Guns, Guardian Angels, Vigilantes, and Dirty Looks

Definitely. And Thank You, "Sweet Young Whatsername" for creating that thread in the first place.

Even though you STILL haven't posted a better pic of the Fedora. :shame:

Hey look! There's a dead horse! Let's kick it! oke:

 

As a 25+ year veteran of the Guardian Angel Safety Patrol and, before that, an MP, I can bring up several points:
1. Any criminal activity an your immediate vicinity is a direct threat to you. It would be foolish to be complacent in the presence of such.
2. Extreme force is usually justified only in rare cases. Successful self-defense may require "shooting first", though.
3. Whether you are justified or not, if you kill someone, you will go before a Grand Jury and pay about $25,000 in legal fees.
4. Almost anything that man did, including shaking his fist, would act as a deterent to later crime. Giving a description of the vehicle used probably would have resulted in an arrest and recovery of the stolen goods.
5. I agree with the Ranger. Unwanted entry into my home my house might not go well. I own guns, but would probably use something else, because bullets keep going after hitting their target. I would also endeavor to leave guest alive because of 3 above.

 

"Attorney: Mr. Shooter, why did you shoot my client?
Shooter: Because he attacked me.
Attorney: And why did he attack you?
Shooter: Because I shook my fist at him.
Attorney: And why did you shake your fist at him?
Shooter: Because he was breaking into the neighbor's house.
Attorney: Was he breaking into your house?
Shooter: No.
Attorney: So my client didn't attack you until you provoked him?
Shooter: Yes.
Jury: The defendant is guilty of actions leading to permanent disability on the part of the plaintiff, damages to be awarded in the amount of $1,000,000.
Judge: Case closed"

This can become a little unclear as laws differ from Country to Country and State to State.
But from an Australian point of view, thats crap. Your saying that waving your fist at someone justified the attack by the client and made it unlawful for you to defend yourself. The fact that you might shake your fist or yell out a challenge because you observe someone committing a crime is not an unlawful act and would hardly count as provocation. The provocation defence here basically only assists in minor assaults. Your resulting action has to be immediate, before you had time to cool down (ie. not planned revenge) and be comparative to the provocation. (eg. I insult your mother, you slap me.)

The biggest issue in shooting someone in self defence is justifying the amount of forced used. You have prove that you were in fear of your's or someone elses life, or grievious bodily harm, before using potentially lethal force against another.

So if someone breaks into my house and I have a gun, I let him know I have a gun and tell him to leave, or that he is under arrest and has to remain there. if he then comes at me with a weapon that could possibly kill me, then its no holds bard. Its always a touchy one though and like GuardianAngel said, a lot of the time you will end up having to defend yourself in front of a jury.

GA if your worried about the bullets travelling further after hitting the body, get some good hollowpoint bullets. Like "Black Talons" there designed to stay in the body.

 

1. You're assuming I'm saying violence is called for.
3. As you can tell, I'm behind the times.
4. It would still act as a deterrent. Burglars don't like attention.
5. Of course, if you shoot someone, don't try to wound them.
Death is a threshold I would like to avoid. You could say that allows the perp to seek revenge, but it happens less often than it is threatened. on the other hand, if I shake my fist at someone burglarizing my neighbor's house, and they attack, my response would definitely be self-defence.
The most common intruders on my property are pets and children.

To Sachmo:
I have a friend who recommends Glazer Safety Slugs. I like the name.
You play the trumpet?

 

My opinion too, Shining One......

You big handsome game-developing hunk!

 

Technically, since the 2 burglars were shot by the old man in his own front yard, it amounted to self-defense. He may not have intended to shoot them when he exited his house, but nothing goes according to plan. If I were a burglar, and I ran into someone packing a shotgun, I might not come back.
Gaear seems to be referring to the civil consequences of the issue. I'm not sure about dead people filing civil suits (really). Additionally, defense against such a suit is likely to be expensive, even without penalties.
My main objection to the shooting is that the unknown people next door might not be burglars. It's hard to be certain. So call the police with a good description.
In and of itself, shooting people who routinely hurt others should only be a misdemeanor. Perhaps littering or violating noise ordinances. Oops, did I type that out loud?
Thank you, you sweet, young, nameless thing, you.

 

You're welcome.

 

Fun fact, in the topic of the man that shoot the robbers, if its the case I am thinking of, he isnt in any legal trouble, and honestly I am deeply greatful. In a world where a crackhead with an itch will shoot you dead for your shoes, I thinks its a wounderful thing that some people actually feel the urge to *stop* such activity. being a thief has a high risk quotient... if you cant stand getting shot at, find a new line of work.I can only hope that the weak inded "make gun's ilegal' mentality that has put us all in such peril will end someday.Honestly.. Vigilantism is probably the saving grace of this god forsaken hole of a country(keep in mind, I *love* my country, but I believe our goverenment has ruined it.) Not to mention, h only took action in the face of the inaction of the (oft worthless)police.May the man be blessed, and praised as a true hero.

also regarding

are you serious?!?! I mean, you expect me to refrain from owning valuble things, and/or install a secruity system costing in the 1000's of $ range, because the burglars have rights? where do you live? Ive got a set of thieves tools ive been itching to try. =p If the police had done there job, and responded to the call of the shooter, there wouldnt have been a shooting... Justice for the criminal is a joke... and I speak from the point of view of the criminal. civil suits from a case like this are the bane of our socity imo, I mean honestly.. what rights should you have, after breaking into someone elses home. honestly shooting is really to gentle... this isnt a case of someone shoplifting a meal, this is a case of someone invading your *home* the one place you should ALWAYS feel safe.
*grrrrrrr*

 

Instead of killing him, you can use a taser:

It will stop him, it's painful, and leaves a mark.

That'll teach him.

 

I think that the availability of firearms especially handguns leads to more shootings. I New Zealand there is hardly any gun violence (NZ's average homicide rate is 65 per year) and I think its for the following reasons.

Most people who own guns are hunters (so they would have hunting rifles and shotguns) but to legally own a pistol is hard work. First off you need an E Category firearms license which is hard to get - expensive and PsyEval (E Cat for any weapon with a pistol grip in fact) rather than the A Category license for shotguns and rifles, secondly you have to be an active member of a pistol cub which means you participate in club activities at least once a month, and thirdly there just aren't many handguns available to buy here.

Another thing I think that helps is that I have never seen an armed law enforcement officer in real life. I know some (or possibly all) cops carry glocks and maybe shotguns in their vehicles but they don't usually wear them on their hips.

Because of this most offenders don't carry guns, armed robberies are usually committed with bludgeoning or slashing weapons - if you have a gun then the police will turn up with guns and shoot you (depending on what part of New Zealand you're in it'll either be the Armed Offenders Squad (rural), the Emergency Response Unit (most cities) or S.W.A.T in Auckland (there is only one S.W.A.T in New Zealand). Recently a man was shot dead by a Police officer outside one of my friends houses, he was the 21st person to be killed by police since 1941.

I'm glad that hardly anyone owns guns here, once when I'd just got new neighbors and hadn't met them yet I locked my keys in the house so I broke in. If he was going to go all vigilante and shoot the intruder he would've shot an innocent person. I wouldn't feel safe knowing my neighbors were the vigilante type.