It’s only vigilanteism if the police are doing their jobs.
Comment by Caged Insanity — June 3, 2012 @ 10:47 am
^ what mojo said, and in more matters than only personal defense.
Skipping over the main body of this post and its merits, I’m going for just a small part of it:
I’ve seen cop training (and know someone who trains cops) regarding confrontations with people who are *not* armed with guns. The (demonstrated) speed with which an apparently ordinary person can cover 20′ – 30′ is astonishing. It is pretty much literally “blink of the eye.”
The person closing the distance can previously appear either nonchalant or confrontational; it makes no difference to the speed. If that person is armed with a sharp object (say, a knife), he can have the other party down and dying in much, much less time than it takes to talk about it.
Firearms, are, of course pretty quick too. I do not envy cops their jobs, and even an ordinary citizen defending their lives, will have very little time to make a judgement call and react accordingly. It is *not* like it is in most movies.
What these fools do not care about is that if the situation is going bad, there is almost no time, and “shooting first” (God forbid any of us should actually find ourselves in this situation) is pretty much the only alternative to dying.
I saw a big news hoopla some years back where a cop was getting tried in the media because he shot a crazed man with a machete who went for him from about 20′ away. My thought at the time was that these prissy media types, activists and politicians ought to have to undergo the kind of real world training that might inform their BS about “20 whole feet away and only armed with a machete.”
Of course he “shot first.” What should he have done — waited less than three seconds until this guy had hacked his arm off and was working on his head?
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 10:49 am
…because *I* know how much I’d be able to have to hose some creep offa my porch and then go on like nothing ever happened…….
Comment by SondraK, Queen of my domain — June 3, 2012 @ 11:00 am
But but but… All they want here is to stop the California-style bloodbaths!
Yep, someone posted a bit of century-old California law a couple of weeks ago, that if you are in fear for your or someone else’s life you do not have an obligation to retreat. Anywhere, not just at home. Which explains why that State has such a lot of murderers walking around, shooting anyone who dares look at them.
^ But don’t they have tight gun laws, dismemberments, and cannibals in Canada?
(okay, there’s cannibals in Florida too)
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 11:58 am
The “shoot first” law??
As opposed to the “Run Away Screaming Like A Little Girl While Getting Shot In The Back So The Goblins Can Loot Your Bleeding Body At Their Leisure” alternative they propose?
Yep — let’s all retreat from the “spaces” we occupy in our everyday lives and give the ground over to the thugs, gangsters and goblins. There’s a swell idea.
Hey — maybe the Nanny Gov’t will set up a Safe Space where we can all retreat to. Where there will be appropriately-sized sodas, “healthy” treats, room to exercise and maybe some re-educational opportunities to take advantage of, as well.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 12:01 pm
So, Doug: Since you’ve done some homework on this I’ve got a question: what constitutes a “home/work” under that law? Inside my house? In my yard? How big a yard? Inside a workplace? Front steps of a workplace? Parking lot?
What if I work outside? In a large place where my home also is?
‘Course none of that likely matters here in CAca Land…
But I have a shovel — for my garden, yanno. Maybe I’ll just dig me a little hidey hole next to the ‘mater bushes while I’m about it…
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 12:07 pm
Ironic (3)
The law generally recognizes 7yd/21′ as imminent danger.
That’s ’cause, as you pointed out, it takes about 1-1/2 sec for a guy to reach you from there from a dead stop. It’s also the time it takes to draw & fire. Basically, you’re truly at risk of death or injury from that distance.
Claire (8)
Okay, short & sweet (your State may vary):
• Your domicile is any place you reside — your house and appurtenances (outhouse, barn, shed, porch, deck, lawn, garden, garage, etc.) where you have reasonable expectation of personal safety. This means any place you live in or normally occupy, even a tent while away from home. A field or extended yard area would probably not qualify, but routine self-defense still applies.
• Your place of work includes any roofed work area (office, store, shop, etc.). Not sure how agriculture and construction apply. That’ll probably be a product of case law, which is the main method for determining the details of NC law.
Note: this does not override the owner/manager’s right to forbid firearms.
• Your vehicle is any form of personal transport (car, motorcycle, RV, boat, etc.) where you have reasonable expectation of personal safety. Again, I don’t really know what that means, yet.
Forgive me for shortening your “Run Away Screaming Like A Little Girl While Getting Shot In The Back So The Goblins Can Loot Your Bleeding Body At Their Leisure” idea and using it as an update.
(What? Well, I was gonna add “and Eating Your Face;” but that would’a been unwieldly.)
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — June 3, 2012 @ 1:37 pm
Doug (various): I expect you know a good deal more about this than I do, and certainly about the legal aspects. Mostly, I just find the sight of a soap box irresistible.
What I have observed in actual practice (more than once), is that the *average* cop cannot draw from a open carry service holster and deploy an effective shot in that 1-1/2 seconds, at least in practice situations. My friend starts them at 30′, where almost none can succeed either. If the gun is *already* in the hand, there is a moderate chance of success, but barely. Part of this is reaction time. Another part is the time it takes a decent person to decide they really have to do this — even in drills, interestingly enough.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 2:03 pm
Does anything else need to be said?
Second Chance Coalition Parters:
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg
NAACP
National Urban League
National Action Network
Color of Change
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights
Vote Vets
What the left really wants to do, now, just as always, is to disarm the law abiding public and identify more places with large numbers of unarmed victims.
This week will be Sharpton/Jackson week on all the communist news media outlets, again trying the Zimmerman case in the media.
The big lie continues. And the truth remains dangerous.
Comment by JoeBandMember® — June 3, 2012 @ 2:18 pm
Ironic (10)
Yeah, the 1-1/2 sec time is for ready-to-bang in training, knowing it’s coming. It’s kind of a physical norm for basic self-defense shooting.
If you consider the whole fighter-pilot’s OODA-loop (observe, orient, decide, act), you know … reality, then the real response time can be fatal.
If danger is less that 2-sec away, be ready to draw.
If it’s closer, you’re gonna get hurt.
“and Eating Your Face” :: “ unwieldly” perhaps, but correct nonetheless.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 3:54 pm
I followed the links and ended up reading at “vote vets”. Went thru the site and was pretty digusted. I guess if you can get time on MSNBC it pretty much sum’s it all up.
This was just another play on gun control just as “fast and furious” was.
The left hates it when they get caught in a lie.
Way off topic and out of left field: Someone needs to be fired and tried for retardation over this headline: “Car Crash Leaves 3 Teens Dead, 1 Set to Graduate”.
And people wonder why no-one on the left will even consider taking fox news seriously for a second.
Comment by Caged Insanity — June 3, 2012 @ 5:44 pm
Bloomberg’s pretty hypocritical about “duty to retreat” for a guy living behind a 24/7 security detail.
Remember: We do not have a “duty to retreat” when we see the Constitution under attack. Let’s just hope we get to draw our vote in November before the goblins close the distance.
Doug (15):
a) Whadda you got agin’ the Texas Rangers, pardner? Haw!
b) If danger is actually less than 2 seconds away, my sights will be on his chest, and my finger will be on the trigger. I ain’t as quick as I was, and frankly I don’t think anyone should assume they are as quick as they think they are. The truth is, if there’s a two second gap, and he hasn’t responded appropriately to my warning (repeated, if feasible), then I’m likely going to be drilling him. I’ve shot in “run up” drills, and I know what happens even when life isn’t in danger.
Caged (19): Seriously? That was the headline? OMG.
Fat Baxter (21): You bettcha pardner!
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 8:22 pm
1) The Controllers have always been on the side of the criminals. Always.
2) I would just call them the “Duty to Allow Yourself to be Murdered” crowd. Screw them with a rusty post-hole digger.
3) Everybody has a burr somewhere uncomfortable about California. *Yes* our politicians are dicktards, no question, and *yes* that includes big-city DAs.
But while weapons laws are quite retarded, self-defense *LAW* is not that bad, and in most cases the police/courts outside of Commie Enclaves respect that. It is a modified Castle Doctrine state and you don’t have a duty to lie down and get murdered like the control freaks want. Self-Defense is in the State Constitution as well.
The Controllers have tried and failed to get rid of all that, so I guess there’s some idiocies the people won’t vote for.
That being said, I am just loving the left trying to make gun control an issue in an election year *again*, it’s just too bad people need these constant reminders to vote against the jacktards. Nice that they give the reminders, though.
Also, picking the name “shoot first” laws for their campaign is effing retarded, it’s like they set up a whiffle-ball stand, sat on it and handed us a bat.
Seriously, they want to give the impression they want criminals to be able to shoot first? That’s the hill they want to pound their head against? Really?
Thanks, Merovign. Not that I would worry about Teh Law until afterward — if I was so lucky to get my OODA-loop to cycle in under an hour-an-a-half…
[yeah -- I stay out of goblin zones.]
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 9:52 pm
Merovign: It isn’t that they side with criminals …
The elite simply consider outlaws to be a normal road hazard, that the elite can deal with using personal guards.
Peasants with weapons, however, are an abomination, and should not be tolerated. They might actually revolt, and put the elites’ lives in actual danger.
I like the part assuming that prosecutors should be able to prosecute anybody they want, and are “stymied” by the law.
Wrong-headed is putting it politely.
Comment by mojo — June 3, 2012 @ 10:03 am
It’s only vigilanteism if the police are doing their jobs.
Comment by Caged Insanity — June 3, 2012 @ 10:47 am
^ what mojo said, and in more matters than only personal defense.
Skipping over the main body of this post and its merits, I’m going for just a small part of it:
I’ve seen cop training (and know someone who trains cops) regarding confrontations with people who are *not* armed with guns. The (demonstrated) speed with which an apparently ordinary person can cover 20′ – 30′ is astonishing. It is pretty much literally “blink of the eye.”
The person closing the distance can previously appear either nonchalant or confrontational; it makes no difference to the speed. If that person is armed with a sharp object (say, a knife), he can have the other party down and dying in much, much less time than it takes to talk about it.
Firearms, are, of course pretty quick too. I do not envy cops their jobs, and even an ordinary citizen defending their lives, will have very little time to make a judgement call and react accordingly. It is *not* like it is in most movies.
What these fools do not care about is that if the situation is going bad, there is almost no time, and “shooting first” (God forbid any of us should actually find ourselves in this situation) is pretty much the only alternative to dying.
I saw a big news hoopla some years back where a cop was getting tried in the media because he shot a crazed man with a machete who went for him from about 20′ away. My thought at the time was that these prissy media types, activists and politicians ought to have to undergo the kind of real world training that might inform their BS about “20 whole feet away and only armed with a machete.”
Of course he “shot first.” What should he have done — waited less than three seconds until this guy had hacked his arm off and was working on his head?
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 10:49 am
…because *I* know how much I’d be able to have to hose some creep offa my porch and then go on like nothing ever happened…….
Comment by SondraK, Queen of my domain — June 3, 2012 @ 11:00 am
But but but… All they want here is to stop the California-style bloodbaths!
Yep, someone posted a bit of century-old California law a couple of weeks ago, that if you are in fear for your or someone else’s life you do not have an obligation to retreat. Anywhere, not just at home. Which explains why that State has such a lot of murderers walking around, shooting anyone who dares look at them.
Comment by John A — June 3, 2012 @ 11:48 am
^ But don’t they have tight gun laws, dismemberments, and cannibals in Canada?
(okay, there’s cannibals in Florida too)
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 11:58 am
The “shoot first” law??
As opposed to the “Run Away Screaming Like A Little Girl While Getting Shot In The Back So The Goblins Can Loot Your Bleeding Body At Their Leisure” alternative they propose?
Yep — let’s all retreat from the “spaces” we occupy in our everyday lives and give the ground over to the thugs, gangsters and goblins. There’s a swell idea.
Hey — maybe the Nanny Gov’t will set up a Safe Space where we can all retreat to. Where there will be appropriately-sized sodas, “healthy” treats, room to exercise and maybe some re-educational opportunities to take advantage of, as well.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 12:01 pm
So, Doug: Since you’ve done some homework on this I’ve got a question: what constitutes a “home/work” under that law? Inside my house? In my yard? How big a yard? Inside a workplace? Front steps of a workplace? Parking lot?
What if I work outside? In a large place where my home also is?
‘Course none of that likely matters here in CAca Land…
But I have a shovel — for my garden, yanno. Maybe I’ll just dig me a little hidey hole next to the ‘mater bushes while I’m about it…
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 12:07 pm
Ironic (3)
The law generally recognizes 7yd/21′ as imminent danger.
That’s ’cause, as you pointed out, it takes about 1-1/2 sec for a guy to reach you from there from a dead stop. It’s also the time it takes to draw & fire. Basically, you’re truly at risk of death or injury from that distance.
Claire (8)
Okay, short & sweet (your State may vary):
• Your domicile is any place you reside — your house and appurtenances (outhouse, barn, shed, porch, deck, lawn, garden, garage, etc.) where you have reasonable expectation of personal safety. This means any place you live in or normally occupy, even a tent while away from home. A field or extended yard area would probably not qualify, but routine self-defense still applies.
• Your place of work includes any roofed work area (office, store, shop, etc.). Not sure how agriculture and construction apply. That’ll probably be a product of case law, which is the main method for determining the details of NC law.
Note: this does not override the owner/manager’s right to forbid firearms.
• Your vehicle is any form of personal transport (car, motorcycle, RV, boat, etc.) where you have reasonable expectation of personal safety. Again, I don’t really know what that means, yet.
Forgive me for shortening your “Run Away Screaming Like A Little Girl While Getting Shot In The Back So The Goblins Can Loot Your Bleeding Body At Their Leisure” idea and using it as an update.
(What? Well, I was gonna add “and Eating Your Face;” but that would’a been unwieldly.)
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — June 3, 2012 @ 1:37 pm
Doug (various): I expect you know a good deal more about this than I do, and certainly about the legal aspects. Mostly, I just find the sight of a soap box irresistible.
What I have observed in actual practice (more than once), is that the *average* cop cannot draw from a open carry service holster and deploy an effective shot in that 1-1/2 seconds, at least in practice situations. My friend starts them at 30′, where almost none can succeed either. If the gun is *already* in the hand, there is a moderate chance of success, but barely. Part of this is reaction time. Another part is the time it takes a decent person to decide they really have to do this — even in drills, interestingly enough.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 2:03 pm
Does anything else need to be said?
Second Chance Coalition Parters:
NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg
NAACP
National Urban League
National Action Network
Color of Change
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights
Vote Vets
Comment by Holger — June 3, 2012 @ 2:05 pm
Claire you got a way with words.
I’m just gonna say one word: Reavers!
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 2:05 pm
I’d like to add….can you really trust your life with an organization that can’t spell “partner”?
Comment by Holger — June 3, 2012 @ 2:06 pm
What the left really wants to do, now, just as always, is to disarm the law abiding public and identify more places with large numbers of unarmed victims.
This week will be Sharpton/Jackson week on all the communist news media outlets, again trying the Zimmerman case in the media.
The big lie continues. And the truth remains dangerous.
Comment by JoeBandMember® — June 3, 2012 @ 2:18 pm
Ironic (10)
Yeah, the 1-1/2 sec time is for ready-to-bang in training, knowing it’s coming. It’s kind of a physical norm for basic self-defense shooting.
If you consider the whole fighter-pilot’s OODA-loop (observe, orient, decide, act), you know … reality, then the real response time can be fatal.
If danger is less that 2-sec away, be ready to draw.
If it’s closer, you’re gonna get hurt.
Ironic (12)
Oooh, right! ‘Em guys’re worse’n zombies!
Holger (13)
Whadda you got agin’ the Texas Rangers, pardner?
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — June 3, 2012 @ 2:18 pm
Bloomberg is crying because the number of justifiable homicide shootings in self defense states is going up.
Someone needs to explain to the NY retard that this is a feature, not a bug.
Comment by Kristophr — June 3, 2012 @ 3:22 pm
“and Eating Your Face” :: “ unwieldly” perhaps, but correct nonetheless.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 3:54 pm
I followed the links and ended up reading at “vote vets”. Went thru the site and was pretty digusted. I guess if you can get time on MSNBC it pretty much sum’s it all up.
This was just another play on gun control just as “fast and furious” was.
The left hates it when they get caught in a lie.
Comment by tctsunami — June 3, 2012 @ 4:03 pm
Way off topic and out of left field: Someone needs to be fired and tried for retardation over this headline: “Car Crash Leaves 3 Teens Dead, 1 Set to Graduate”.
And people wonder why no-one on the left will even consider taking fox news seriously for a second.
Comment by Caged Insanity — June 3, 2012 @ 5:44 pm
Bloomberg’s pretty hypocritical about “duty to retreat” for a guy living behind a 24/7 security detail.
Comment by rickn8or — June 3, 2012 @ 5:52 pm
Remember: We do not have a “duty to retreat” when we see the Constitution under attack. Let’s just hope we get to draw our vote in November before the goblins close the distance.
Comment by Fat Baxter — June 3, 2012 @ 7:36 pm
Doug (15):
a) Whadda you got agin’ the Texas Rangers, pardner? Haw!
b) If danger is actually less than 2 seconds away, my sights will be on his chest, and my finger will be on the trigger. I ain’t as quick as I was, and frankly I don’t think anyone should assume they are as quick as they think they are. The truth is, if there’s a two second gap, and he hasn’t responded appropriately to my warning (repeated, if feasible), then I’m likely going to be drilling him. I’ve shot in “run up” drills, and I know what happens even when life isn’t in danger.
Caged (19): Seriously? That was the headline? OMG.
Fat Baxter (21): You bettcha pardner!
Comment by Ironic in Denver — June 3, 2012 @ 8:22 pm
1) The Controllers have always been on the side of the criminals. Always.
2) I would just call them the “Duty to Allow Yourself to be Murdered” crowd. Screw them with a rusty post-hole digger.
3) Everybody has a burr somewhere uncomfortable about California. *Yes* our politicians are dicktards, no question, and *yes* that includes big-city DAs.
But while weapons laws are quite retarded, self-defense *LAW* is not that bad, and in most cases the police/courts outside of Commie Enclaves respect that. It is a modified Castle Doctrine state and you don’t have a duty to lie down and get murdered like the control freaks want. Self-Defense is in the State Constitution as well.
The Controllers have tried and failed to get rid of all that, so I guess there’s some idiocies the people won’t vote for.
That being said, I am just loving the left trying to make gun control an issue in an election year *again*, it’s just too bad people need these constant reminders to vote against the jacktards. Nice that they give the reminders, though.
Comment by Merovign — June 3, 2012 @ 9:19 pm
Also, picking the name “shoot first” laws for their campaign is effing retarded, it’s like they set up a whiffle-ball stand, sat on it and handed us a bat.
Seriously, they want to give the impression they want criminals to be able to shoot first? That’s the hill they want to pound their head against? Really?
Comment by Merovign — June 3, 2012 @ 9:22 pm
Thanks, Merovign. Not that I would worry about Teh Law until afterward — if I was so lucky to get my OODA-loop to cycle in under an hour-an-a-half…
[yeah -- I stay out of goblin zones.]
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — June 3, 2012 @ 9:52 pm
Merovign: It isn’t that they side with criminals …
The elite simply consider outlaws to be a normal road hazard, that the elite can deal with using personal guards.
Peasants with weapons, however, are an abomination, and should not be tolerated. They might actually revolt, and put the elites’ lives in actual danger.
Comment by Kristophr — June 4, 2012 @ 10:48 am