so lets talk about riots, and tactics

[Xae289]

There's arson, then there's arson which may be prevented with deadly force. My previous post clearly breaks that down and shows you arson of a vehicle, which everyone knows is a crime, is not a qualifying event to apply deadly force. You can do whatever you want but I'm not going to prison for a car. I'll take my insurance check and go get another one.

Technically and academically, (which is what courts care about) the sentence says clear as day that a person may use deadly physical force to prevent arson. Not "arson against a building", or "arson against a home", or "arson against a building they own", or "arson, but only if you think the building is occupied". Just "arson," period. Then arson is defined in Article 150 and includes way more than just someone setting fire to your house.

Practically, whether I would use deadly force against a person trying to burn down a car depends only on whether anyone is in it or I think someone is in it.

 

[Vapor]

Here we go again, all the NY gun forum legal experts.

 

[Chevusa]

Here we go again, all the NY gun forum legal experts.

As I said - do as you wish. No argument from me. Not my problem.

It can be confusing for people because that law sends you to other laws for definitions.

 

[Vapor]

As I said - do as you wish. No argument from me. Not my problem.

It can be confusing for people because that law sends you to other laws for definitions.

Eh, its not really anything against you, but the level of scrutiny we have to undertake to be allowed basic human rights is ridiculous.

 

[Chevusa]

Eh, its not really anything against you, but the level of scrutiny we have to undertake to be allowed basic human rights is ridiculous.

Agree. It'd be nice if you didn't have to worry about being prosecuted for doing what was right, but that is not the case in this state. Tread lightly.

 

[GOPerfect]

In regards to Article 35///

I think gun owners in New York State should do a bit more studying of this Article. One of the reasons Law Enforcement is able to "get away" with so much is because Article 35 is fully understood by all in the profession.

Do not just read it, learn it, research the article. Dig deep, many may be surprised at how much it protects all gun owners.

 

[Chevusa]

In regards to Article 35///

I think gun owners in New York State should do a bit more studying of this Article. One of the reasons Law Enforcement is able to "get away" with so much is because Article 35 is fully understood by all in the profession.

Do not just read it, learn it, research the article. Dig deep, many may be surprised at how much it protects all gun owners.

And DA's send cases involving police to grand jury, which they don't usually do with regular citizens, and those grand juries almost never decide to bring charges upon an officer.

I'll also say police can use DPF to prevent an escape or when someone is running away and presents a threat to the public. Other people cannot, unless directed to do so by a police officer.

 

[spat]

A group of 1,000? Bug out time.


Something a bit less? 25? 50?

I live half in country. A riot in my little town is an old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn.

But say, bused in?

I'm watching the house from the tree line. I can get out through the woods to a road for escape if needed. If things go hot, come and get me and play on my own terrain.


Force them to hunt you and play your game by your rules if at all possible.

This is why I need nv/thermals...

Bug out implies you know a better place to go.

Depending on the nature of the trouble that may not be the case.

 

[spat]

And DA's send cases involving police to grand jury, which they don't usually do with regular citizens, and those grand juries almost never decide to bring charges upon an officer.

I'll also say police can use DPF to prevent an escape or when someone is running away and presents a threat to the public. Other people cannot, unless directed to do so by a police officer.

The textual differences in the law between cops and everyone else aren't anywhere as large as you think.

Cops can't use DPF to prevent escape except for very limited circumstances. You *can* use non-deadly force to prevent a felon from fleeing the scene in many cases.

The major differences between cops and everyone else are in how the prosecutors treat them, not in the law itself.

That and who pays for the lawyers.

 

[1075tech]

With all this discussion.... If it really came down to it and mobs of people were actually seeking to harm you, would you even bother with the police? As we can see, they are outnumbered and overwhelmed. Not really in control of much of anything. If it was night time and there were large scale incidents such as we've seen, they're not coming to help you. Call in the morning after things have settled down.

911: What's your emergency?
You: I just got up this morning to put the dog out and there's like 5 bodies in my yard. Can you send someone over?
Cops: Did you hear anything?
You: No. I was sleeping with the TV on.

 

[Jmac00]

let go a different scenario:

Let say you and your wife (or significant other) are Out-n-about and a riot breaks out and you are physically caught IN with the rioters. How would you handle getting you and your SO out of this situation.

I think I would lock hands with my wife and try to get as close to a building as possible and work my way in the opposite direction of 'flow' I would try to become invisible and move quickly to get out of the flow of the riot/looters.

 

[Celt]

let go a different scenario:

Let say you and your wife (or significant other) are Out-n-about and a riot breaks out and you are physically caught IN with the rioters. How would you handle getting you and your SO out of this situation.

I think I would lock hands with my wife and try to get as close to a building as possible and work my way in the opposite direction of 'flow' I would try to become invisible and move quickly to get out of the flow of the riot/looters.

Act like the rioters and act like you're on their side and make your way out.

 

[Jsmegs77]

Act like the rioters and act like you're on their side and make your way out.

I think this would be the path of least resistance....then peel off the next side street and get the hell out of Dodge.

 

[@thewheels]

Act like the rioters and act like you're on their side and make your way out.

^^^This^^^ And snag a pack of gum to blend in.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

^^^This^^^ And snag a pack of gum to blend in.

And on your way out slap MAGA stickers on their cars

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

So to look at this rioting problem in another way,

you can also think outside the box and make a strategic decision to live around people who won't tolerate riots. If you live in that environment you might not have to worry about sudden spontaneous riots.

Here is a great article that has me thinking.

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Watch the embedded videos. There were hundreds of people kitted up and open carrying rifles in cour' dalene ID and no looting or rioting. They were deterred. It was quite impressive and wish we could do that here.

 

[SomeSoldier]

In regards to Article 35///

I think gun owners in New York State should do a bit more studying of this Article. One of the reasons Law Enforcement is able to "get away" with so much is because Article 35 is fully understood by all in the profession.

Do not just read it, learn it, research the article. Dig deep, many may be surprised at how much it protects all gun owners.

Its about knowing how to interpret the law and how to word your statement so that it fits within the law. If you don't, don't say shit get a lawyer.

 

[@thewheels]

Don't say shit, get a lawyer.

fify

ONLY speak when your lawyer is present.

 

[Michael]

There's arson, then there's arson which may be prevented with deadly force. My previous post clearly breaks that down and shows you arson of a vehicle, which everyone knows is a crime, is not a qualifying event to apply deadly force. You can do whatever you want but I'm not going to prison for a car. I'll take my insurance check and go get another one.

My truck is parked in front of my garage, which happens to be attached to my house. Try to burn my truck, and I will assume you are trying to burn my house and take the appropriate actions, irregardless of whether or not my truck is a "dwelling." Same goes for any of my neighbors houses.

So to look at this rioting problem in another way,

you can also think outside the box and make a strategic decision to live around people who won't tolerate riots. If you live in that environment you might not have to worry about sudden spontaneous riots.

Here is a great article that has me thinking.

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Watch the embedded videos. There were hundreds of people kitted up and open carrying rifles in cour' dalene ID and no looting or rioting. They were deterred. It was quite impressive and wish we could do that here.

Who says we can't? Two thoughts come to mind. 1) Many smaller departments would probably not mind the backup and support, even if they don't actively support it and 2) no one says you have to be geared up and walking down the street. A bunch of neighbors sitting on their porch or front lawn with a longarm next to them would most likely deter all but the most violent of the bunch.


As for me in this whole situation. I live far enough out in the sticks where I don't think the rioters are willing to walk the roads. I do work in Syracuse and am looking at appropriate kitting for the vehicle in case of an emergency situation in regards to rioting.

 

[Chevusa]

ou *can* use non-deadly force to prevent a felon from fleeing the scene in many cases.

And a cop can shoot them in the back as they are running away. Seems like a big difference to me. Just sayin'.

 

[GOPerfect]

And a cop can shoot them in the back as they are running away. Seems like a big difference to me. Just sayin'.

Where in article 35 does he give cops permission to shoot someone in the back and where does it say the everyday gun owner cannot?

 

[Chevusa]

My truck is parked in front of my garage, which happens to be attached to my house. Try to burn my truck, and I will assume you are trying to burn my house and take the appropriate actions, irregardless of whether or not my truck is a "dwelling." Same goes for any of my neighbors houses.

I totally get it. But it's a gray area. It'll all come down to (1) if they decide to charge you and (2) if your lawyer can make it jive with the jury.

You would need to rely on the police and/or DA to do the "right" thing.

By the exact letter of the law, lighting a car in a driveway on fire is not defensible by deadly force.

 

[spat]

There's arson, then there's arson which may be prevented with deadly force. My previous post clearly breaks that down and shows you arson of a vehicle, which everyone knows is a crime, is not a qualifying event to apply deadly force. You can do whatever you want but I'm not going to prison for a car. I'll take my insurance check and go get another one.

Well, the law says "premises" not "dwelling".

Premises includes the whole lot, not just the buildings. You *might* be correct if your car is parked on the public street, but if it's in your driveway then they would be committing arson on the Premises.

 

[Chevusa]

Where in article 35 does he give cops permission to shoot someone in the back and where does it say the everyday gun owner cannot?

I'd have to find the exact but it's along the lines of "someone posing a significant threat to the public" and the exception for it specifies police or peace officers only. Might try to find it later for ya.

 

[Chevusa]

Well, the law says "premises" not "dwelling".

Premises includes the whole lot, not just the buildings. You *might* be correct if your car is parked on the public street, but if it's in your driveway then they would be committing arson on the Premises.

I understand that is your opinion, and I like it. I hope the people who would hold your/my fate would share the same opinion.

 

[spat]

I understand that is your opinion, and I like it. I hope the people who would hold your/my fate would share the same opinion.

I am not saying I would use DPF on someone burning my unoccupied vehicle, nor would I recommend it.

I am just saying that a good lawyer would have a good argument if you did.

 

[Chevusa]

fify

ONLY speak when your lawyer is present.

Exactly.
"I fully intend to cooperate but I am stressed and need a lawyer" Nothing more.

 

[Chevusa]

I am not saying I would use DPF on someone burning my unoccupied vehicle, nor would I recommend it.

I am just saying that a good lawyer would have a good argument if you did.

We are on the same page. You'd just need the 12 other people to agree. If you are being prosecuted for it, the other side will also have a good argument for why you should be convicted as charged.

 

[Celt]

Disregard, I see someone else already made the same point

 

[GOPerfect]

I'd have to find the exact but it's along the lines of "someone posing a significant threat to the public" and the exception for it specifies police or peace officers only. Might try to find it later for ya.

I am not arguing one point or another. There are parts of article 35 specific to employment, for the most part article 35 is for all people.

All I want is for people to read it no it and understand it. This justification for the use of force is one of the most important documents a gun owner can know