I'm not objecting to resistance. Just try to do it carefully, legally, and non-violently if at all possible.

Cool, so you support tyranny or anarchy where those who are armed get to control others. How anti American of you.

I didn't mean to give the impression that I support stand-your-ground laws; I don't. But they are what they are and they have to be dealt with until they're repealed.

Furthermore, the gun was concealed. So the scenario is the same whether anyone is armed or not, until the last moment.

 

[MrSquished]

Here is the link to the NPR story. The author was an actual gun industry insider. He can see how they are loons now. It was an interesting piece

Former gun industry insider explains why he left to fight for the other side

Gunfight author Ryan Busse was once a rising star in the gun industry. But he became disillusioned after Columbine when, he says, the NRA began to use "fear and conspiracy and hatred" to boost sales.

www.npr.org

 

[nOOky]

Never done anything about it? You mean like elect politicians that support gun control and pass legislation? Do you know what country you are in? Do you know how legislation is passed? Because it’s not the people who want control that are the problem.

Oh and btw, the assault on responsible gun owners isn’t coming from non gun owners, it’s coming from the gun nuts just as was predicted!

What a fucking stupid thing to say!

lol speaking of fucking stupid. Nice try Beto.

 

[weblooker2021]

In your scenario, if you pulled out a gun and shot him it would be self defense. Being he is the aggressor, he can't claim self defense.

 

[ivwshane]

lol speaking of fucking stupid. Nice try Beto.

Makes no difference to me, I’m not an ammosexual like you.

 

[JTsyo]

When it comes down to it, it'll be what you can convince the jury of. If you have pictures from afterwards showing you bloodied, it'll be easier for them to believe your fear. On the other hand if you were a big guy fighting a smaller guy, it's going to be harder to convince them you feared for your life. Though I guess there could also be cases where the DA doesn't even bother to bring charges.

 

[Pohemi]

...Though I guess there could also be cases where the DA doesn't even bother to bring charges.

Similar to what happened with the Arbery case.
There were no charges until the video became public and went viral two months after the fact.

It took the public backlash and outcry before (at least local) authorities gave a shit, which is why the DA there got investigated for preferential treatment to McMichael, his son, and their buddy. He was a former investigator who had worked with that same DA in the past.