COTEP.org  

Go Back   COTEP.org > Main Category > News and Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-04-2017, 11:07 PM
FfNJGTFO's Avatar
FfNJGTFO FfNJGTFO is offline
COTEP Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Wesley Chapel, FL
Posts: 1,663
Thanks: 1,522
Thanked 207 Times in 72 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade View Post
As I said the shooter made a number of poor decisions and deserves what he will get.

So just to continue discussion, at what point do I no longer have a right to defend my property? The article said the second house was where he ran a business. Where does the law say I need to sit and watch someone break into my business and possibly destroy my livelihood? Yes I know in this case the burgler was just taking a shower but what if it were someone trying to steal or otherwise put my livelihood at risk? Say I own a jewelery store and I see a thief robbing my store? Do I have a right to try and detain them from fleeing before the police arrive? That was the angle I was getting at. If I see someone illegally on any of my property I can't gaurentee I will sit on my hands a wait for someone else to come and tell me they got away and my business is in shambles.
I hear ya. I think of all the store owners in places that suffered rioting and looting, etc. in recent times. I think of the grocery store owners that sat on roofs armed with long rifles and waited.

It's times and circumstances like that, that I wish we had deadly force/threat of deadly force as a defense against property crimes... similar to Texas.

That said, I think this gentleman is going to be in world of hurt. If it were NJ, there'd be no question that he'd face all kinds of charges (manslaughter at minimum) as NJ has a duty to retreat, even inside your house/property.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-04-2017, 11:12 PM
TLE2's Avatar
TLE2 TLE2 is offline
Founding Member
COTEP Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Near Okahoma City
Posts: 2,831
Blog Entries: 5
Thanks: 547
Thanked 379 Times in 83 Posts
Default

If you are in fear of a wet, naked man in your shower, shoot. But I think you'll have a hard time proving it was a reasoned response, regardless of the Castle doctrine.
__________________

COTEP #719


"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-05-2017, 08:13 AM
AFJuvat's Avatar
AFJuvat AFJuvat is offline
COTEP Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 1,278
Thanks: 120
Thanked 283 Times in 63 Posts
Default

I'll withhold my opinion until more facts come out.

The facts, as they are presented, do not make it look good for the shooter IMO.
__________________
There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.

To speak without thinking is to shoot without aiming.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.