Where are WE headed??? - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Where are WE headed???

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Kannapolis, N.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    So, Martin was justified in booby trapping his home and shooting a guy was running away inthe back? Is this really who you want for aposter boy?
    If a person is stupid enough to break in your home at night and you are their, then they're stupid enough to come back when they think you aren't their. They will be dead in the back or shot in the face makes no difference to me.

    Man in Charlotte went looking for the teenagers who broke into his home.

    Police said McClure freed himself, got in his car and then drove out in search of the suspects. He told police he planned to shoot out the tires of their getaway car to slow them down until officers arrived.

    McClure found the teens at a nearby apartment complex and fired on Fluker when the teen turned toward him, fearing he was about to be shot with an automatic weapon, investigators said. They said the elderly man did not know that he struck the teen because the boy continued to run.
    Homeowner Not Charged In Teenís Shooting Death - News Story - WSOC Charlotte

  3. #12
    Point taken correctly I see...

    My entire reason for getting a CCP is to protect my family from WHOMEVER may try to harm them. What the circumstances may be at a time it comes to protecting them...I will do whatever it takes. Period.

    Anyone questioning the point of this story...Just read "Why do you carry?"
    Taurus 24/7 OSS DS .45
    Ruger LCR .357
    Remington 870 Tactical 12 ga

  4. #13
    Well, here you can't shoot them in the back either, in fact that didn't go over well even if you go back to the days of ye Olde Wilde West. And I can't really disagree with that.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    FT Bragg, NC
    if there is only 1 side of the story to tell....One could think of many reasons to shoot someone in the back in home defense:
    - said bad guy started to move towards your wife/husband
    - said bad guy started towards your child/children
    - said bad guy could have been going for something that could be used as a weapon behind him
    ect ect ect

    My point is, someone forces their way into my home and I am there, he is not leaving alive. I would rather be judged by 12 for defending my family, than carried by 6 of my family

  6. #15
    I agree there might be scenarios where it might be permissible to shoot someone in the back - for example if he was armed and moving towards your loved ones. But in the case quoted it seems it was "only" about property and I don't think that qualifies.

  7. #16
    On the other hand, a "no survivors" modus operandi doesn't allow some Legal Beagle and his "client" to concoct tales about your actions in self defence.

    Just an observation. (Insert "devilish laughter" here!)

    Fanatics of any sort are dangerous! -GG-
    Which part of "... shall NOT be infringed..." confuses you?
    Well now, aren't WE a pair, Raggedy Man? (Thunderdome)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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