store manager kicks @ss

[Becca]

These laws are different in each state. While what is written is true in California and other legally retarded states; lots of other states feel you are allowed to protect your possessions.

The spacifics of how far you are allowed to take it differ. that you are not justified in becoming an agressor just because you started out the victom is pretty much the same.

Here in Colorado we have a "make my day" law. If you feel threatened by someone breaking into you home, you have the right to use deadly force. This does not extend to any place outside of your physical house. Right now they are trying to amend the law to make it "make my day better." Basically to extend the right to use deadly force in self defence if you are attacked in your car. This would still not make it ok to contunue beating up a perp who stopped fighting the instant he'she realized you are not going to just let yourself be vicomized...

[Iman01]

The spacifics of how far you are allowed to take it differ. that you are not justified in becoming an agressor just because you started out the victom is pretty much the same.

Here in Colorado we have a "make my day" law. If you feel threatened by someone breaking into you home, you have the right to use deadly force. This does not extend to any place outside of your physical house. Right now they are trying to amend the law to make it "make my day better." Basically to extend the right to use deadly force in self defence if you are attacked in your car. This would still not make it ok to contunue beating up a perp who stopped fighting the instant he'she realized you are not going to just let yourself be vicomized...

I totally agree with what you are saying. But that article you linked stated that you need to leave if you come home and find someone in your house stealing your stuff; it would remove you from danger hence you don't need to use any force. I see that as some serious backward thinking.

[PangQuan]

I totally agree with what you are saying. But that article you linked stated that you need to leave if you come home and find someone in your house stealing your stuff; it would remove you from danger hence you don't need to use any force. I see that as some serious backward thinking.

nah, you just say he attacked you.

your word against a criminals. who do you think the jury would believe?

ill lie to protect my gear from some scumbag.

[Becca]

I totally agree with what you are saying. But that article you linked stated that you need to leave if you come home and find someone in your house stealing your stuff; it would remove you from danger hence you don't need to use any force. I see that as some serious backward thinking.

No, it said that if you are comming home and noticed someone in your house while you are still in the yard, you have to leave. The unspoken part would be that if you have already entered your home before becomming aware there is some one inside, you still need to leave, as your person has not been threatened at that point. But if you are in your home and that person attacks you or your family, then your right to use deadly force for self-defence kicks in.

It's leagal grey water. You can choose to defend your property, but if you can't proove you couldn't avoid being in a situation that required you to defend your life, the law does not protect you. If you knowingly enter your home with a perp inside, you could have prevented being in a situation that would have required deadly force.

[BentMonk]

IMO the law is absurd. Why should you as a law abiding citizen have to wait to be attacked to defend yourself, your family, or prevent having the things you worked to buy from being stolen? That's like telling the criminal, "Ok, you can break into a home or business and steal what ever you want. As long as you don't threaten or hurt anyone, you'll be allowed to go on your merry way." What a crock! If you are not a criminal and someone attempts to commit a crime against you, why should they be given anything more than a beat down and told to go get a job? The message society should be sending is, "Don't be a criminal. Decent people have the right to treat you like the scum you are. Being a criminal could get you beaten or killed." Instead of, "Oh we're sorry you have such an awful life. Here, you can steal from me, but I won't do anything because you have your rights as a person too." Please...

[The Willow Sword]

Although the subduing of the alleged robber was a tad excessive, i still think the punk got exactly what he deserved. This is the kharma he is reaping to what he sowed when he tried stupidly to rob a seemingly secure convienient store.

As for the whole person breaking into your home deal. I tend to agree with alot that you have a right to defend your property and your loved ones. You cant just stop to think,"uhh well does this person have a weapon or what are his intentions blah blah blah". Someone is trying to unlawfully enter your home,you do what is necessary to defend and protect your property. Ive said it on these boards before when these issues have been brought up and that is "If you decide to shoot the person you better make sure they are all the way in the house before you do, that way the law is pretty much on your side and wont cause too much of a fuss. At least in Texas the law gives you the right to use deadly force when someone is entering your home. I dont like the idea of killing anyone for any reason, but i will if my life or the lives of my loved ones are threatened. Good thing i live in a neighbourhood that rarely has anything remotely criminal going on to where i would have to worry as much.

Peace,TWS

[masherdong]

Well, what is the difference between being robbed in your home and being robbed in your place of business?? If we can use deadly force inside of our residence, then how is that different than your place of business?? I do not think the owner would go to jail. He did what he was supposed to do to protect him and his employees.

[Becca]

IMO the law is absurd. Why should you as a law abiding citizen have to wait to be attacked to defend yourself, your family, or prevent having the things you worked to buy from being stolen? That's like telling the criminal, "Ok, you can break into a home or business and steal what ever you want. As long as you don't threaten or hurt anyone, you'll be allowed to go on your merry way." What a crock! If you are not a criminal and someone attempts to commit a crime against you, why should they be given anything more than a beat down and told to go get a job? The message society should be sending is, "Don't be a criminal. Decent people have the right to treat you like the scum you are. Being a criminal could get you beaten or killed." Instead of, "Oh we're sorry you have such an awful life. Here, you can steal from me, but I won't do anything because you have your rights as a person too." Please...

... Because less-than-ethical people have been known go too far. An old man, a while back, made the head lines for shooting a kid for walking on his lawn. His justification was that his property had been vandelized in the past.

Law makers do thier best, by and large to make useful, meaningful laws. But trying to make 1 law work in a thousand situations is tough. Our society has become one that says, "I want to do what I want to do." You make it illegal to kill in self-defence, then people who genuinly needed to end up in jail. You make it legal to kill in self-defence, you get ego maniacs who kill anything that pizzes them off and justifies this blatent murder by twisting the law.

A law can only be as good as those who created, those who enforce it, and those to whom it applies. And humans have a tendancy to be less than perfect from time to time...

[PangQuan]

humans have a tendancy to be less than perfect from time to time...

I dont believe that for a second!