• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Unarmed victim

AGENT J said:
dodge noted, ill ask MY question again

If the story is true and the people started attacking your SUV with your wife and kid in the care what do you do?"
you cant say i wouldn't have been in that situation
you cant say you have a magic SUV and its bullet proof
you cant say you have a time machine in the glove box to go back
you have to answer the actually question in a honest form

you are sitting there, people are beating on your suv trying to get in, you are with your wife and daughter, what would you do in that situation?
Click to expand...

BEEP BEEP mothereffer, I am coming through.
 
Blue_State said:
BEEP BEEP mothereffer, I am coming through.
Click to expand...

yep thats what i do minimum
me and my family's well being/safety/lives vs criminals lives trying to gain access to my vehicle with us inside it

me and my family win
 
soot said:
Come on now. I wouldn't kid you.



Given NYC anti-gun laws, I completely agree. He would be facing prison, at a minimum, if he had even presented a firearm and the folks filiming it captured him doing so on video (assuming of course it could later be proven that it was a real firearm, and all that).

So in that exact situation, yes, he "did the right thing".

If, however, he was in a State or locality where carrying a firearm was legal I believe that he would have been within his rights to open fire.

The thing you're failing to take into consideration is that there is the propriety of the use of deadly force and the impropriety of the use of such force.

If it can be reasonably articulated that one was in fear of his life, or in fear of grave physical injury, or was in fear of the same fate befalling others, then the use of deadly force to prevent such death or serious injury is appropriate.

Once you've met that bar, it makes little difference whether you use a 5000 SUV as a deadly weapon or whether you use a firearm as a deadly weapon.

If a reasonable man can find it appropriate that Mr. RR used his vehicle as a deadly weapon I find it completely unreasonable that the same man would find it unreasonable that he use any other weapon up to and including a firearm.



I would find him to be a hero even if he used a firearm. I think most reasonable people would join me.



Two completely different situations.



Better to be tried by 12...



Again, the law makes no stipulation in so far as what can be used as a deadly weapon once it can be reasonably established that deadly force was necessary and appropriate.

For the record, I agree with you that what Mr. RR did was probably the BEST course of action.

But if he had turned to a firearm as his choice of deadly weapon I would only consider it a less than ideal choice, not an illegal choice.

Again, assuming the laws of the jurisdiction were such that legally carrying a firearm was acceptable and assuming that he had satisfied whatever licensing regulations were in force.
Click to expand...
Brandishing a firearm may have ended the situation long before it got out of hand.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Brandishing a firearm may have ended the situation long before it got out of hand.
Click to expand...
Not if it were being brandished by one of the bikers.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Not what I meant.
Click to expand...
That's my point. It'd be no less likely turn of events were it legal for people to carry guns in that state. Bad situation plus guns doesn't automatically equal good situation. If anything, incidents like this demonstrate one of the complexities of increasing private gun ownership.
 
HonestJoe said:
That's my point. It'd be no less likely turn of events were it legal for people to carry guns in that state. Bad situation plus guns doesn't automatically equal good situation. If anything, incidents like this demonstrate one of the complexities of increasing private gun ownership.
Click to expand...
So innocent people dont have a right to defend themselves and family? Home boy tries opening a door only to be greeted by a gun barrell.
Bet that would be the end of it right there.
 
CRUE CAB said:
So innocent people dont have a right to defend themselves and family?
Click to expand...
I didn't say that. I didn't even imply that. If you wish to respond to what I actually write, feel free to start.
 
HonestJoe said:
I didn't say that. I didn't even imply that. If you wish to respond to what I actually write, feel free to start.
Click to expand...
What is your implication then? You went to the other side and said what if the biker had a gun.
The end of this deal was an un armed man was yanked out of his car and beaten on the street while off duty cops looked on.
Had that man presented a weapon when that idiot was smashing his window out, that would have been the end of it.
Many other states thats exactly how it would have happened.
 
CRUE CAB said:
What is your implication then?
Click to expand...
I didn't imply anything, I made straight forward statements of fact; Were guns legal in that state, it is just as likely that the bikers would be carrying them as the driver. Introducing guns in to a bad situation doesn't automatically make that situation any better. The issues of private gun ownership and use is complicated. This is framing the question, not giving an answer (I don't pretend to have an answer).

CRUE CAB said:
You went to the other side and said what if the biker had a gun.
Click to expand...
It's not about sides, it's about recognising all of the possible outcomes, not only the one you'd like to consider. It's certainly possible that, had the driver been armed, the outcome could have been better but it's also possible that had the driver, bikers or both been armed, the outcome could have been much worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom