View Single Post
Old 01-02-2013, 11:03 AM
tynashracing tynashracing is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 215
tynashracing is on a distinguished road
Originally Posted by PersonaNonGrata View Post
Thank you. I think I make a lot of sense.

New Orleans was reputed to have the most corrupt police department in the country. There is plenty of video to who NOPD's "finest" helping themselves to goods and the worst was those officers who murdered civilians and tried to cover it up but they got caught and convicted.

I am in a job where I am sworn to uphold the law and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. I mention this because I think it bears on my point of view, for better or worse. I believe in the law and uphold it. I agree that in an ideal society everyone is afforded due process and no one has lethal weapons, and everyone makes the right decisions but that is simply not reality. I think your premise is flawed in assuming that the bad guys, or culprits, care about the same things you want us to care about. Specifically, you want people acting in self defense to give the culprit the chance to stand trial and face due process of law instead of being shot and killed in the street. I have to say that is far too generous a view given that same culprit and other culprits like him don't give a rats behind about his victims, or due process. What you propose is that law abiding citizens would refrain from self-defense and instead submit themselves to the whims of criminals who have no regard for laws much less the rights of their victims. A harsh view? Yes but that is the world we live in. Every single minute of every single day, criminals take from victims in any way they can even if that means with force and violence. They enter our homes and businesses and are willing to use deadly force to get their way.

Now you might ask "what if the citizen makes a mistake". Well, that can happen and does rarely and there is recourse for that. Invalid or imperfect self-defense can result in a manslaughter conviction. On the other hand, if the citizen is not allowed any sort of self-defense the result for him could be death.

The idea of less than lethal options is a nice ideal but not realistic and subjects those who rely on them to a false sense of security. We all know how ineffective pepper spray can be and tasers are not foolproof either. I submit that a citizen who uses pepper spray unsuccessfully is at substantially greater risk of death or great bodily injury. The reality is that some situations require lethal force. If the criminal is armed, is larger or stronger than the victim, or several other factors, the only effective response is lethal force. Don't bring pepper spray to a gunfight. I truly believe an assailant is intending to cause death or great bodily harm to me or my loved ones, I will respond with lethal force, not to kill but to stop the threat. I say lethal force because the force that the assailant is to apply is also lethal.

I see you take your oath seriously . And, I bet you have a few years under your belt. You make me proud of what my country should always stand for when dealing with our liberties and Constitution.

It's awesome to see real patriotism is alive and well with those commissioned to protect my rights from foreign and domestic tyranny!
2002 4.4 Sport
134k miles and counting
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links