Posted on 03/06/2017 8:55:01 AM PST by PROCON
Especially in Berkeley, conservatives would be called upon to be Christ-like. Take the punch (hopefully on camera -> YouTube) and turn the other cheek.
Some of the rural counties Sheriff's Departments, yes.
Rural Police Departments slightly less.
For many of them the following description is accurate:
Some people just want to see the world burn.
The subject was self-defense laws, not concealed carry laws.
Yes, California is a CCW "may issue" state, with a lot of variance in practice between counties.
Self defense laws however are statewide.
Again, that's gun law, not self-defense law.
My wife, Vinny’s Niece, says Cops who stand down are not Cops!
Meaning, they are on the “Take”!
Yep. Tennessee neither. Even the BLM protest in Memphis was VERY carefully peaceful. I give those folks a bit of credit for restraint.
An armed society is a polite society.
Trump supporters held a rally, and black masked rioters showed up to oppose. What would have been more "adult?" Taking their beatings in a gentlemanly way? You show up in public to support Trump and you should expect it?
WTF does he mean?
No it is not the only one you need.
"Ask the hot dog vendor that was just acquitted of murder in a road rage incident that HE started."
Who started is again only one element of self-defense. But in this case even the prosecution admitted that the guy shot was the initial aggressor in the deadly force altercation. He attacked with a baseball bat.
He attacked with a baseball bat.
Maybe we’re actually on the same page with this. I’m not suggesting you can use deadly force because someone yelled at you. They have to be attacking you, but the weapon can simply be their fists. It has to be physical and you have to fear for bodily harm. I don’t want to get knocked unconscious. It could lead to death or who knows what. So I shoot the guy trying to do it.
Both sides did not act childishly and violently. ONE SIDE acted in a MURDEROUS manner.
There was plenty of violence to justify the use of a firearm. If someone comes at me with a club I am going to shoot him. Period. Full stop.
Oh... so he has seen more violent bar fights has he? Maybe he should not hang out with violent drunks.
Introducing firearms is TOTALLY justified. And Bobby honey child, you don't fire into the crowd. You fire into the body of the person attacking you. Center mass and you should possibly use Glasers.
Put simply, the fights I saw weren’t nearly as bad as bar fights I’ve seen in real life.
= = = = = = = = =
BUT in a bar fight if LEO is called or even ‘passing by’, someone is going to jail, usually the one that made the first overture - push, pour beer etc etc...
Seems like you can ‘go to jail’ or get a ticket for throwing a beer in someones face but if you step out in the street in an organized manner, the rules that TODAYS society has enforced will exempt one from the ‘minor’ part of it.
Of course back in the Middle Ages (mid 1900s) a bar fight would usually consist of TWO (or an equal amount) participants, when one either said Uncle or was dropped in his tracks, the participants would usually retire to the bar for more drinks....
Today, someone is going to jail, bar will probably lose license or at least get reprimanded.
Yes, I realize that EVERY bar fight was not by Marquess of Queensberry rules but the normal ‘everyday joe’ type was not always super violent.
Show them your KBar combat knife. Don’t even point it in their direction. It is particularly lethal looking. No one will approach you with a sign stick.
because that is what the left wants. They prefer their own useful idiots are killed for the propaganda value.
Very true. And communists have historically referred to themselves as “Anti-Fascists.”
At some point this stuff is going to turn into actual deadly combat. In a group of demonstrators some will be or are armed with guns. Some antifa is going to swing a baseball bat at a head and blood will flow. At that point, maybe the third of fourth time it happens, the batsman gets shot. Then the active warfare will commence as the antifas will all suddenly be supplied with guns and ammo and won’t feel they need to observe all the strictures on use of force. When it happens once and several people are killed it will be the pattern for rapidly spreading gunfights in the city streets, first in California where the antifas can count on police and judicial protection then spreading across the country..
Of course. But reasonable fear is not the only thing that matters, as I've said. I even posted a link that details the other elements of legal self-defense. All of them are necessary, although the duty to retreat is negated in certain circumstances and in certain jurisdictions.
Because they are actually facist that call themselves something else for better news coverage.
The Sate of Washington allows use of deadly force beyond self-defense of yourself. And yes - like NM goes wherever you are, and can use it to help another person - even a stranger. Deadly force can be used to stop a felony - so these protest assaults would be covered if it was deemed justified to prevent the attack. (Why the shooter in Seattle wasn’t charged.)
There have even been cases where people get shot in the back after stealing something. The shooter gets off. (Preventing a felony).
There was one case where a guy saw somebody leaving his neighbors home carrying a TV. He knew the neighbor was out of town. Yelled at the guy to stop and he tried to run down the drive - but slowed by the TV he was stealing.
The neighbor got him in the butt with a hunting arrow! (was a justified shoot.) Thank goodness it wasn’t the grandson taking Poppa’s old TV!
I recall after a string of these types of things in the news some sheriff said “You’d think they would get the message - it is open season on criminals.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.