Spoke to a Judge... What is he talking about? - Page 6
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 90

Thread: Spoke to a Judge... What is he talking about?

  1. In that case, the man definitely should not have been charged with attempted murder.

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by Neal View Post
    Self defense is not a crime of violence, is it?
    Depends on the state.
    Let me use Washington state as one example of where the judge the OP quoted is absolutely correct.

    In Washington state, homicide is a crime. If you shoot someone dead, you have just committed homicide. State law provides an exemption to the penalty of that crime when it has been shown that it was justified.

    If it is not 100% obvious to the DA that it was justifiable, you may very well be charged with homicide or even murder, as the bar incident mentioned a few posts up shows us. At that point a judge might toss out the charges if it is clear enough to the judge that it was justifiable. If he doesn't think it's clear enough, he's going to let a jury decide.

    MOST of the DA's out there look at the situation and not so much at the tools used. There are some that will be clueless and assume "scary/macho named bullet" shows prior intent to kill. Others will say to themselves, "I can get another conviction for my scorecard if I play this just right. I'll be running for mayor soon if I can keep this pace up."

    The problem isn't necessarily the judge, but the DA in your area.

  4. #53
    Some "liberals" have argued against hollow points, as they are intentionally to provide more killing power, so therefore you must intend to be kill theml. Like you are supposed to only wound them, ya know ? I think if you shoot someone with a gun, you are not trying to wound .. but stop them from killing you and whatever goes along with that. Period.

    He must be of that ilk.... and an idiot.

  5. Probably Time for a Scenario Discussion Re: Use Of Lethal Force

    The Fish case was complicated. There were big dogs running loose adding to the threatening posture of the aggressor, and even a screwdriver on the aggressor's person, but the evidence pointed to him not being an immediate threat, not having touched or struck Fish, and the "reasonable man" test failed. Any time you use lethal force that evaluation will be part of the DA decision to charge or not. What would a "reasonable man" have felt, or done, in the same circumstance? Unfortunately, that evaluation is aided by hindsight (which you don't have the benefit of as the situation is evolving around you) and flavored by the personal beliefs and prejudices of the evaluator and ultimately the jury, if it goes that far.

    That said, you definitely could be steered by determining what ammo the cops use. Or a check of your statutes. I recommend both and if you still don't get it, you could consult your attorney. Preferably one schooled in, and favorable to, matters concerning firearms and self-defense.

    And never stop your own education on matters concerning use of lethal force. Would really suck to be placed in a life/death situation, shoot and survive, only to be charged, convicted, lose your wife, family and freedom. Like Mr. Fish. Did he make a bad decision to shoot? Did the guy in the parking lot? Bet they didn't think so at the time, but i bet they do now...
    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants ... for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

  6. This is why; if you have the opportunity to vote against a liberal judge and you sit home and suck a beer down or find some other lame excuse for not voting, this is what you end up with. Maybe everyone here votes on a regular basis. Wish that were true.

    This missive is for those lazy A's who think someone else will do it.
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum. . .Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis. . . .Nemo me impune lacessit . . .Veritas vos Liberabit. . . .ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! . . . .Write, speak, do!

  7. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Badger Lake, WA
    Posts
    33
    Of course "you could be charged with manslaughter".

    Anytime a person kills another they "could be charged with manslaughter"

    Run over someone in your car - "could" be manslaughter.

    Your poodle bites a hemophiliac - "could" be manslaughter

    Your lwqn mower slings out a rock and conks the neighbor - "could" be manslaughter.

    However, simply put, that judge is a maroon.

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kalifornia & Idaho
    Posts
    1,052
    Quote Originally Posted by eagleks View Post
    Some "liberals" have argued against hollow points, as they are intentionally to provide more killing power, so therefore you must intend to be kill theml. Like you are supposed to only wound them, ya know ? I think if you shoot someone with a gun, you are not trying to wound .. but stop them from killing you and whatever goes along with that. Period.

    He must be of that ilk.... and an idiot.
    That's because some liberals are total idiots. Hollow points are used to stop over penetration. They are used so if you shoot someone that needs shooting, you don't accidentally shoot the guy behind him who didn't need shooting. So it's a safety issue. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
    Maybejim

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member CRPA
    Life Member SASS

    What you say isn't as important as what the other person hears

  9. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by hardballer View Post
    This is why; if you have the opportunity to vote against a liberal judge and you sit home and suck a beer down or find some other lame excuse for not voting, this is what you end up with. Maybe everyone here votes on a regular basis. Wish that were true.

    This missive is for those lazy A's who think someone else will do it.
    Well said. Since the People's Republic of South Carolina requires all amendments to its constitution to go before a referrendum, I always make sure to vote.

  10. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by maybejim View Post
    That's because some liberals are total idiots. Hollow points are used to stop over penetration. They are used so if you shoot someone that needs shooting, you don't accidentally shoot the guy behind him who didn't need shooting. So it's a safety issue. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
    Hollowpoints also allow you to stop threat with fewer shots. If you need to shoot someone, the less rounds that are needed, the better.

  11. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    47
    from what i've read and gathered, your best bet is to carry what your local law enforcement carries, whether that be sherrif, local pd, or state pd. They usually carry different ammo, so find which one works best for you and carry that. It's just another "precaution" you can take in an effort to eliminate BS claims by the prosecutor should you ever be in the unfortunate situation that requires you to use your gun. It's really hard for a lawyer to even attempt the "crazy super killer bullet" angle when he'd be lumping your local law enforcement in the same bunch...my .02
    Never had to use my gun, never want to use my gun, will not hesitate to use my gun.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast