- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:10 pm to Smeg
When it comes to defending your life,
there are no laws, there are no rules, there are no ethics, there are no morals.
It's just you choosing life or death.
there are no laws, there are no rules, there are no ethics, there are no morals.
It's just you choosing life or death.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:15 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
Why should I leave my own house instead of defending myself?
Cause some dude wearing a dress and a purse full of free drug needles told you so.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:25 pm to Smeg
You’ll own nothing and be happy about it.
You really have to be a dumb arse to still live in cali
You really have to be a dumb arse to still live in cali
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:30 pm to Smeg
The French WW2 approach to self-defense.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:34 pm to dafif
quote:Sorry. I didn't know who to cite.
You literally quoted sheriff Brady Judd of Polk County Office 75 bullets into the victim and he said that's all we have
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:35 pm to Smeg
quote:
killing in self defence is NOT justified if
Oh how rich. So if someone breaks into my home while I'm in it, I automatically assume (with sound logic) that they are there with bad intentions. So,
quote:
(1) you could have retreated
They could have retreated instead of breaking in. I'm hitting them, center mass, with slug after slug until I am satisfied that they no longer pose any threat. Period
quote:
(2) you used more force than reasonably necessary
Again, I will use whatever force is necessary until I'm convinced that they no longer pose a threat, and
quote:
(3) you provoked the person, and failed to exhaust every means of terminating the encounter.
They provoked me by breaking into my occupied domicile with what I am deeply compelled to believe is bad intent. My life is too valuable to have a conversation with the intruder to try and establish whether or not they intend harm before I aerate them. No. They came in, and they're leaving in a body bag. I'm not going to retreat in my own goddamn house unless I'm retreating to one of my many predetermined defensive positions.
There is no discussion here. California people need to GTFO that shithole. This will embolden home invaders.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:37 pm to Big Jim Slade
These Marxists know what they're doing. It's called raising the misery index. You make it so that regular middle class can't live there. Then you're left with mega rich elite overlords and their huge army of slaves/serfs who will be pressed into a life of mandatory servitude.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:37 pm to Smeg
Who the frick wants to live in California.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:37 pm to the808bass
quote:
Marxists hate property owners.
It’s worse than that.
They don’t want you to be able to defend yourself without or from the state.
It’s about making you powerless.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:40 pm to stlslick
quote:
will end up before supreme court, and will be be thrown out.
Maybe, but some innocent homeowner will have to have their life ruined and spend some time in prison before they'll have standing to challenge the law.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:40 pm to Smeg
If you continue to live in the communist state of CA after the past 5 years, you deserve everything you are about to get.
This post was edited on 2/26/25 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 2/26/25 at 6:52 pm to Smeg
Same thing in NY. Look at what just happened to that guy who was put on trial for putting a guy in a headlock after he was threatening to hurt people on the subway.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 7:25 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:I'm certain the thief is reasonable.
Not sure, but your wife and kids wouldnt be happy with you.
"Hey, you broke in. Okay. I get it. You want our stuff. Fine. Can I have 2 minutes to get my wife and kids out before you ransack the place. The safe code is 18-34-6. You'll find that in the closet of the master bedroom. It's down at the end of that hall. We good?"
Posted on 2/26/25 at 7:30 pm to HubbaBubba
Is there any federal angle to challenge this? Self-defense seems like a basic civil right to me.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 7:40 pm to Smeg
Middle of the night.. someone breaks into your house. You've to get up, wake your family up, and usher them out in an attempt to retreat and allow the robber to casually stroll around and figure out what thhey want to steal from you?
If the robber has a gun, pointing it at you or your family, he hasn't shown his intent to kill anyone unless he fires the gun? So a homeowner can't use deadly force until the robber takes a free shot ?
If the robber has a gun, pointing it at you or your family, he hasn't shown his intent to kill anyone unless he fires the gun? So a homeowner can't use deadly force until the robber takes a free shot ?
Posted on 2/26/25 at 8:17 pm to Smeg
Who is the constituency asking for this?
Posted on 2/26/25 at 8:22 pm to Smeg
Obligation to retreat laws are anthem to US values. They were really popular in the 1980s and 1990s in liberal bastions.
Stand your ground and castle doctrine are the correct answer
Stand your ground and castle doctrine are the correct answer
Posted on 2/26/25 at 8:26 pm to Smeg
At this rate, one of two things are inevitable. Every sane person will leave that State, or California will turn red.
Posted on 2/26/25 at 8:53 pm to Smeg
quote:
killing in self defence is NOT justified if
(1) you could have retreated,
(2) you used more force than reasonably necessary,
(3) you provoked the person, and failed to exhaust every means of terminating the encounter
Upside down world stupidity.
Popular
Back to top


0








