What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Hooray for our legal system

  • Thread starter Pyro
  • Start date
  • #41
[b said:
Quote[/b] (JB_OrchidGuy @ May 27 2005,1:13)]Even the lifers get the right to appeal their sentances.  So they too are costing more than Death row because after all the appeals then they atill have to be cared for for life.
Not quite. Most of the DP appeals are trying to turn the sentence into life, and due to the final nature of the punishment are somewhat more liberally granted.

LWOP prisoners get far fewer appeals. The cost of a LWOP prisoner, including all legal fees, is far less than that of a DP prisoner.

Honestly, the only true motive for the DP is revenge. And that should not be the basis of rule of law.
 
  • #42
well, I don't currently have a fire arm in the home because my wife hasn't had a handgun safety course. What I do have is a louisville slugger with about 10 lbs of lead melted into the core. It may not have the reach of a pistol or shotgun, but it has more than a knife and in an apartment, that is plenty.

As to my willingness to use lethal force on someone who has broken into my home and is threatening my family? In a heart beat. at 6'5 350 lbs, I will without hesitation make a 'dazing blow' to their torso, and then end their existence. It sounds horrible, but it is better than having a violent act wife.
 
  • #43
SarraceniaScott I assume when you say DP you are refuring to due process.  Am I not correct is saying all of them have the right to that?  I;m not a lawer and never had to deal with one and never been arrested and don't plan on it.  From my understanding all prisioner have the right to the same ammount of appeals?  Am I inccorrect?  Again i don't have any experiance so I don't know just going by what I assume to be correct.

Ram I agree with you I will not hesitate to blugen someone to death with my fists if they break in while I am home. I have been looking forward to giving that a shot to be honest. I can't just go and start hitting someone for no good reason, but breaking into my home is a great reason. >;-D
 
  • #44
JB, I think Scott may mean 'death penalty.'
~Joe
 
  • #45
Thanks Joe that makes sence now. DUH!!! I duno I may get motivated enough to do the research on which one costs the more moeny. I just don't agree with keeping someone alive just to keep them in jail, when we have hard working people who can't afford health insurance and can't get assistance not getting medical attention, but the prisioner who we keep locked up because they are no good to be let loose get their medical needs taken care of. Its just not right. My cousins father died from cancer because he couldn't go to the Dr because he didnt have any money. And when he finaly broke down and HAD to go they found our he had a broke hip that he was walking around on and lung cancer. The kind caused by asbestous. He couldnt go back to the hospital because he had a balance that he couldn't pay on. Well, because of that he is now dead. Yet we will lock up a good for nothing deadbeat for robbing someone and take care of his every need. I just don't think its right.
 
  • #46
I'm sorry to hear about your uncle, JB. It's a shame that this country doesn't provide better health care for it's citizens. Unfortunately, the powers that be believe they have better uses for our tax money.
Having lived in a third world country where bands of teenagers with axes and machetes come knocking at all hours, I am very quick to bristle at the notion of an intruder in my home. I would not hesitate to confront someone breaking in, if I felt it were a necessary risk. However, I've spent half of my life studying martial arts, to learn to assess those risks. It is for this reason that I do not own a gun; a gun turns any physical confrontation into a lethal one, very quickly. It doesn't matter if I'm holding the gun or the attacker.
I do not want to come off anti-gun, as I feel that I have a rather neutral stance compared to most people. However, I am, most definitely, anti-pro-gun. The gun is not the first solution, nor is it the only solution. Many people in America are raised to think that having a gun is a great way to take control of a dangerous situation, and nothing could be further from the truth. A gun is a weapon of desperation; there is no such thing as shooting someone a little, or shooting them gently. The only time you really need something as powerfully violent as a gun is if you are assuredly facing up against someone with a gun.
I choose to keep a shillelagh beside my bed for self-defense, and rather than have a gun, I've studied how to disarm an attacker with a gun. I can throw someone off me gently, and I can sprain their wrist to keep them from squeezing a trigger. Those same techniques with more force can become killing or breaking blows, just as effective as a bullet to the target area, but the decision is mine to make.
But this begs the question - is someone breaking into your home to kill you? No. Do they want to use their gun? No. If a person wants your stuff, just give it to them. I, like Scott, see a lot of gun hobbyists, mostly teenage boys (hey, I won't be a teenager in three weeks, so nyah,) who are under the impression that making the decision to shoot is an easy one. I have never been in that situation myself, but I can tell you, deciding when to take a confrontation to the next level is NEVER easy. A criminal has already put their neck out and has more to loose than you do - whenever it's possible, don't force their hand by pulling your own gun.
When I first moved to this town to go to school I spent a lot of time walking by myself at night, because I do not have a car. One night, I was walking home, and a man pulled a knife on me as I was cutting through a park. I know how to handle myself in such a situation, and was able to get him to the ground, but after it became clear that no one was coming to help me, I had to make a very difficult decision. After sitting there wrestling with this guy for what seemed like forever, I broke his knee so I could go find help. I would have never imagined that I would have to think about it, but it was a very difficult decision to make, despite the fact that that very man had a knife to my throat minutes before. When I returned with the police, they didn't find him.
I still feel very guilty about doing it, but I had failed to choke him to incapacitate him for what seemed like much too long, and I didn't think that I could hold out longer. Remembering that moment makes me sick and upset, to this day. I know it wasn't my fault, and I know I was in the right, but seeing another human being in severe pain is a very shocking experience in any context. It's taken a lot of work for me just to get back on the mat and practice with my sparring partners. I cannot imagine the guilt I would feel having killed, or the horror of looking at someone I'd just shot. I hope it never has to happen, and to that end I study ways to end my physical conflicts without serious injury.
Target practice with pictures of people you don't like is not going to prepare you for having to make that kind of decision. Marksmanship is an admirable skill in it's own right, but don't mistake it for critical thinking and willpower.
~Joe
 
  • #47
I cant believe so called 'great' people would willingly murder somebody.
Its MURDER for god sake! KILLING somebody for taking something that belongs to you is a bit much, and the law wont care whether it was a burglar or not!
I dont see how all of you could KILL somebody like that and live with yourselves for the rest of your life.
 
  • #48
Well I did not expect quite the moral/ethical debate that this would create. All I was really doing was venting. But my 2 cents on this all:

1) No, Tre, I do not think all of you are insane.

2) I was serious when I said I would aim for the leg. I know a bullet in the leg is not going to put someone down for good (though a well placed shot to the knee works wonders, if a guy can not stand he can not do much.) I do not want someone dead for something as small as burglary but I dang well want fool-proof evidence that he was the one taking my stuff. If the bullet in someones leg matches one fired from my gun then you know they were shot with my gun when they were taking my stuff.

3) As for the comment about not being able to tell what is going on in the dark at night-- These guys were burglarizing my house at 10:45 in the morning. Broad daylight, hard to miss that they were people we did not know.

4) I had a long talk with the ADA. Accordig to her the reason there is no restitution is because ther were 3 guys involved and only this one was brought to court. Because of that she says they can not hold him accountable for all that was taken so I get screwed and he gets to wash his hands on the matter. If I had any say in the matter I would have demanded that the ADA not take the plea unless he roll over on his 2 friends and hold all 3 accountable for restitution. Unfortunatly since it was a State case I had no say in the matter. I am guessing that this same argument would hold up in a claims court.

5) As for insurance, I have a $500 deductable so only $200 would be covered. And I wouls have to deal with a hiked rate if I filed and being a graduate student my annual income is tight enough already.

6) Starman, I understand what you are saying and please do not take offense but until you have walked in my shoes you have no right to judge me. Before all this I was not a believer in vigilante justice. Now... well, I think it is pretty obvious that I would be willing to take matters into my own hands if need be. Besides, as I said above and in my earlier post, I never said I planned on killing anyone.

7) Right after the burglary I broke a shovel while working in the yard. The handel has since been named the whoopass stick and it basically stays by my wife's side. It isn't a gun or a bat with 10lb of lead but I know that one square hit to the head will cause some damage. Right now I guess that will have to be good enough.

I am sure there are other things here I wanted to address but I can not remember it all. Suffice to say, I was really just blowing off steam on the matter but I really do appreciate the support from all of you.
smile.gif
 
  • #49
[b said:
Quote[/b] (seedjar @ May 27 2005,2:32)]JB, I think Scott may mean 'death penalty.'
~Joe
Correct; sorry, I post on a political forum a lot, and this is a typical abbreciation. I should have explained the acronym the first time I used it.

In my posts above, DP = death penalty
LWOP = life without parole
 
  • #50
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Starman @ May 27 2005,5:25)]I cant believe so called 'great' people would willingly murder somebody.
Its MURDER for god sake! KILLING somebody for taking something that belongs to you is a bit much, and the law wont care whether it was a burglar or not!
I dont see how all of you could KILL somebody like that and live with yourselves for the rest of your life.
Self-defense != murder.

Murder is the unwarranted taking of human life.

In self-defense, it is not unwarranted.

If I were to have to shoot a home intruder, it would not be for taking my stuff.  It would be for being a direct physical threat to the safety of my family.  I can't gauge intent.  I don't know if he is there to burglarize or to violent act/murder.  Even if I don't SEE a gun on him, I don't know he doesn't have one concealed, and I'm not going to be stupid and give him an opportunity to produce it.  To me, a fair fight is when I am heavily armed, and my attacker is not.

And, starman, in almost every state, the law WILL care that he was a burglar.

[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I dont see how all of you could KILL somebody like that and live with yourselves for the rest of your life.

I would rather live with guilt than die because I failed to protect myself.

Seedjar, if the martial arts works for you, more power to you.  Most people don't have the time to learn that.  A firearm takes less time to master.  And I fully agree with you: Marksmanship should never substitute for good judgement.
 
  • #51
A death penalty does cost more because a death penalty get an automatic appeal at tax payers expense, even when the defendant wants to die.
If a person make a choice that he wants to break into my house, I take that as a threat to my life. If he is brave or desperate enough to come into my house I can only assume that he's also brave enough to do physical harm to me or my family. I will do whatever is needed to stop him.
Rampuppy, you really need to be careful with your bat. If you are ever forced to use it, you could be in some serious trouble. I don't know the laws in Texas, but every state is different. Say a 5'8 180lbs man breaks into your house. He has a knife and threatens you with it. You take him out with your bat.
A prosecutor could argue that you modified a bat to make it into a deadly weapon because you were looking to hurt or kill a person. The knife was similar to knives that you had in your kitchen, so you must have placed the knife by the suspect. You are much bigger than "unarmed" man so you could have just restrained him until the police got there. You could be found guilty of attempted murder or even 2nd degree murder.

I know that you may think this is far fetcthed, but there have been cases where the prosecution proved that the defendant showed deadly intent because they used bullets that had a reputation of being more deadly than normal bullets. An example of that is the black talon bullets. The bullets were coated with Teflon. The media said that the Teflon made the bullets penetrate bullet proof vest, which made them cop killers, which is untrue. The Teflon was to reduce friction in the barrel. Winchester SXT bullets are the same as black talons, but don't carry the bad reputation.
So to sum this up. If you if you used your bat, it could mean that you modified the bat to make it more deadly, so when you use it, a prosecutor could make it sound like you were looking and waiting for a chance to inflict as much injury as you could on any subject that walked into your house.

Don't get me wrong, I support your right to repeatedly put that bat upside of anybody that poses a treat to you or your family. The legal system is made up of people that is looking to further their career. A prosecutor would love to win a high profile case like that.

By the way my gun of choice is my .45 auto. The bullet is big enough to take the subject down but has low velocity so when it hits the target it stays in the body. My bullet of choice is hyro-shoks. It's what most cops use.
For women I suggest .44 special. It's small enough to put in their purse, and has low kick back. Like the .45, it has big bullets with low velocity.
 
  • #52
All the bad people have them so why shouldn't me and all the other Moms out there have them.
 
  • #53
My wife was anti gun when I met her. You should have seen her reaction the first time I met her and I had my 9mm with me.
She now owns a .44 special that I bought for her, and she loves shooting it.
When we met, the only meat she ate was fish and chicken. I introduced her to eastern NC barbeque, and now she eats all kinds. She even went to a Game feed at a club I belong to and she ate deer, bear, rabbit, moose, and elk.
 
  • #54
[b said:
Quote[/b] (0zzy @ May 27 2005,12:02)]I don't know the laws in Texas, but every state is different. Say a 5'8 180lbs man breaks into your house. He has a knife and threatens you with it. You take him out with your bat.
A prosecutor could argue that you modified a bat to make it into a deadly weapon because you were looking to hurt or kill a person. The knife was similar to knives that you had in your kitchen, so you must have placed the knife by the suspect. You are much bigger than "unarmed" man so you could have just restrained him until the police got there. You could be found guilty of attempted murder or even 2nd degree murder.
Texas may be about the safest state for home defense. If you kill somebody who invades your home, with any sort of weapon, you are generally pretty safe. I think it would have to be a very shocking case, eg, you bludgeon the criminal 25 times, or tie him up and THEN shoot him, before you'd have to worry about prosecution.

If, in good conscience, you do the least required with the weapon at hand to render him a non-threat, you should be safe in Texas.
 
  • #56
I just wanted to point out that, just because you are a small person, or a woman, or elderly or whatever, it doesn't mean your only option is a gun, or that you can't defend yourself hand-to-hand when your attacker has more physical strength than you. I train with girls half my size and old men three times my age, and they're all very capable of throwing me a few meters across the mat. I'm not saying everybody should be a martial artist, as I understand how impractical that can be. I'm not suggesting that anybody go out and spend ten years studying like me, but I do think that most people should take an exhaustive course in self-defense sometime in their life, at least a few months of it, so that they are aware of their options beyond shooting someone or crushing their head in with a bat. Having a gun helps in some situations, but becomes a risk in others, so I think it's important to know what you're capable of so you can minimize that risk. Also, children can learn to defend themselves effective far before they have the responsibility (or even physical capacity) to handle a firearm.
Long story short, a gun is very effective in certain situations, but has limits. What happens if there's a hostage? What if somebody gets ahold of you, and your kid grabs your gun to try to help? What if the gun jams, or you can't get to it? Would you rather be panicing, or preparing your contingency plan? Self-defense training isn't often as much about learning special techniques as it is learning to handle yourself in a scary situation. When someone has you by the throat and you feel your vision fading, there is very little help that a gun can give you. But you can knee your attacker in the crotch, provided you're thinking straight enough to remember to do so before you pass out.
It's not that anybody doesn't know how to put their knee in somebody's crotch - it's that when you're scared, you think about those things that are familiar. To most people, fighting is not familiar. If a gun is the only thing familiar to you, then you're as good as dogmeat once it's not pointed at your assailant. When I get on the mat with new students at my dojo and we start doing wrestling techniques, most of them turn into complete dummies. Just the act of touching another person without a familial or romantic context is enough to make untrained people freeze up entirely. Can anybody say, without having been in such a situation before, that they would know what to do, or make the right decision to do it, or act on that decision before it's too late? For many of you, this is not only your life and your home at stake, but your partners, children, and families. Is it really wise to put all those eggs in one basket?
~Joe
 
  • #57
[b said:
Quote[/b] (seedjar @ May 27 2005,2:03)]I do think that most people should take an exhaustive course in self-defense sometime in their life, at least a few months of it, so that they are aware of their options beyond shooting someone or crushing their head in with a bat.
Totally agreed.
 
  • #58
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I cant believe so called 'great' people would willingly murder somebody.
Its MURDER for god sake! KILLING somebody for taking something that belongs to you is a bit much, and the law wont care whether it was a burglar or not!
I dont see how all of you could KILL somebody like that and live with yourselves for the rest of your life.

Starman, until you are a husband and especially a father, you CANNOT make such a statement.

I do not own a gun.  I do own a few swords & axes, but they're not really accessible.  I, however, have two black belts (working towards another promotion in one of them), and will thoroughly annihilate anyone who breaks into my house.  I don't care if it's a teenager.  Done.  This person is a direct threat to the safety of my family, and if I go to jail for it, so be it.

Now, this may make me seem like a violent person.  I am not.  I have not reacted with violence to any situation since a was a young child.  That's 25 years or so without a fight, including my teenage years.  The idea of hurting another person, let alone killing them, in abhorent to me, but if it's them or me/my family, it will definately be them.  I will leave nothing to chance.
 
  • #59
[b said:
Quote[/b] (0zzy @ May 27 2005,9:02)]A prosecutor could argue that you modified a bat to make it into a deadly weapon because you were looking to hurt or kill a person. The knife was similar to knives that you had in your kitchen, so you must have placed the knife by the suspect. You are much bigger than "unarmed" man so you could have just restrained him until the police got there. You could be found guilty of attempted murder or even 2nd degree murder.
An excellent discussion of this type of legal liability is given here. At first I was very shocked to see how little legal protection there was for the defending party in a violent crime, but I generally agree with the idea that the law should discourage the use of unneccessary force - this is not to say that it's doing a good job of doing so. Nonetheless, misunderstandings happen (though not often in the case of home invasion,) and you don't want the guilt of an accident hanging over your head for the rest of your life.
After the police had taken my statement when I was mugged, they informed me that I could be charged with aggrivated assault for what I did if the mugger came forward and wanted to press charges. Fortunately, about two years later, nothing has come of it. But that does go to show what a fine line you walk in taking any action - all in all, you're often just as well giving up your money or property or whatever, if only to avoid legal retaliation. It's a sad state of affairs.
~Joe
 
  • #60
I'm tired of guns, I wouldn't own one, I would not knowingly permit one on my property. I am sick of guns. The last neighborhood I lived in was all gunplay, a lot of the time. Anyone who loves guns would have loved my old neighborhood...it would be a virtual paradise for a gun nut.

Funny how some(and I said some) people who live in the safest neighborhoods have the deepest paranoia about crime.
 
Back
Top