|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 6:07 am
This topic has two parts:
1. What is a common household item you might employ in defending your home from intruders.
2. Should the government be allowed to punish you for using certain items as a defensive weapon.So the reason I thought of this is because I read about someone advocating the use of wasp insecticide as a self defense tool because it can usually be sprayed up to 20-30 feet and supposedly has similar irritating effects to pepper spray. I'm not sure how effective wasp spray really is but my point of view is that on the spur of the moment anything you can get your hands on is better than nothing (just don't forget you can still use your hands, once you have a weapon don't limit yourself to it). According to Snopes.com the use of anything other than pepper spray may get you into trouble in certain jurisdictions (wow, these jurisdictions must be sympathetic to criminals or something) and that the toxic nerve agents employed in wasp insecticide may be more harmful than expected in the long run. Okay look, if violent criminals are invading my home to take my property and/or possibly kill me I'm not going to be all that worried about their well being and they should consider themselves lucky they aren't getting shot rather than being subdued or repelled by nonlethal means. The idea that someone could be punished by the law for defending themselves seems outright ludicrous to me no matter how they accomplish the task. For the most part as long as the intruders are not mistreated after they are subdued or repelled.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 6:40 am
And in the end, the love you take
I'm with you on this one.
It's absolutely rediculous that people can get in trouble for self defence.
You have every right to scare the intruder off in any way.
.
Criminals are given too much sympathy, like one case I heard.
A man was breaking into someone's house through the skylight,
he fell and broke his leg and then successfully sued the homeowner.
What madness is that?
And another, I don't remember it exactly, but it went along the lines of:
a late teen-early tweny year old girl's ex-boyfriend
came to the girl's house when the family was out in the yard.
He grabbed the girl and, from what I understand, tried to kidnap her.
The girl's dad chased the guy with a bat or something.
The dad was charged with "assault with a deadly weapon."
A man came onto his property and tried to take his daughter!
What do they expect him to do?!
It really ticks me off.
Oh, and the girl's ex didn't get in trouble : emotion_facepalm :
.
If anyone broke into my house, I'd hit them with whatever I could reach,
and if I got in trouble for it, I would fight that case with all I had.
Is equal to the love you make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 6:55 am
Those cases were intruders successfully sue the residents when they get hurt are definitely outrageous and appalling. mad It just boggles the mind. In my mind self defense is not only morally acceptable it's pretty much a natural response.
Luckily I live in a state that typically favors homeowners and residents. Heck, we even have a law that states you can legally "stand your ground" when you are threatened in a public place. You have no obligation to attempt to flee when someone is trying to violate your rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:03 am
I believe here in Texas, the rule is if they are more that 50% inside your home or past the threshold, you can incapacitate them if you are a man, or kill them if you're a woman...or kil them and blame it on your wife/girlfriend or sister. smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:04 am
I want to find the judges that made/make those decisions, and b***h-slap them in font of everybody. How stupid are these people? Someone is trying to break into someone's house, and then the criminal gets off free, along with money from the person they were trying to steal from. How twisted is that? That's basically the same as just letting the criminal get away with the crime.
Makes me sick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:13 am
Abrien Sliver I believe here in Texas, the rule is if they are more that 50% inside your home or past the threshold, you can incapacitate them if you are a man, or kill them if you're a woman...or kil them and blame it on your wife/girlfriend or sister. smile Why the sexual discrimination? What if the man was a 98 pound weakling or the woman was a 200 pound body builder? razz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 7:15 am
Strideo Abrien Sliver I believe here in Texas, the rule is if they are more that 50% inside your home or past the threshold, you can incapacitate them if you are a man, or kill them if you're a woman...or kil them and blame it on your wife/girlfriend or sister. smile Why the sexual discrimination? What if the man was a 98 pound weakling or the woman was a 200 pound body builder? razz It's an older law, but it was never taken out of use so it still stands, and even if that's the case, why the hell is that man no good at picking a target?!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 8:45 am
Abrien Sliver Strideo Abrien Sliver I believe here in Texas, the rule is if they are more that 50% inside your home or past the threshold, you can incapacitate them if you are a man, or kill them if you're a woman...or kil them and blame it on your wife/girlfriend or sister. smile Why the sexual discrimination? What if the man was a 98 pound weakling or the woman was a 200 pound body builder? razz It's an older law, but it was never taken out of use so it still stands, and even if that's the case, why the hell is that man no good at picking a target?!! If they are 100% inside does it matter what gender you are if they end up dead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:23 am
i prefer using tools wink ~
i always go for monkey wrenches - just don't go for the small one - the heavier the better whee ~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:26 am
Abrien Sliver I believe here in Texas, the rule is if they are more that 50% inside your home or past the threshold, you can incapacitate them if you are a man, or kill them if you're a woman...or kil them and blame it on your wife/girlfriend or sister. smile 50% inside...as in half their body is inside of your house? Makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:29 am
*Shoots them with a shotgun, twice*
*Starts punching the dead body in the face, until it becomes an irrecognizable pulp*
Ta-da! biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am
I'm with Z, I'd just shoot them with my shotty.
There was a court case a while back that the burglar won. He was trying to break into a house via a sliding door. The burglar was armed, so the owner of the house took up arms as well, shot him thru the door, killing him. The burglar's family sued the guy, and won because "the man was not inside the house"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:42 am
Strideo This topic has two parts:
1. What is a common household item you might employ in defending your home from intruders.
2. Should the government be allowed to punish you for using certain items as a defensive weapon.So the reason I thought of this is because I read about someone advocating the use of wasp insecticide as a self defense tool because it can usually be sprayed up to 20-30 feet and supposedly has similar irritating effects to pepper spray. I'm not sure how effective wasp spray really is but my point of view is that on the spur of the moment anything you can get your hands on is better than nothing (just don't forget you can still use your hands, once you have a weapon don't limit yourself to it). According to Snopes.com the use of anything other than pepper spray may get you into trouble in certain jurisdictions (wow, these jurisdictions must be sympathetic to criminals or something) and that the toxic nerve agents employed in wasp insecticide may be more harmful than expected in the long run. Okay look, if violent criminals are invading my home to take my property and/or possibly kill me I'm not going to be all that worried about their well being and they should consider themselves lucky they aren't getting shot rather than being subdued or repelled by nonlethal means. The idea that someone could be punished by the law for defending themselves seems outright ludicrous to me no matter how they accomplish the task. For the most part as long as the intruders are not mistreated after they are subdued or repelled. A criminal fell through the ceiling/roof hat he was going to rob. Below him was a table and on that table were knives that ponite up. The owner of the property was sued because the bad guy got hurt and the badguy won. makes me mad. You should do whatever you can to defend your home and not be punished by law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:47 am
And thus why I keep everything of value to me in my bedroom with only one -locked- way to get in. Because there is no way that I girl my age, weight and strength could defend herself against anybody. I'm legally not allowed to have guns, knives, explosives, any "Shooting weapons,"[including pepper spray] or a tazzer. If I were to punch someone, I could be tried as an adult.
And yet they expect me to be safe?
*Angry now and feels unprotected.*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:49 am
Our jury system is broken, that's all I have to say
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
