Archery Talk Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
The dude abides
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Yeah this is one of those don't belong here threads, but it reminds us of the right we have that others want taken away. I wonder how this would have turned out in a handgun ban city.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/laworder/story/E237DFE6C1F23D468625771B0004520E?OpenDocument
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
Texas passed a law called "castle doctrine" which affirms a citizen's right to defend himself, his family, and his property with deadly force. It includes robberies such as this one, car jackings, and burglaries. One important aspect of the law is that the citizen is granted immunity from civil suit by the criminal or his/her family.
 

·
Alien Mafia Member
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Texas passed a law called "castle doctrine" which affirms a citizen's right to defend himself, his family, and his property with deadly force. It includes robberies such as this one, car jackings, and burglaries. One important aspect of the law is that the citizen is granted immunity from civil suit by the criminal or his/her family.
I wish we had this one over here!!

Kev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
495 Posts
Texas passed a law called "castle doctrine" which affirms a citizen's right to defend himself, his family, and his property with deadly force. It includes robberies such as this one, car jackings, and burglaries. One important aspect of the law is that the citizen is granted immunity from civil suit by the criminal or his/her family.
As does Ohio.
 

·
The dude abides
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Yeah I think the castle law is great. I wish Missouri had it. I saw this story yesterday but didn't know the circumstances around it. Now it's good to hear everything will turn out for the guy that is still alive.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Good for him. I'm not sure we have that rule up here in MN.
I'm all for the would be victim defending himself. But, Couldn't a attorney make an argument that the guy didn't need to shoot him twice? I'm no Johnny Law or nothing, but with a gun shot wound to the back, doesn't that prove he was trying to get away.
When I was a younger I had a friend that got jumped by 8 people. He beat 6 of them up pretty bad (broken noses, arms, and kicked in knee) well he went to jail because they say that he could have ran away and didn't need to beat the guys up. Couldn't the attorney say that he didn't need to fire twice with one round hitting him in the back?
I'm all for the victim protecting himself, just trying to play the advocate.
 

·
The dude abides
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Good for him. I'm not sure we have that rule up here in MN.
I'm all for the would be victim defending himself. But, Couldn't a attorney make an argument that the guy didn't need to shoot him twice? I'm no Johnny Law or nothing, but with a gun shot wound to the back, doesn't that prove he was trying to get away.
When I was a younger I had a friend that got jumped by 8 people. He beat 6 of them up pretty bad (broken noses, arms, and kicked in knee) well he went to jail because they say that he could have ran away and didn't need to beat the guys up. Couldn't the attorney say that he didn't need to fire twice with one round hitting him in the back?
I'm all for the victim protecting himself, just trying to play the advocate.
It said the intended victim told the guy to stop, put the gun down, and the usual, but the guy moved like he was pulling the gun up to shoot. I think that justifies it. Also it didn't say what angle it hit him he could have been just slightly quartering away when he took the bullet. Also just because his back is turned doesn't mean he can't throw the gun over his shoulder for some blind pot shots.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
Yeah I agree, I guess I'm just saying the dude is lucky. It could be interpreted in a different way.
Just so you know I'm on the side of the shooter here, not the robber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,754 Posts
Yeah I agree, I guess I'm just saying the dude is lucky. It could be interpreted in a different way.
Just so you know I'm on the side of the shooter here, not the robber.
I don't think he's lucky. The overwhelming majority of people that protect themselves with their concealed weapon do not sustain injury. Criminals are mostly dumba**es that aren't expecting people to have a concealed weapon or to be armed in general.

I say it was a good stroke of work!
 

·
The dude abides
Joined
·
1,065 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Yeah I agree, I guess I'm just saying the dude is lucky. It could be interpreted in a different way.
Just so you know I'm on the side of the shooter here, not the robber.
Oh yeah I get what you're saying, and the post dispatch can be a little liberal from time to time when they report (hence the final paragraph in the article.) They might try to influence how people feel with their writing, but by reading the comments 99% of the people were for the guy still alive.

It's a shame that we even have to consider the guy still alive lucky for not being prosecuted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
and St. Louis is now a better place

The last line is priceless - "..just like to Old West".. - except it isn't "just like the Old West. The streets of SL were 90% safer in 1875 than they are now - because arms were commonly carried.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top