Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 41
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    6,327

    Still want to be more like England

    http://realestate.aol.com/pictures/f...e00dynlsec0003

    So do anyone still want to go down the path England is taking.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,477
    England has turned into one screwed up place.

    I can't even comprehend what the English Government is thinking. To bad the British people have little to no power to rid themselves of of this stupid government.

    We at least can change what our government is doing, although at this point the damage maybe to severe to recover from
    I only drink a little, but when I do
    I turn into another person and THAT person drinks a lot

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    425
    Let 'em try that shiz here in Texas.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    Quote Originally Posted by classical View Post
    http://realestate.aol.com/pictures/f...e00dynlsec0003

    So do anyone still want to go down the path England is taking.
    Being Canada I guess we are game. We actually have the same concept in law. You can use as much force as necessary to defend yourself. Our law does take a dim view of you trying to kill someone once the danger is over.

    From the same article where the realestate.aol.com article came from.

    The Government has promised that people who fight back against burglars will find the law is on their side, so long as they do not use excessive or disproportionate violence.
    Just curious. In the U.S. if you fight off a robber in your house and he leaves and runs down the street with his tail between his legs would you be charged if you loaded up a rifle and shot him in the back?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,918
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    Being Canada I guess we are game. We actually have the same concept in law. You can use as much force as necessary to defend yourself. Our law does take a dim view of you trying to kill someone once the danger is over.

    From the same article where the realestate.aol.com article came from.



    Just curious. In the U.S. if you fight off a robber in your house and he leaves and runs down the street with his tail between his legs would you be charged if you loaded up a rifle and shot him in the back?
    Better to shoot them first and be sure that they are dead. No survivors.

    Yes, that is a callous attitude, but what kind of attitude does it take for a scumbag to enter my house with intent to commit robbery or worse?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,507

    I think I should be allowed to go to his house to kill him

    What does the fact that he got away have to do with it?
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,507

    If you kill someone - always remember their last words to you

    Which were: I am going to kill you.

    PHM
    --------



    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post
    Better to shoot them first and be sure that they are dead. No survivors.

    Yes, that is a callous attitude, but what kind of attitude does it take for a scumbag to enter my house with intent to commit robbery or worse?
    PHM
    --------
    The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    425
    Laws and use of deadly force are based upon being able to prove that you were in fear for your life. If the perp ran from your house and you shot him, in the back or not, you would be charged with a criminal offense. We want the right to protect ourselves and our families..that's all

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Poodle Head Mikey View Post
    What does the fact that he got away have to do with it?



    I seem to recall something about "an eye for an eye" I have always liked that concept.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,477
    Quote Originally Posted by printer2 View Post
    Being Canada I guess we are game. We actually have the same concept in law. You can use as much force as necessary to defend yourself. Our law does take a dim view of you trying to kill someone once the danger is over.

    From the same article where the realestate.aol.com article came from.



    Just curious. In the U.S. if you fight off a robber in your house and he leaves and runs down the street with his tail between his legs would you be charged if you loaded up a rifle and shot him in the back?

    Yes, but thats not what the article is about is it. This guy is being charged for beating the guy while still IN THE HOME. In this country we have the GOD GIVEN RIGHT to kill anyone in our home that was not invited. Weather the bad guy is armed or not, we have the right to shoot your sorry, uninvited butt dead......GOD BLESS AMERICA (and pass the ammunition)

    Some states also have the Castle Doctrine, which basically says, that a perpetrator's estate may not sue you if you kill him in your home (thats a very simple explanation of the CD )
    I only drink a little, but when I do
    I turn into another person and THAT person drinks a lot

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,918

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,918
    Quote Originally Posted by jmac00 View Post
    Yes, but thats not what the article is about is it. This guy is being charged for beating the guy while still IN THE HOME. In this country we have the GOD GIVEN RIGHT to kill anyone in our home that was not invited. Weather the bad guy is armed or not, we have the right to shoot your sorry, uninvited butt dead......GOD BLESS AMERICA (and pass the ammunition)

    Some states also have the Castle Doctrine, which basically says, that a perpetrator's estate may not sue you if you kill him in your home (thats a very simple explanation of the CD )
    Sadly, I don't think that this is the case everywhere.

    I still think that some states require you retreat to a safe point and wait while the thug comes to you or robs you blind.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    6,327
    It depends on the state but in most cases no you cannot pursue and retaliate but it would also depend on the circumstances.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event