Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
A precedent has been set; although, a slightly dangerous one.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 504013" data-attributes="member: 9240"><p>[USER=22693]@Blacktop[/USER], with all due respect, you've obviously never visited NJ. You may have landed in an airport, but you've never been to my neck of the woods, or you're simply speaking in ignorance. Next street over we have two people with shooting ranges in their backyards - all perfectly legal and done well within the confines of NJ gun regulations which site clearly the necessary perimeter under which a firearm can be discharged. I've done my research, found this <strong><em>asshats</em></strong> property and seen the homes in various directions well within the range of shot fired into the air. I know of what I speak.</p><p></p><p>I'm not saying that the guy with the drone wasn't violating anyone's rights, and yeah, if the guy's daughter was out there then that is disconcerting. Not as disconcerting as a firearm being the first volley in what should have been a face to face confrontation over what he was doing and why, with a call to the cops to mediate when it goes south. That's what responsible, thinking human beings do. Asshats fire at will. Had this happened before, all bets are off. The fact that the guy could have reasonably shown that his version of the truth was far closer to the shooter's but the evidence was not even considered shows a whole additional layer of ignorance about this. The fact is, an asshat with a toy has the right to play with it as they choose and do whatever they want with it within the bounds of the law until it can be proven that laws were violated - and that's the difference between what this guy did and someone physically trespassing on your property with a camera. At present, there were no laws violated, other than the one in which charges were ridiculously dropped. Taking the law into your own hands is <em>not</em> what reasonable people do in a non-life threatening situation. <em><strong>That </strong></em>is my point. The man <em>should</em> be condemned for using deadly force in this kind of situation when a call to law enforcement is the called for and entirely normal person's response. Every person with a gun is not a deputized agent of the local cops, but <a href="http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/10/26/woman-who-shot-at-fleeing-shoplifters-at-home-depot-enters-plea/" target="_blank">some of them sure as hell act that way</a>. When they do, they act criminally and that requires punishment under the laws the <em>do</em> exist.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 504013, member: 9240"] [USER=22693]@Blacktop[/USER], with all due respect, you've obviously never visited NJ. You may have landed in an airport, but you've never been to my neck of the woods, or you're simply speaking in ignorance. Next street over we have two people with shooting ranges in their backyards - all perfectly legal and done well within the confines of NJ gun regulations which site clearly the necessary perimeter under which a firearm can be discharged. I've done my research, found this [B][I]asshats[/I][/B] property and seen the homes in various directions well within the range of shot fired into the air. I know of what I speak. I'm not saying that the guy with the drone wasn't violating anyone's rights, and yeah, if the guy's daughter was out there then that is disconcerting. Not as disconcerting as a firearm being the first volley in what should have been a face to face confrontation over what he was doing and why, with a call to the cops to mediate when it goes south. That's what responsible, thinking human beings do. Asshats fire at will. Had this happened before, all bets are off. The fact that the guy could have reasonably shown that his version of the truth was far closer to the shooter's but the evidence was not even considered shows a whole additional layer of ignorance about this. The fact is, an asshat with a toy has the right to play with it as they choose and do whatever they want with it within the bounds of the law until it can be proven that laws were violated - and that's the difference between what this guy did and someone physically trespassing on your property with a camera. At present, there were no laws violated, other than the one in which charges were ridiculously dropped. Taking the law into your own hands is [I]not[/I] what reasonable people do in a non-life threatening situation. [I][B]That [/B][/I]is my point. The man [I]should[/I] be condemned for using deadly force in this kind of situation when a call to law enforcement is the called for and entirely normal person's response. Every person with a gun is not a deputized agent of the local cops, but [URL="http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/10/26/woman-who-shot-at-fleeing-shoplifters-at-home-depot-enters-plea/"]some of them sure as hell act that way[/URL]. When they do, they act criminally and that requires punishment under the laws the [I]do[/I] exist. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
A precedent has been set; although, a slightly dangerous one.
Top
