• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Shoot First

kmcdowel

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
253
Location
Marquette, Michigan, USA
imported post

What is this all about? I just came acrossTHIS seemingly anti gun website, and thought you all could provide some info on it (and the controversy surrounding it).

THIS website describes it as the castle doctrine, applied to your body (i.e., you have no duty to retreat, even when outside your home)

So, what are your thoughts? I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere.
 

IndianaBoy79

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
639
Location
Eagle, Idaho, USA
imported post

Not an unusual interpretation of this law by the anti-gun left.

First of all, the so called "casle doctrine" has been recognized by many states for many years, at least in practice. The idea is that as a normal citizen, you should have the right to meet force with force when you believe it is the best option available to you. Laws that require you to retreat first ignore the fact that retreat may not be your best option for survival.
In any gunfight, survival is my main concern and retreat may indeed be my best option at times. The castle doctrine recognizes another important aspect...it's not just about my rights, its about the attacker's. Someone coming to do myself or my family harm has forfeited their right to be safe from me returning fire.
With or without a duty to retreat, we have a duty as firearm owners to shoot responsibly and know what is beyond our target (enemy, attacker). We have a moral obligation to only take a life when nessesary. This law wasn't passed so people could shoot others just because they "feel" afraid, it was passed so people could meet force with force. Another important aspect of this law in most states is that "a reasonable person" would have to fear for their life. This means, if you can't explain your reasoning to your fellow peers on a jury, this law won't protect you. Simply shooting someone cause they look at me wrong and "scare" me isn't what this law protects.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

Unfortunately it isthe sameinterpretaion by many on the pro-gun right. Too many feel that this gives them the right to shootanyone beating on their front door at 3am or anyone who outweighs them by 30 lbsand says they are going to beat them up. I agree totally with the law and its intention but common sense seems to be in short order these days and too many use it as an excuse to pull their gun and fire. JUst because someone is breaking into my home doesn't mean I have toshoot them but neither should I be required to run out the back door because they have all the rights.
 

IndianaBoy79

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
639
Location
Eagle, Idaho, USA
imported post

PT111 wrote:
I agree totally with the law and its intention but common sense seems to be in short order these days and too many use it as an excuse to pull their gun and fire.
I'd like to see the evidence on that comment. I haven't seen any real evidence that since these castle laws have been passed that a lot of people have "used it as an exuse to pull their gun." If anything, the statistics I have studied show that the more a citizen has rights in reguards to firearms, the less the crime. While I have heard people talk about how they would shoot someone over this or that matter on boards like this and other boards, I haven't actually seen it happen. I think most of these people are just talking out their butts.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

IndianaBoy79 wrote:
PT111 wrote:
I agree totally with the law and its intention but common sense seems to be in short order these days and too many use it as an excuse to pull their gun and fire.
I'd like to see the evidence on that comment. I haven't seen any real evidence that since these castle laws have been passed that a lot of people have "used it as an exuse to pull their gun." If anything, the statistics I have studied show that the more a citizen has rights in reguards to firearms, the less the crime. While I have heard people talk about how they would shoot someone over this or that matter on boards like this and other boards, I haven't actually seen it happen. I think most of these people are just talking out their butts.

Maybe instead of use I should have said see. I don't know of any real incidents other than people running their mouths. The real concern comes from people reading the "Shoot First" articles rather than actually knowing the law. Until I took my last CWP class I did not realize thatthe lawhad been changed and I don't thinkmost peoplehave a cluewhat you would be talking about. However that same bunch have never heard of duty to retreat either. Take the case of the 75 year old lady shooting her nephew through her door because she heard someone breaking in. I doubt that she knew what the laws were, just that she was being attacked.

In the case of Joe Horn in Texas I doubt that he was concerned about the law at the time he shot the two robbers breaking into his neighbor's home. A friend of mine used to be a constable that had to serve warrants. He said never try to serve one when someone was surrounded by his friends. If they run their mouths then they feel like they have to back it up in front of their buddies but get them alone and they go like a lamb. :cool:

Just remember the 4 guides of Castle Doctrine and you won't have a problem, especially the one that says the amount of force should be proportional.
 

Mainsail

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,533
Location
Silverdale, Washington, USA
imported post

Whatever you do, don't bother posting the text so those of us behind a .mil firewall can know what it's all about. :banghead:



95b556b3-01a6-46a8-984b-a91906a65a4f.jpg
 
Top