• Go to page :
  • 1 2
  • Text Only
Deleted. Unnecessary feather ruffling.

Technologist said:   as in "It was HUGE man!!!"That's what she said!

Make signs that say, "Look Up - Smile For The Camera" and tape one on the inside of each ground floor window, doors with glass and screen door. The lettering must be large enough to read in dim light.

Sonofspam said:   OliverQuackenbush said:   wannabe murderers!!!!!Did you live under power lines as a kid? Eat paint chips?

Maybe, if you're lucky, one of your armed neighbors will post a sign like this one linked below. You'll feel much better, right?

Gun Free Home


http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/21/3107666/teen-in-fla-fatal-...

All guns should not be be banned. But handguns should. Responsible ownership of HARD TO CONCEAL rifles should be encouraged in a polite society.

ashish1t said:   cheaper here:- http://www.readytodefend.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cP...

Congratulations, friend! You just identified an actual deal, unlike the OP, who really should have put this in OT cause it's demonstrably NOT any kind of deal. (Since when does something selling for freaking LIST PRICE belong in HD?)

I like this one: "No Trespassing, Trespassers will be shot, survivor will be shot again!"
http://www.amazon.com/Trespassing-Vintage-Look-Metal-Sign/dp/B00...

Great sign, but hardly a deal at $34+ship

mungbai said:   

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/11/21/3107666/teen-in-fla-fatal-...

All guns should not be be banned. But handguns should. Responsible ownership of HARD TO CONCEAL rifles should be encouraged in a polite society.


This is a very sad story, but

a)This "accidental" thing is not that common... most of the "children" killed by guns are gang members under 18.
b)There are lots of sad stories like this that have no guns in them.

I would feel more strongly that the stepfather he got the gun from should be prosecuted for failing to secure the gun (even if it was legal)... It was just sitting in the closet.

Also, this was not the first time this kid carried the gun around. Evidently, lots of people knew, but nobody reported it... shouldn't those people be prosecuted?

If the gun was illegal, as they often are in these types of stories, then banning handguns would not have helped this situation.

Not trying to get into any big "gun control" debate, just saying that this sad article is not a basis for "All handguns being banned".

SteveG

I think the sign would have a certain deterent effect. That being said if anything were to happen and an intruder or burglar were shot on your property it may be enough to get you convicted of murder. Imagine the news reports and hungry for publicity DA using the display of the sign as enough evidence of your premeditation to kill someone. They'd make mincemeat of you here in Maryland and your @ss be sitting in jail in no time. Defend yourself and family but do it smartly and quietly and keep your mouth shut.

Markfaafp said:   ganjagadget said:   ParkRoad22 said:   I bought one of these signs last year, someone stole it.

Buy another and booby trap it by electrifying it with a 20 AMP dedicated circuit or with a bear trap



Great idea, but then the crook will sue you!!!!!


Maybe in CA or NY. Not in TX or the south!

akbungle said:   

Think he's compensating for something?

Also I don't know what castle you live in but you would go to jail for firing that gun just because someone was messing around with your crap.


Castle Doctrine

Typical conditions that apply to some Castle Doctrine laws include:

- An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully or forcibly enter an occupied residence, business or vehicle.
- The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home. Some states apply the Castle Doctrine if the occupant(s) of the home reasonably believe the intruder intends to commit a lesser felony such as arson or burglary.

Do you feel lucky?

"On an early October morning, Mr. Baker heard a noise - his Mexican red-headed parrot, Salvador, had squawked an emphatic "Hello," something he does whenever someone passes by. Mr. Baker flipped on a closed-circuit monitor and saw a man walk into his garage.

Mr. Baker said he had seen the man before, on tapes of the earlier burglaries.

"If he needed a fast fix, he'd go into my garage and grab something and take it to his drug connection," Mr. Baker said earlier this month.

That night, he decided to confront the intruder, identified as John Woodson, 46, of Dallas, who had a criminal record for various offenses, including burglary.

"I went out the front door and came through the gate, and when he started walking from the back of the garage toward me, that's when I shot him," Mr. Baker said.

When police arrived, a homicide detective watched the video and told Mr. Baker, "This is by the book."

The case received international attention, largely because of Salvador, the parrot. But Dallas grand jurors treated it as Texas juries usually do: They declined to indict. "

And

""In 25 years, I've never known a Harris County court to prosecute a homeowner or businessman for killing a burglar or robber," Harris County Assistant District Attorney Bill Delmore told legislators. "We don't do that.""

sgogo said:   
This is a very sad story, but

a)This "accidental" thing is not that common... most of the "children" killed by guns are gang members under 18.

SteveG


Or, if you're the CDC, you define a child as "children and adolescents under age 20." So when a 19 yr. old shoots an 18 yr. old, it's another "child" felled by gun violence.

97snake said:   akbungle said:   

Think he's compensating for something?

Also I don't know what castle you live in but you would go to jail for firing that gun just because someone was messing around with your crap.


Castle Doctrine

Typical conditions that apply to some Castle Doctrine laws include:

- An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully or forcibly enter an occupied residence, business or vehicle.
- The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home. Some states apply the Castle Doctrine if the occupant(s) of the home reasonably believe the intruder intends to commit a lesser felony such as arson or burglary.

Do you feel lucky?

"On an early October morning, Mr. Baker heard a noise - his Mexican red-headed parrot, Salvador, had squawked an emphatic "Hello," something he does whenever someone passes by. Mr. Baker flipped on a closed-circuit monitor and saw a man walk into his garage.

Mr. Baker said he had seen the man before, on tapes of the earlier burglaries.

"If he needed a fast fix, he'd go into my garage and grab something and take it to his drug connection," Mr. Baker said earlier this month.

That night, he decided to confront the intruder, identified as John Woodson, 46, of Dallas, who had a criminal record for various offenses, including burglary.

"I went out the front door and came through the gate, and when he started walking from the back of the garage toward me, that's when I shot him," Mr. Baker said.

When police arrived, a homicide detective watched the video and told Mr. Baker, "This is by the book."

The case received international attention, largely because of Salvador, the parrot. But Dallas grand jurors treated it as Texas juries usually do: They declined to indict. "

And

""In 25 years, I've never known a Harris County court to prosecute a homeowner or businessman for killing a burglar or robber," Harris County Assistant District Attorney Bill Delmore told legislators. "We don't do that.""


If you shot someone in the back who was running away after stealing your sign, you'd get charged with murder. And rightfully so. And I doubt a grand jury would be sympathetic to someone using deadly force against someone who stole a sign off a yard. Note in the above example (1) the incident took place inside the physical structure of the house, and (2) the deceased approached the guy. In that circumstance, he had a reasonable argument that deadly force was required to protect his own life.

To recap:

Nowhere can you kill people for taking your crap. If you do this, you deserve the lengthy prison sentence you will get.

HOWEVER, if in the course of stealing your crap, someone invades your home and you feel threatened, if you shoot them you MAY get off. But its still a bad idea.

This is not legal advice.

mungbai said:   

If you shot someone in the back who was running away after stealing your sign, you'd get charged with murder. And rightfully so. And I doubt a grand jury would be sympathetic to someone using deadly force against someone who stole a sign off a yard. Note in the above example (1) the incident took place inside the physical structure of the house, and (2) the deceased approached the guy. In that circumstance, he had a reasonable argument that deadly force was required to protect his own life.

To recap:

Nowhere can you kill people for taking your crap. If you do this, you deserve the lengthy prison sentence you will get.

HOWEVER, if in the course of stealing your crap, someone invades your home and you feel threatened, if you shoot them you MAY get off. But its still a bad idea.

This is not legal advice.


Let me post this part of the story again: "I went out the front door and came through the gate, and when he started walking from the back of the garage toward me, that's when I shot him"

According to your interpretation, the homeowner would be going to jail because he killed someone for taking his crap. He OBVIOUSLY wasn't in fear of his life and feeling threatened, because he left his home in order to confront the thief. He was NOT inside of a physical structure, yet, oddly enough, he wasn't indicted.

I'm not an attorney either, but it's not as cut and dry as you seem to think it is. It definitely varies from state to state, with Texas DA's less likely to indict in the first place. Yes, shooting someone in the back (which was not even mentioned in your initial post) complicates things, which is why you shout at them to have them turn around first.

What's to stop a homeowner from shooting someone on their property, and then placing a knife next to the corpse? Then it becomes the homeowner's word against the dead man's, and we all know that dead men tell no tales, despite all of the wildly ridiculous stuff that CSI would like you to believe is possible.

cleek said:   A friend who lived in a bad part of town just but up two silhouette targets with the head & upper body perforated by a couple magazines of .45. One on the back storm door and one on the front. Both of his neighbors had break in's. but he never had any issues. Just lucky I guess...

So what you're saying is.. you gotta make your own sign.. a DIY project..... None of this $35 crap? lol.

Great sign. Dont know if I will get robbed later by thieves but at this price I'm already getting robbed by Amazon.

97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If you shot someone in the back who was running away after stealing your sign, you'd get charged with murder. And rightfully so. And I doubt a grand jury would be sympathetic to someone using deadly force against someone who stole a sign off a yard. Note in the above example (1) the incident took place inside the physical structure of the house, and (2) the deceased approached the guy. In that circumstance, he had a reasonable argument that deadly force was required to protect his own life.

To recap:

Nowhere can you kill people for taking your crap. If you do this, you deserve the lengthy prison sentence you will get.

HOWEVER, if in the course of stealing your crap, someone invades your home and you feel threatened, if you shoot them you MAY get off. But its still a bad idea.

This is not legal advice.


Let me post this part of the story again: "I went out the front door and came through the gate, and when he started walking from the back of the garage toward me, that's when I shot him"

According to your interpretation, the homeowner would be going to jail because he killed someone for taking his crap. He OBVIOUSLY wasn't in fear of his life and feeling threatened, because he left his home in order to confront the thief. He was NOT inside of a physical structure, yet, oddly enough, he wasn't indicted.

I'm not an attorney either, but it's not as cut and dry as you seem to think it is. It definitely varies from state to state, with Texas DA's less likely to indict in the first place. Yes, shooting someone in the back (which was not even mentioned in your initial post) complicates things, which is why you shout at them to have them turn around first.

What's to stop a homeowner from shooting someone on their property, and then placing a knife next to the corpse? Then it becomes the homeowner's word against the dead man's, and we all know that dead men tell no tales, despite all of the wildly ridiculous stuff that CSI would like you to believe is possible.


I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.

mungbai said:   All guns should not be be banned. But handguns should. Responsible ownership of HARD TO CONCEAL rifles should be encouraged in a polite society.Please, explain to me how disarming law abiding citizens makes them safer?

"An armed society is a polite society."

― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

mungbai said:   97snake said:   akbungle said:   

Think he's compensating for something?

Also I don't know what castle you live in but you would go to jail for firing that gun just because someone was messing around with your crap.


Castle Doctrine

Typical conditions that apply to some Castle Doctrine laws include:

- An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully or forcibly enter an occupied residence, business or vehicle.
- The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home. Some states apply the Castle Doctrine if the occupant(s) of the home reasonably believe the intruder intends to commit a lesser felony such as arson or burglary.

Do you feel lucky?

"On an early October morning, Mr. Baker heard a noise - his Mexican red-headed parrot, Salvador, had squawked an emphatic "Hello," something he does whenever someone passes by. Mr. Baker flipped on a closed-circuit monitor and saw a man walk into his garage.

Mr. Baker said he had seen the man before, on tapes of the earlier burglaries.

"If he needed a fast fix, he'd go into my garage and grab something and take it to his drug connection," Mr. Baker said earlier this month.

That night, he decided to confront the intruder, identified as John Woodson, 46, of Dallas, who had a criminal record for various offenses, including burglary.

"I went out the front door and came through the gate, and when he started walking from the back of the garage toward me, that's when I shot him," Mr. Baker said.

When police arrived, a homicide detective watched the video and told Mr. Baker, "This is by the book."

The case received international attention, largely because of Salvador, the parrot. But Dallas grand jurors treated it as Texas juries usually do: They declined to indict. "

And

""In 25 years, I've never known a Harris County court to prosecute a homeowner or businessman for killing a burglar or robber," Harris County Assistant District Attorney Bill Delmore told legislators. "We don't do that.""


If you shot someone in the back who was running away after stealing your sign, you'd get charged with murder. And rightfully so. And I doubt a grand jury would be sympathetic to someone using deadly force against someone who stole a sign off a yard. Note in the above example (1) the incident took place inside the physical structure of the house, and (2) the deceased approached the guy. In that circumstance, he had a reasonable argument that deadly force was required to protect his own life.

To recap:

Nowhere can you kill people for taking your crap. If you do this, you deserve the lengthy prison sentence you will get.

HOWEVER, if in the course of stealing your crap, someone invades your home and you feel threatened, if you shoot them you MAY get off. But its still a bad idea.

This is not legal advice.


So if I run into the thief with a 9mm in my hand and he's holding my 2 signed Mickey Mantle baseballs and various jewelry.. I'm supposed to open the door for him and then call the cops?

You are ridiculous. How about you tell him to immediately get on his knees and put his hands behind his head. Tell him if he moves you will shoot him. Make your wife call the cops. Game over. Nobody got hurt. If he moves, shoot him. You warned him and he is trepassing in your house and may be armed. Never forget they may have a gun just like you.

mungbai said:   

I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.


Care to provide a pic of the JD? Oh, and on the offhand chance you ARE an attorney, that doesn't mean you specialize in things like personal defense, you could be the real life equivalent of Troy McClure.

Yep, I'm just an internet tough guy providing actual facts, compared to you, who has yet to link anything factual. Yep, I faint at the sight of blood every time I dress a dove or deer. It took me FOREVER to dress these dove, what with all of my fainting! You got me pegged. LOL

How about providing actual facts instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks?

germanpope said:   Markfaafp said:   ganjagadget said:   ParkRoad22 said:   I bought one of these signs last year, someone stole it.

Buy another and booby trap it by electrifying it with a 20 AMP dedicated circuit or with a bear trap



Great idea, but then the crook will sue you!!!!!


or the parents of the eight year old boy that you kill will demand that you be tried for murder and be given the death penalty


Na, knocking off 8 year olds will get you a public service award. Esp with them all screaming while in the store that they want this or that as the parents just stand idly by. I would have been looking for my internal organs if I had behaved that way as a child.

mungbai said:   I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.Well, counselor, you are making your pronouncements based on a particular set of circumstaces. First, if you legally owned and/or carried a gun, and you saw someone "taking your crap," how would you know that is all they wanted, and didn't wish to do you or your family physical harm?

Now let us say that you, acting within the legal definition of Castle Doctirne, drew your weapon and commanded the theif to stop, stay where they are, and you or someone near you called the police? You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you? This is how most instances end when a lawful gun owner, with a carry permit (where needed), stops a crime in progress. The criminal is stopped and the police are called, and the crook is apprehended. Everybody is happy, except for the crook.

However, how about after you confront the crook, commanding him to stop so you can call the police, suppose the bad guy starts towards you, and he reaches in his jacket or a pocket and withdraws a weapon? Whether you, personally, would fire at that point is irrelevant because legally a lawful gun owner could fire, and they would likely not be charged with a crime. I do say "likely" because in some areas the nogunz crowd includes police or the prosecuter, and the gun owner will be charged anyway, but from the cases I know of, the gun owner is later released and either charges are dropped or they are aquitted at trial.

Do you see the point? Sure, if a bad guy is running away, they aren't a threat and I would not fire. But, if the bad guy came towards me or my family, especially if he had a visible weapon, then I would fire. From this you will have an opinion, but without actually seeing the events as I picture them in my mind you, nor anyone, will really be able to make a judgement on the intertubes.

97snake said:   mungbai said:   

I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.


Care to provide a pic of the JD? Oh, and on the offhand chance you ARE an attorney, that doesn't mean you specialize in things like personal defense, you could be the real life equivalent of Troy McClure.

Yep, I'm just an internet tough guy providing actual facts, compared to you, who has yet to link anything factual. Yep, I faint at the sight of blood every time I dress a dove or deer. It took me FOREVER to dress these dove, what with all of my fainting! You got me pegged. LOL

How about providing actual facts instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks?


I'm a civil attorney with no experience in criminal matters. But, I guarantee you, if you shoot someone for stealing a sign off your lawn, you will be charged with murder. If you shoot someone who is running away from you, you will be charged with murder.

The possessions are irrelevant. It appears that the guy in the Texas case was approaching the shooter, and that is why he got off. I would still suggest it was an extreme case. For another case, see: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/29/retired-marine-charles-clement...

Yes, he only got probation, but if you believe his defense attorney, he was attacked and beaten.

Sonofspam said:   mungbai said:   I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.Well, counselor, you are making your pronouncements based on a particular set of circumstaces. First, if you legally owned and/or carried a gun, and you saw someone "taking your crap," how would you know that is all they wanted, and didn't wish to do you or your family physical harm?

Now let us say that you, acting within the legal definition of Castle Doctirne, drew your weapon and commanded the theif to stop, stay where they are, and you or someone near you called the police? You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you? This is how most instances end when a lawful gun owner, with a carry permit (where needed), stops a crime in progress. The criminal is stopped and the police are called, and the crook is apprehended. Everybody is happy, except for the crook.

However, how about after you confront the crook, commanding him to stop so you can call the police, suppose the bad guy starts towards you, and he reaches in his jacket or a pocket and withdraws a weapon? Whether you, personally, would fire at that point is irrelevant because legally a lawful gun owner could fire, and they would likely not be charged with a crime. I do say "likely" because in some areas the nogunz crowd includes police or the prosecuter, and the gun owner will be charged anyway, but from the cases I know of, the gun owner is later released and either charges are dropped or they are aquitted at trial.

Do you see the point? Sure, if a bad guy is running away, they aren't a threat and I would not fire. But, if the bad guy came towards me or my family, especially if he had a visible weapon, then I would fire. From this you will have an opinion, but without actually seeing the events as I picture them in my mind you, nor anyone, will really be able to make a judgement on the intertubes.


If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.

mungbai said:   

I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.


I'm a civil attorney with no experience in criminal matters. But, I guarantee you, if you shoot someone for stealing a sign off your lawn, you will be charged with murder. If you shoot someone who is running away from you, you will be charged with murder.

The possessions are irrelevant. It appears that the guy in the Texas case was approaching the shooter, and that is why he got off. I would still suggest it was an extreme case. For another case, see: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/29/retired-marine-charles-clement...

Yes, he only got probation, but if you believe his defense attorney, he was attacked and beaten.

You'll excuse me if I take your pronouncement of a JD with a grain of salt, especially since you trotted it out as though it makes you an expert on these matters and yet, are now backtracking (you aren't my first "lawyer" to claim to be something he's not). In any event, I never disagreed that shooting someone in the back would be a different situation, in fact, I made a statement to the opposite effect. As far as killing someone for stealing a sign, there are so many other variables in play that your simplistic scenario doesn't even begin to describe.

As for your link, it's IL (notoriously anti-gun) and it was obviously not justified. Apparently the judge and jury believed the defense attorney as well, which only strengthens my assertion that it's your word vs. the criminal's, and dead men tell no tales.

mungbai said:   Sonofspam said:   mungbai said:   I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.Well, counselor, you are making your pronouncements based on a particular set of circumstaces. First, if you legally owned and/or carried a gun, and you saw someone "taking your crap," how would you know that is all they wanted, and didn't wish to do you or your family physical harm?

Now let us say that you, acting within the legal definition of Castle Doctirne, drew your weapon and commanded the theif to stop, stay where they are, and you or someone near you called the police? You wouldn't have a problem with that, would you? This is how most instances end when a lawful gun owner, with a carry permit (where needed), stops a crime in progress. The criminal is stopped and the police are called, and the crook is apprehended. Everybody is happy, except for the crook.

However, how about after you confront the crook, commanding him to stop so you can call the police, suppose the bad guy starts towards you, and he reaches in his jacket or a pocket and withdraws a weapon? Whether you, personally, would fire at that point is irrelevant because legally a lawful gun owner could fire, and they would likely not be charged with a crime. I do say "likely" because in some areas the nogunz crowd includes police or the prosecuter, and the gun owner will be charged anyway, but from the cases I know of, the gun owner is later released and either charges are dropped or they are aquitted at trial.

Do you see the point? Sure, if a bad guy is running away, they aren't a threat and I would not fire. But, if the bad guy came towards me or my family, especially if he had a visible weapon, then I would fire. From this you will have an opinion, but without actually seeing the events as I picture them in my mind you, nor anyone, will really be able to make a judgement on the intertubes.


If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


I think if you'd just said it that way the first time, it wouldn't have caused this uprising. Yes, we aren't going to shoot some kid who steals my sign as he's running away. We aren't going to shoot someone TP'ing my house. Will we shoot someone IN our house? Oh you better believe it. I ain't about to have my own blood on my walls.

mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.

97snake said:   mungbai said:   97snake said:   mungbai said:   

I am an attorney. You're an internet tough guy who spouts homicidal nonsense but would faint at the sight of blood.


I'm a civil attorney with no experience in criminal matters. But, I guarantee you, if you shoot someone for stealing a sign off your lawn, you will be charged with murder. If you shoot someone who is running away from you, you will be charged with murder.

The possessions are irrelevant. It appears that the guy in the Texas case was approaching the shooter, and that is why he got off. I would still suggest it was an extreme case. For another case, see: http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/29/retired-marine-charles-clement...

Yes, he only got probation, but if you believe his defense attorney, he was attacked and beaten.


You'll excuse me if I take your pronouncement of a JD with a grain of salt, especially since you trotted it out as though it makes you an expert on these matters and yet, are now backtracking (you aren't my first "lawyer" to claim to be something he's not). In any event, I never disagreed that shooting someone in the back would be a different situation, in fact, I made a statement to the opposite effect. As far as killing someone for stealing a sign, there are so many other variables in play that your simplistic scenario doesn't even begin to describe.

As for your link, it's IL (notoriously anti-gun) and it was obviously not justified. Apparently the judge and jury believed the defense attorney as well, which only strengthens my assertion that it's your word vs. the criminal's, and dead men tell no tales.


1. I'm barred in Florida and admitted to the Northern and Southern Districts of Florida.

2. I'm at an AmLaw 200 firm.

3. Believe whatever you want.

4. You said in your reply "I'm not an attorney either." I didn't cite being an attorney first. So your supposition is completely wrong.

5. The reason I said "This is not legal advice" is because I am an attorney, why else would I have said that except out of an abundance of caution that someone might mistakenly rely on my advice?

6. I hope no one steals your crap, but if someone steals your crap and you have an opportunity to NOT kill them and you do, you deserve the legal, moral, and psychological penalties that go along with the act.

This thread is way off topic now.

However, I think regional differences are a very good point. Example:

Coastal California - My father was arrested after taking his shotgun outside to scare off a bunch of teens crowded near his car late at night. He had recently replaced the stereo after the previous one was stolen, so he assumed they were planning to do it again. He did not point it at anyone, did not say a word...just walked out of the house and chambered a round. The kids heard that and ran. 30 minutes later the cops came to our door, put him in handcuffs, and confiscated every firearm I the house. It was eventually reduced to disturbing the peace, and he got everything back except the offending 12ga pump.

When I told that story to friends from Plano, they said that never would have happened in Texas. The cops would have done nothing more than knocked on his door and warn him about bringing a loaded firearm off his property. Ymmv.

97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.
*ouch*

jcantanixon said:   This thread is way off topic now.

However, I think regional differences are a very good point. Example:

Coastal California - My father was arrested after taking his shotgun outside to scare off a bunch of teens crowded near his car late at night. He had recently replaced the stereo after the previous one was stolen, so he assumed they were planning to do it again. He did not point it at anyone, did not say a word...just walked out of the house and chambered a round. The kids heard that and ran. 30 minutes later the cops came to our door, put him in handcuffs, and confiscated every firearm I the house. It was eventually reduced to disturbing the peace, and he got everything back except the offending 12ga pump.

When I told that story to friends from Plano, they said that never would have happened in Texas. The cops would have done nothing more than knocked on his door and warn him about bringing a loaded firearm off his property. Ymmv.


After Hurricane Andrew, some idiots were shooting stunned birds on the property next to us. My father heard them, we went to investigate and discovered the situation. My father told me to run and get his gun, which I did. My father then very politely yelled to the gentlemen "Just so y'all know, if any shells land over here, I'm inclined to send a few back." They decided to pursue their venture elsewhere.

No police were involved.

It is generally not a bad idea to tell police dispatchers that there is a gun on the scene, as it guarantees a faster response.

97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.


Wrong again.

http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/hot-deals/1238666/m17365001/#m17...

That is the post you replied to. You conveniently clipped out the other part in your reply.

Sonofspam said:   97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.
*ouch*


Dude, you're the moron in question. Really? Do we live in a fact free zone here?

mungbai said:   Sonofspam said:   97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.
*ouch*


Dude, you're the moron in question. Really? Do we live in a fact free zone here?
My experience has taught me that the guy resorting to name calling has lost the argument, and he knows it, and is limited to displaying his mighty mental prowess by calling silly names.

Fits you to a "T," don't you think?

Sonofspam said:   mungbai said:   Sonofspam said:   97snake said:   mungbai said:   

If someone is in your house, particularly late at night, chances are if you shoot them, you will either not be charged or acquitted. Some moron upthread talked about shooting someone in the back who stole a sign, which prompted this. I don't have any sympathy for people who rob people's homes. But, on the other end of the spectrum, if you shoot someone in the back for stealing a sign, maybe you deserve prison time.


Actually, the moron who brought up shooting someone in the back for stealing a sign was you, and that was after you determined your argument wasn't going the way you'd intended it, so you decided to add that in.
*ouch*


Dude, you're the moron in question. Really? Do we live in a fact free zone here?
My experience has taight me that the guy resorting to name calling has lost the argument, and he knows it, and is limited to displaying his mighty mental prowess by calling silly names.

Fits you to a "T," don't you think?


My experience has taught me that people who lie about easily proven facts lose the argument when their opponents call them out on their lies.

mungbai said:   My experience has taught me that people who lie about easily proven facts lose the argument when their opponents call them out on their lies.Post the link to my alleged "lie." You sure do have your knickers in a nasty twist. Is this a daily condition?

*crickets*

Sonofspam said:   mungbai said:   My experience has taught me that people who lie about easily proven facts lose the argument when their opponents call them out on their lies.Post the link to my alleged "lie." You sure do have your knickers in a nasty twist. Is this a daily condition?

Both you and your pal made significant misrepresentations. Him, denying that you introduced the issue of shooting someone in the back. You, chuckling at his account of events with no acknowledgement of its falsehood.

You should have more self-respect.

Muffin said:   Markfaafp said:   ganjagadget said:   ParkRoad22 said:   I bought one of these signs last year, someone stole it.

Buy another and booby trap it by electrifying it with a 20 AMP dedicated circuit or with a bear trap



Great idea, but then the crook will sue you!!!!!


Maybe in CA or NY. Not in TX or the south!


despite your perceptions/stereotypes, boobytrapping IS illegal in TX.

Technologist said:   ScooberDiver said:   0AfterRebates said:   Never mind the dog beware of owner
I always chuckle when I see that one because the cylinder holes are much smaller than the barrel. Still, a pretty good sign.


2 reasons for the disparity:
First - Actual depth perception difference. Since the business end of the barrel is actually closer to the viewer, diameter is bigger.
Second - Anytime you are STARING at the business end of a pistol pointed at your face, the only thing you see is a manhole-sized dark hole!!! As a matter of fact, if the timing is right, most people can't describe abything OTHER than the caliber of the pistol... as in "It was HUGE man!!!"


No matter what distance you are from the barrel, the diameter IS the same.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014

It's time for an upgrade!

After a decade on our current platform, we're upgrading our plumbing. The site will be down for a few hours starting at 12:00AM CST (Midnight) tonight.

At FatWallet we strive to bring you the best coupons, deals and Cash Back. So please come back and check us out.