Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

ratherfish wrote:10-4

Commonly referred to as suicide by cop. You'll be asked once if they're not too tweaked to surrender your firearms.

I don't know many who could out gun the police.

Might be good to induce a double check on the warrants address though...

After being assaulted at my house in April, 5 days later a cop came to issue a citation to the assailant. He came to MY house looking to find the assailant who lives ACROSS THE STREET. Maybe I'm a super pro address reader, but who doesn't know that one side is odds and another evens?

Me thinks anything that forces the ignorant to "double check" their work before invading someone's home IS A DAMNED FINE LAW.


I was not long ago banned from a not-so-fine forum for stating one specific time I feel it is perfectly fine to shoot a cop. A negro family in a nice neighborhood in ATL suburbs had their dog in the garage (open IIRC) tethered inside. Some deputy dumbsheeot entered the wrong house llooking for a criminal and proceeded to shoot this tethered animal inside some innocent family's residence.

That would have led to me grabbing my rifle and most likely blasting to hell anyone responsible. If this act is illegal, dangerous and in fact, criminal, I don't see why anything changes just because of a piece of metal on one's chest. If I go to jail for it, so be it. At what point are we MERE citizens? That crosses the line pretty plainly for me.

So overall, no matter your position we're all in agreement on three things:

1.) Police REALLY need to SUPER verify that ADDRESS! No exceptions!

2.) "No-Knock" Warrants need to go away. They're unnecessary in most situations, and just an excuse to "SWAT" up.

3.) The 4th amendment is under attack from drones, hackers for the guv'mint, and Bureaucractic types.

Sound about right?

Tweaker wrote:

ratherfish wrote:10-4

Commonly referred to as suicide by cop. You'll be asked once if they're not too tweaked to surrender your firearms.

I don't know many who could out gun the police.

Might be good to induce a double check on the warrants address though...

After being assaulted at my house in April, 5 days later a cop came to issue a citation to the assailant. He came to MY house looking to find the assailant who lives ACROSS THE STREET. Maybe I'm a super pro address reader, but who doesn't know that one side is odds and another evens?

Me thinks anything that forces the ignorant to "double check" their work before invading someone's home IS A DAMNED FINE LAW.


I was not long ago banned from a not-so-fine forum for stating one specific time I feel it is perfectly fine to shoot a cop. A negro family in a nice neighborhood in ATL suburbs had their dog in the garage (open IIRC) tethered inside. Some deputy dumbsheeot entered the wrong house llooking for a criminal and proceeded to shoot this tethered animal inside some innocent family's residence.

That would have led to me grabbing my rifle and most likely blasting to hell anyone responsible. If this act is illegal, dangerous and in fact, criminal, I don't see why anything changes just because of a piece of metal on one's chest. If I go to jail for it, so be it. At what point are we MERE citizens? That crosses the line pretty plainly for me.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I think you'd be in trouble even if the guy who shot the dog WAS NOT a cop. You posit a case where you would use deadly force to protect NOT your life and safety or that of your family, buy mere property (which is the legal status of a dog no matter how much the kiddies love it). That is an unjustifiable use of deadly force, and you're almost surely going to be up on a murder rap.

Sounds about right Reverenddel.

Tweaked, I understand the outrage at that, but please don't do that. I imagine it would be the last we heard of you.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

dorminWS wrote:I think you'd be in trouble even if the guy who shot the dog WAS NOT a cop. You posit a case where you would use deadly force to protect NOT your life and safety or that of your family, buy mere property (which is the legal status of a dog no matter how much the kiddies love it). That is an unjustifiable use of deadly force, and you're almost surely going to be up on a murder rap.

Just as a thought exercise here, assume some perp had just shot my tethered dog in my garage (not a cop, as you stipulated).... I would agree with you if someone was in my open garage stealing my lawnmower that deadly force is certainly not justified. However, I think the situation is much more volatile when someone initiates the use of deadly force on my property to kill my "watch dog". "Gee, he entered my garage, he had a gun (opportunity), he used it to kill my watch dog (intent) so I assumed I or my family was next in his sights and I stopped him" Not as cut and dried to me as you seem to think. Now expand the thought exercise to someone, not in unform, who SAYS he's a cop... 'cuz criminals would never try to deceive you, would they? What would a reasonable man do? a jury? I dunno...Let the debate continue...

BW1911 wrote:

dorminWS wrote:I think you'd be in trouble even if the guy who shot the dog WAS NOT a cop. You posit a case where you would use deadly force to protect NOT your life and safety or that of your family, buy mere property (which is the legal status of a dog no matter how much the kiddies love it). That is an unjustifiable use of deadly force, and you're almost surely going to be up on a murder rap.

Just as a thought exercise here, assume some perp had just shot my tethered dog in my garage (not a cop, as you stipulated).... I would agree with you if someone was in my open garage stealing my lawnmower that deadly force is certainly not justified. However, I think the situation is much more volatile when someone initiates the use of deadly force on my property to kill my "watch dog". "Gee, he entered my garage, he had a gun (opportunity), he used it to kill my watch dog (intent) so I assumed I or my family was next in his sights and I stopped him" Not as cut and dried to me as you seem to think. Now expand the thought exercise to someone, not in unform, who SAYS he's a cop... 'cuz criminals would never try to deceive you, would they? What would a reasonable man do? a jury? I dunno...Let the debate continue...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Oh, I myself would be willing to say that any man that would shoot a tethered dog NEEDS killin'. But there ain't NO way I'd risk MY freedom and MY life (they execute cop killers) on the chances I could convince 12 of my peers that the guy shot my dog, so that meant he was going to shoot me next. It may be useful (speaking of thought exercises) to think about it this way: What if he shot your car when he came into the garage instead of your dog?

Again, I would and will kill ANYONE who enters my house unlawfully and shoots at ANYTHING. That's that.

Anyone who thinks this situation is one that permits thoughtful reflection or any sort of deliberative process has not done a lick of study on how a gun fight works. When someone enters my residence shooting AT ANYTHING...that IS a GUNFIGHT!

In the "dog shot in the garage" scenario, we have a trespasser INSIDE your house, firing a gun. How does that not warrent return fire?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

But but but he gots a shiny piece o tin, a HS edukation and has been granted super fun toys, full immunity and a license to kill by GOV CO!

SHMIV wrote:In the "dog shot in the garage" scenario, we have a trespasser INSIDE your house, firing a gun. How does that not warrent return fire?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Completely 100% justified. How much more clear can his intent to commit bodily harm to you or your family be at that point? Hell, if that person comes in my yard and just pulls out a weapon I am going to react to protect myself and my family.
A little food for thought here, there are cartel members and thugs out west who are dressing up like police officers and then using that disguise to kidnap/home invade/rob motorists etc. I can certainly see people being apprehensive about who "cops" really are.

"When someone enters my residence shooting AT ANYTHING...that IS a GUNFIGHT!"

For The Win... That is CORRECT!

See, I knew if the right question was asked somebody with balls would finally show up on this site! I think tweaker and myself are on the same page. As for the garage debate, I'll say it again ------ come in my house unwarranted and die, come shooting in my house and die, moral...... just leave me and my home the hell alone.

Sometimes a feller is better off to think with his brain than his cojones. That's all I'm sayin'.

davasmith wrote:See, I knew if the right question was asked somebody with balls would finally show up on this site! I think tweaker and myself are on the same page. As for the garage debate, I'll say it again ------ come in my house unwarranted and die, come shooting in my house and die, moral...... just leave me and my home the hell alone.

I'm right on track with you. Somebody would die that day.

Tweaker I am not saying you would not be justified and iT is likely even within the law to shoot in such a situation. However that piece of tin on the mans chest means if you shoot at him you will likely be dead. Not saying that it right. Just repeating what my daddy taught me that you can be right and dead at the same time.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Quoth the VA state Constitution:

Section 2. People the source of power.That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people, that magistrates are their trustees and servants, and at all times amenable to them.

...at all times amenable...


Section 8a, 10, 11 are interesting.

http://legis.virginia.gov/Laws/search/constitution.htm

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Thus, the nature of a dilemma. There is no happy ending when someone with either evil in their hearts or idiocy in they brain bucket comes bringing hellfire and damnation.

I know that there are 8 living beings in my residence. I am responsible for all of them, and also most able to defend them. I have spent a hell of a lot of time, money and effort to make this a realistic option. So no, I am not going to remain in a fetal position on the couch, fingers covered in Cheeto dust when shots are fired in anger in my dwelling.

I don't hate cops, but I abhor stupidity, recklessness and abuses of power. This family in the ATL encountered all three.

Tweaker wrote:Thus, the nature of a dilemma. There is no happy ending when someone with either evil in their hearts or idiocy in they brain bucket comes bringing hellfire and damnation.

I don't hate cops, but I abhor stupidity, recklessness and abuses of power. This family in the ATL encountered all three.

That pretty much sums up the way I feel about it. But I would imagine it would be a real uphill battle to clear yourself.

This is IF you lived through the encounter which is far from a forgone conclusion.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

English not being my first language, I just learned a new word today
a·me·na·ble
   [uh-mee-nuh-buhl, uh-men-uh-] Show IPA
adjective
1.
ready or willing to answer, act, agree, or yield; open to influence, persuasion, or advice; agreeable; submissive;

Oh, I know that very well.. open to influence and persuasion? Like in ok, I'm available to bribe, or "lobby" how it called here? And this is in constitution???
The officials in my country were always veeery "amenable" and their "submissive" status is direct proportional with the money

And to be on subject, in Romania cops are extremely reluctant to draw pistol, even when they are directly attacked and beaten. Because the law is made to protect the criminals, and if the police shoot it, it may be likely going to jail. Of course that is a good thing, but here is the other extreme with trigger happy boys and immunity and cops fraternity. The police shooting cases should be investigated not by other police buddies, but by civic organizations. That is what you should ask for. Then the cop will think twice to pull the trigger, knowing that it is responsible for his actions.