MuttCat
.223 Rem
Warning shot to the kidney....
Looters in Buffalo fired at?
- Thread starter MuttCat
- Start date
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Thats a convincing argument
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
For 2000 years the Romans controlled an empire from Europe , N. Africa, and parts of Asia and the middle east, and they did it without formal prisons. The method was much cheaper and much more effective. it was called the cat o nine tails. It was probably one of the most effective deterrents know to man. after seeing the results , or hearing the screams of pain. it became obvious to most that it is something you dont ever want to experience . People who were whipped with it often were not in the mood to go out and do it again .
MuttCat
.223 Rem
Going through the Buffalo news, finger pointing is just starting up. There's some video of trashed stores, the cops have made a few arrests,...everybody is doing a great job....
Even Schumer is getting into the act.
I was living and putting myself through school in Boston during the blizzard of 1978. I do not recall anything about looting or people dying in their cars.
Even Schumer is getting into the act.
I was living and putting myself through school in Boston during the blizzard of 1978. I do not recall anything about looting or people dying in their cars.
Deplorable Me
.700 Nitro Express
Did the looters have matches in their pockets?
Wow, that's pretty crazy. The sad part is they are only hurting themselves and their community. How many of these stores aren't going to be able to open for a while now and how many will never re-open?
As far as the shooting, from a quick search it appears that it is legal, if they can justify it properly. Shooting at people as they run away obviously is never a good look but the law I found says deadly force it is authorized under certain conditions.
S 35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and
in defense of a person in the course of burglary.
3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
As far as the shooting, from a quick search it appears that it is legal, if they can justify it properly. Shooting at people as they run away obviously is never a good look but the law I found says deadly force it is authorized under certain conditions.
S 35.20 Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises and
in defense of a person in the course of burglary.
3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
I wonder if some looter in a shop would be found with a BIC lighter in his pocket and wine bottle full of fuel and stuffed with a rag next to his body. Seems likely. More than a few of them seem to like to try and burn shit down from different videos I have seen.
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
Arson has a provision for an occupied dwelling. If you see someone setting fire to your garden shed in the backyard, you can't shoot him. If your wife is in said shed, be judicious with your marksmanship.
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
People like that don't give a shit about long term. Many of them don't even give a shit about the items they take. Its just a chance to act like a medieval primate for a little while.
When the stores close and fleet then claim racism.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
I don't want to get shot. Part of my plan of action not to is to not loot or commit any type of crime like that. Pretty simple to me what to do if you don't want a store owner to shoot at you. We seem to make things too complicated at times in life.
It's not really their community. They barely own any of it.
RedBreast21
.223 Rem
While I can respect some of the view points here, I am a bit shocked that we aren't talking about who got hit. Oh, that's right, no one. Shots fired down a public street ending up who knows where and many are more concerned that the people doing the shooting had every right to, in their view defend themselves from thieves of material items. How would this all look had someone been hit by one of these rounds and were killed to save the profit on a bag on chips or whatever. Yeah, no. I will never take that position of defense unless all my rounds entered the body of the thief ans they're down hard. I can then account for all my rounds.
Remember! Your level of use of deadly force has a far higher bar than any police officers. It would be best if everyone kept that in mind.
Remember! Your level of use of deadly force has a far higher bar than any police officers. It would be best if everyone kept that in mind.
Last edited:
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
RedBreast21
.223 Rem
These are NY sheriffs? I don't think so. But hey if you find yourself needing a legal defense attorney here in NY just call a Florida attorney. That will go well. lol
spat
.700 Nitro Express
And bodies if it comes to that...
spat
.700 Nitro Express
So, the moral of the story is "don't call 911 after" ?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
The letter of the law says that your bar for use of deadly force is exactly the same as a police officer.
We all know in the real world the DA will not treat it that way, but on paper they are the same.
I'm not sure we know that shots were fired as irresponsibly as you suggest. Do you have any reports to suggest they were?
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
I think what hes saying is that the media ignores other issues and focus'es on what they want. Instead of like how bad the storm was handled , and why they wernt they ready when all the towns were, ect... the focus comes off of city hall and on to the criminals. City hall blames the people stuck on the roads but never has any accountability for their own mistakes. Im just saying, whenever the government wants to dodge an issue they focus on something else. Not that looting shouldnt be covered by no means .
Doesn't the letter of the law also state that injuries and deaths due to a person breaking the law are attributed to that person?
ie: if you break into a store with a friend, and the friend gets shot by the store owner, YOU are the one liable for the death.
And to those who feel that "material things" aren't worth taking the life of a criminal, I'm glad that you are in a position that the items you purchased with your hard work mean nothing, or are in a position that everything you own is superfluous and not required for day-to-day living.
Not everyone can come back from having their property stolen.
Not everyone feels criminals should be rewarded for their bad behavior.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
No, those people are right, that flat-screen TV isn't worth someone's life.
But if that someone decides to risk their life to steal one, it's not anyone else's responsibility to protect them.
Just like speeding shouldn’t be a capital crime, but if you choose to do it around "dead man's curve" in a blizzard, it might just end up being that way, and it's nobody's fault but the speeder.
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
Shooting always requires you to be aware of your surroundings, yes. For sure. In this case the vast majority of the city was locked down and really no one was out and about. It would be different if you were shooting at a purse snatcher in Times Square on December 31st.
Greyhair
9mm
Greyhair
9mm
Florida!
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
2 Florida Sheriffs
If I recall it doesn't have to even be occupied.
It can be an abandoned shed.
The logic is the firefighters rushing to put the fire out are at risk of a crash and injury and injuring the public,. The firefighters can still get hurt or killed fighting a fire. The fire can spread to other occupied structures.
It's essentially open season on Arsonists because their actions create secondary effects which put others lives in imminent danger even if the building they light on fire is vacant.
No that's Grady Judd from Polk county Florida he's a legend
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
The arsonist can be charged with the aftermath, yes. Just like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. But if you use DPF to shoot someone setting fire to your vacant garden shed, you're going to jail.
I'm not so sure. Hopefully neither have to find out.
I'll have to re read the arson subsection
dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
It's not spelled out in Penal Code 35. There was a court case that defined the "occupied' part from years ago. I can't find it now, I forget which one. Chris Fry of MDTS used to reference it in all his defensive courses.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
To say nothing of the fact that even in a dense urban environment there *are* a lot of adequate backstops.
Now, a basic masonry wall might be inadequate for target shooting where it will see thousands of rounds, but it is plenty for a self defense incident where it will see a handful of pistol caliber hits.
Even a cheap brick or stone veneer will sap enough energy from a 9mm that you don't have to worry about it being dangerous too far.