Nightmares (or pipe dreams) About Prosecution for Self-Defense **Merged** - Page 3

Nightmares (or pipe dreams) About Prosecution for Self-Defense **Merged**

This is a discussion on Nightmares (or pipe dreams) About Prosecution for Self-Defense **Merged** within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; I get where you're coming from, Berney. I hope to never be involved in a civilian self defense shooting, but I know this: If I ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 50
  1. #31
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    I get where you're coming from, Berney. I hope to never be involved in a civilian self defense shooting, but I know this: If I have, then a whole bunch of bad things have already happened, and many more are likely to happen. I just want to make sure I don't add to my problems by saying something stupid in the adrenaline dump of the aftermath...
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.


  2. #32
    Member Array target1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ft Worth TX
    Posts
    198

    Article in Dallas News Paper

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... a8cbd.html

    Quote:
    'Castle law' arms Texas homeowners with right to shoot
    Does new law make them quicker to pull the trigger?

    12:06 AM CST on Sunday, January 20, 2008
    By MICHAEL E. YOUNG / The Dallas Morning News
    myoung@dallasnews.com

    The shootings came fast, a bang-bang-bang cluster of cases starting in early autumn that quickly had police, prosecutors and the media wondering about the sudden impact of Texas' new castle law.

    A business owner who lives at his West Dallas welding shop killed two men in three weeks as they tried to break in.

    A 79-year-old homeowner in east Oak Cliff, awakened by his dog, struggled with an intruder before grabbing a shotgun and wounding the man.

    A retired Army warrant officer managed to kill a gun-wielding robber at a Far East Dallas dry cleaners after his wife surprised the intruder and handed her husband their own 9 mm handgun.

    Texas has long had a reputation as a shoot-first-ask-questions-later place, dating back to its frontier days.

    But the spate of shootings begs the question: Did the castle law which gives people the right to use whatever means necessary to protect themselves and their property without fear of civil liability unleash a flurry of gunfire?

    Perhaps just as important, has the law changed people's perceptions about fighting back? Are they more likely to shoot first even when safe retreat may be an option?

    "I think the castle law has more citizens thinking about fighting back, knowing they're protected from being sued later," said Dallas homeowner Dennis Baker.

    He shot and killed a burglar in October after seeing the man enter the garage where he stored thousands of dollars worth of tools.

    But Dr. Gary Kleck, a professor of criminology at Florida State University, doesn't think the castle law governs someone's thinking when they hear a window softly opening late at night, or the crash of a door coming down in a home invasion.

    "In situations in which people would be making a decision to use defensive violence, it's very unlikely they'd be thinking about laws and penalties," he said. "That would be the furthest thing from their mind."

    Certainly the castle law has become a high-profile addition to the Texas statutes since it took effect Sept. 1, but police and the district attorneys association argue that it brought little substantial change.

    While it appeared to apply to each of these cases, so did a batch of other laws, along with the tradition of Texas juries giving people every benefit of the doubt when protecting themselves, their families and their property.

    None of these property owners was charged. Police referred a few cases to the Dallas County grand jury, which declined to indict. In others, police determined that the shootings were justified.
    Police's take

    And they see the rash of shootings as part of a normal cycle, not a trend.

    Dallas police homicide investigators said they've yet to encounter a self-defense situation since the castle law took effect that would have been barred under previous laws.

    "There may come a time when that's not the case," said Lt. Craig Miller. "But I would have to look at each of those under its own merits."

    Shannon Edmonds, director of governmental relations for the Texas District and County Attorneys Association, said he didn't know of a single Texas case in which the castle law would have made a difference.

    "The reality is Texas grand juries routinely no-billed deadly force cases under the old law, which was very lenient," he said. "Many of the cases that you read about center on defense of property laws, which were always very, very lenient in the use of deadly force.

    "That's just how Texas is."

    Dr. Kleck said some states, including Texas, have legal systems with broad definitions of self-defense.

    "There was a study of homicides in Houston sometime back," he said, "and a huge percentage of those cases were defined as justifiable.

    "But in the Northeast, another study showed that almost none of the cases there were justifiable under the law."
    Neighbor fights back

    One Texas case in particular has attracted national attention, in part because of the circumstances: It was a neighbor, not the homeowner, confronting and killing a pair of burglars Nov. 14.

    Joe Horn of Pasadena, Texas, was heard on a 911 tape telling Diego Ortiz and Hernando Torres, "Move, you're dead," before shots were fired.

    And the neighbor mentioned in a 911 call that a new law gave him the right to protect himself if he confronted the burglars.

    The 61-year-old Pasadena man, Joe Horn, told the police operator: "The laws have been changed in this country since September the first, and you know it."

    "You're going to get yourself shot," the operator warned.

    "You want to make a bet?" Mr. Horn said. "I'll kill them. They're getting away!"

    "That's OK. Property's not worth killing someone over, OK?" the operator said. "Don't go out of the house. Don't be shooting nobody."

    The burglars emerged from the house, carrying "a bag of loot," Mr. Horn said.

    "Which way are they going?" the operator asked.

    "I can't ... I'm going outside, then I'll find out," Mr. Horn said.

    "No, I don't want you going outside," the operator said.

    "Well, here it goes, buddy," Mr. Horn replied.

    Seconds later, Mr. Horn can be heard saying, "Move, you're dead," followed by two shots and then a third.

    "I had no choice," Mr. Horn said in a second 911 call. "They came in the front yard with me, man."

    Was the castle law designed to cover those circumstances?

    No, said the law's author, state Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio.

    "You're supposed to be able to defend your own home, your own family, in your house, your place of business or your motor vehicle," he said but not your neighbor's.

    But Mr. Edmonds said other property laws could provide a defense for Mr. Horn, whose case is under investigation.

    "The laws governing the use of force to defend property instead of a person are very broad and very favorable to someone who wants to use that force," Mr. Edmonds said.

    Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code describes deadly force as justified to prevent arson, robbery, theft or criminal mischief at night, or to prevent a suspect from fleeing if the property owner "reasonably believes the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."

    "You hear someone stealing something off your front porch. You come out there with a gun, and they're running off. It's nighttime. The law in Texas allows you to shoot them," said former Dallas County prosecutor Toby Shook.
    Juries' leniency

    Texas grand juries have traditionally given people carte blanche to take whatever steps they need to keep their property, Mr. Edmonds said. "In the Pasadena case, as egregious as the facts may be," he said, "the law may still excuse that person's conduct."

    He pointed to a case near Waco in the 1990s when the owner of a car saw a group of teenagers stealing his hubcaps late one night.

    "He shot at them from his apartment and killed one of them" Mr. Edmonds said. "The grand jury no-billed it."

    Jim Cornehls, an attorney and professor of urban and public affairs at the University of Texas at Arlington, said he defended a man a few years ago in similar circumstances.

    The man lived in an apartment complex where kids left their bikes in a central courtyard.

    "There had been a rash of bike thefts," Dr. Cornehls said, "and when this man got home from work late one night, he saw a guy out there purloining a bike.

    "He whipped out his .22 and shot him. He didn't kill him, but he wounded him, and the prosecutors let that one slide. In his case, it wasn't even his property. It was a random bike."
    Law necessary?

    But if Texas law already allowed people to defend themselves, their families and their properties against a whole array of crimes, did the state really need the castle law?

    Absolutely, Mr. Wentworth said.

    "I read in the newspaper a couple of years ago that Jeb Bush, the governor of Florida, was signing the castle doctrine there to allow residents to defend themselves in their own homes," the senator said. "And I thought, 'Isn't that silly? We in Texas have always had that right.'

    "But when I checked, I discovered that through legislative and judicial action in the 1970s, we'd changed the law. Before that, there was no fear of indictment or civil suits if you defended yourself in your home. But we lost that in 1974."Rather than using whatever means necessary to protect yourself and your family, he said, Texans "didn't have a right to stand and defend themselves, but an obligation to retreat."

    And if that was impossible, he said, the resident had the obligation to ascertain whether the intruder was armed and with what and respond only with the appropriate level of force to match the threat.

    "I believe you have the right to defend yourself with any means necessary without fear of being indicted or sued by the intruder or his or her survivors," Mr. Wentworth said.
    Tried every measure

    Mr. Baker believes that, too.

    He had lived in his modest neighborhood just north of Dallas Love Field for 15 years without a problem when burglars began stealing his equipment five times in two months.

    He stored his tools in his garage, protected behind a locked six-foot gate and next to a back yard bathed by a light so bright that a friend said it looked like the Texas Rangers' ballpark.

    It wasn't enough to deter the thieves.

    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.

    That's one of the reasons county prosecutors argued against the castle law in committee hearings before it was approved. It really wasn't necessary, they said, because more than a half-dozen self-defense provisions already existed in Texas law. And Texas juries almost always sided with the person protecting his own.

    "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."

    Jana McCown, an assistant district attorney for Williamson County, echoed that in her remarks.

    "I can assure you that we don't try to arrest homeowners or crime victims for protecting themselves against crime," she said.

    But the Legislature overwhelmingly supported Mr. Wentworth's bill, and it was quickly signed into law.
    In the courtroom

    Now judges and prosecutors need to figure out how to deal with it in the courtroom.

    "Prosecutors who were concerned about the law were concerned about how it will operate in court, not in the street," said Mr. Edmonds of the district and county attorneys association.

    The castle law says the use of force or deadly force is presumed to be reasonable if someone unlawfully and with force enters an occupied home, business or car. Further, if the force used against the intruder was reasonable according to the statute, the occupant is immune from civil liability for injuries or death.

    For Mr. Baker and many in Texas, the right to defend family, home and property only makes sense.

    But others, including Marsha McCartney of Dallas, a member of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, say the law becomes a death sentence for criminals who would never face that in court.

    In practical terms, Ms. McCartney said, there doesn't even need to be an explicit threat of attack to justify a shooting over property. In several local cases, she said, property owners didn't appear to be in any danger, yet shot and killed unarmed intruders.

    "I find that shocking killing people over things," she said. "The question you have to ask is: Does the punishment fit the crime?

    "People don't get the death penalty for breaking and entering. Defending your family, defending yourself against someone who is armed is one thing. But now it's like we don't need to call the police anymore."

    Steven Jansen of the American Prosecutors Research Institute in Alexandria, Va., said the so-called "no-retreat" castle laws largely take away discretion from local district attorneys, even in cases with questionable circumstances.

    "The law always was that you had a right to defend your home and your person, and the prosecutor had discretion at that point to look at the facts and decide what a prudent person would do," said Mr. Jansen, a former prosecutor in Detroit.

    "But the castle doctrine laws extend that right to self-defense to places outside the home almost anywhere a person has a legal right to be and providing for criminal and civil immunity for the person using the lethal force.

    "That isn't even extended to police officers who use their guns in the line of duty."
    Emotional backlash

    Still, there can be a price to pay for taking the life of another.

    Dr. Heidi Vermette, medical director for mental health at the Veterans Administration in Dallas and an assistant professor of psychiatry at UT Southwestern Medical Center, said a person who shoots another human could suffer from acute stress disorder, or even post-traumatic stress disorder.

    "Acute stress disorder lasts for a few days to four weeks or so," she said, "and people with it tell you they feel numb as they recall the event. They say things like, 'I was in a daze,' or 'It was as if time was standing still.'

    "And afterward they might not be able to remember the event. Or they re-experience the event. Nightmares are common and feeling distressed."

    Mr. Baker said a friend, a child psychologist, called him after the shooting at his house.

    "She talked with me for hours, and she said, 'When this is over, when the attention is gone, this will work on you mentally,' " he said.

    "But then another friend of mine told me that every occupation has an occupational hazard. A fireman can die in a fire. A coal miner can die in a mining accident. And a burglar can die in someone's garage in the dark of night.

    "I guess I was his occupational hazard."

    But a few minutes later, he sat quietly in an office chair, looking down.

    "It's hard to look at some things because he was a human being," Mr. Baker said. "But he had a drug problem.

    "The people closest to him should have gotten him some help."

    Staff writer Steve Thompson contributed to this report.

    RIGHTS UNDER NEW LAW

    Major provisions of Texas' Castle Law:

    Presumes you are reasonable in using force if someone illegally and with force enters or is attempting to enter your occupied home, car or workplace. You are not given this presumption if you provoked the person or are engaged in a crime.

    Removes your obligation to retreat if possible before using deadly force if you are anywhere you have a right to be. The previous law obliged you to retreat if a "reasonable person" would have, except in a situation where someone unlawfully entered your home.

    Gives you added protection from lawsuits by injured attackers or their families. Previous law granted this protection if someone illegally entered your home, but not in other situations.

    SOURCE: Dallas Morning News research
    I LOVE TEXAS
    David

    Ride hard and Shoot safe

    The first rule of gunfighting should be to know when the gunfight starts - being the last one to get the news certainly won't put the odds in your favor.

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member Array sniper58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,631
    I lived in Florida when the Castle Doctrine was enacted. The papers were full of the same type of stories. I guess you kind of expect it.
    Tim
    BE PREPARED - Noah didn't build the Ark when it was raining!
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    ________
    NRA Life Member

  4. #34
    Member Array LoneRanger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    145
    And thats why I'm from Texas...well that and thats where I was born. :)
    "You gonna do something about it or just stand there and bleed?" -Wyatt Earp

  5. #35
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,976
    And this is part of the reason my truck bears a " Texan by choice" bumper sticker!
    I think we should all get together and buy Ms McCartney a bus ticket to Baltimore where she might be more comfortable. I think she would find the laws in Maryland much more to her liking.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  6. #36
    Member Array abuttermilk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Lubbock,TX
    Posts
    228
    "no retreat" castle laws largely take away discretion from local district attorneys". The Second Amendment does that by giving each of us the right to protect ourselves, families and properties. We, the people, give the da's their authority by electing them but in so giving, we don't give away our ability to protect ourselves, families, others who may be seriously harmed, and our property.
    What is the problem? Those Castle Doctrine laws just re-establish what we have had all along with more protection for the victims instead of the danged criminals.
    This is a right that all citizens, in all states, are given by the Second amendment and we all need to be reminding our DA's and Judges of this.
    "It does not take a majority to prevail,,,,,,but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." Samuel Adams

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,411
    National uniformity in the CC laws and all events pertaining/following such an event would be nice. Heck, even state wide uniformity.

    Such as it is, the way things are handled change constantly, and what might be OK today, will be a no-no next year.

    In CO there is concern that the CC may disappear shortly after the National Convention. The current Governor is anti, and the anti's are taking over the state congress. All it would take is a single line written in repealing SS 18.12.201-216 at the end of another unrelated important issue, and all would be lost.

    Likewise, all of the criminal coddling that has been done may finally bear enough fruit for the bulk of the politicians to realize that this is out of control, and start bearing down on the issues.

    I for one would like to see the CC recognized nation wide just like ones drivers license.

    I would also like to see the law enforcement and courts react like they do in WA state where if you are found innocent, you are reimbursed for legal fees, lost wages and so forth.

    The castle doctrine should extend outside your home to anywhere you are at, keeping you immune from civil suits stemming from a self defense action because "Johnny was a good boy, he just fell in with the wrong crowd."

    It may be a pipe dream, all we can do is keep pushing the issues with the whack-jobs in power and hope that the new ones that we vote in do not double back on us (of course if they do that, we can't very well call them politicians anymore, we would have to find a new name).

    4000 years ago, the Romans invented political corruption, and the world as a whole has perfected it. As long as people are willing to use their position to influence someone else for their own personal gains, we may never see the light at the end of the tunnel (and in most cases, it is that damn train heading in the opposite direction).

    The human race has become to smart for their own good. It is almost impossible to write a law that is so well defined that it can not be interpreted in a way other than it's intended purpose. 2000 years later and we are still arguing about what the bible means.

    Texas, with your long history of being pro 2A and support of self defense, will one day see it challenged and won. All it will take is the right combination of DA, Counsel, and Judge to set a precedent and the lever on the toilet bowl will be depressed.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    OK has about the same "castle" law as TX. Do not believe that night time burglary is specifically mentioned in the OK law. There is one big difference in OK. In OK the prosecutor is not required to take a righteous shooting case to the grand jury. Our prosecutor recently declined to take two righteous shooting cases, one fatal, to the grand jury.


    "By The Associated Press
    10/27/2007 1:34 PM

    LAWTON — A state prosecutor cited Oklahoma’s “Stand Your Ground” law in announcing that no charges would be filed against a man who shot and killed a teen who appeared to be a burglar.

    Comanche County District Attorney Robert Schulte said he plans to take no action against Jeffrey David Dorrell, 40, who shot and killed Frederick Stuever, 17."


    The shill for the Brady Bunch needs to get a life. Typically, the Brady Bunch recommends that residents whose homes are invaded to "just give them what they want, run away, blow a whistle, call the police, etc." These whiney, anti self defense folks are opposed to any meaningful punishment for violent criminals.

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,994
    'Castle law' arms Texas homeowners with right to shoot
    Does new law make them quicker to pull the trigger?
    Well, yes. Good thing, too, else we'd have far more dead citizens who merely wanted to defend themselves and their loved ones. It's these people that "Castle" law was designed to stop hurting.

    The fact is, statutes in regards to murder and assault still exist and cover illegitimate actions. "Castle" simply take the legal "boot" off the neck of citizens for acting responsibly in their own defense.
    Last edited by ccw9mm; February 1st, 2008 at 03:11 AM. Reason: spellin'
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  10. #40
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    National uniformity in the CC laws and all events pertaining/following such an event would be nice. Heck, even state wide uniformity.
    The very last thing that we need in this country is a federal law that spells out in detail how a local prosecutor handles a lawful shooting case. Such a law would probably be modeled after laws in one of the North-Eastern Demokratic Republiks of the US.

    It pleases me to no end that prosecutors in OK are not required to take lawful shooting cases to the grand jury.

  11. #41
    VIP Member Array Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig 210 View Post
    "National uniformity in the CC laws and all events pertaining/following such an event would be nice. Heck, even state wide uniformity."

    The very last thing that we need in this country is a federal law that spells out in detail how a local prosecutor handles a lawful shooting case. Such a law would probably be modeled after laws in one of the North-Eastern Demokratic Republiks of the US.

    It pleases me to no end that prosecutors in OK are not required to take lawful shooting cases to the grand jury.
    I was not implying a Federal law, just having individual State laws on said subjects (CC and Self Defense) uniform, preferably leaning benefit of the doubt on the behalf of the CC holder.
    Sticks

    Grasseater // Grass~eat~er noun, often attributive \ˈgras-ē-tər\
    A person who is incapable of independent thought; a person who is herd animal-like in behavior; one who cannot distinguish between right and wrong; a foolish person.
    See also Sheep

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    While I think a National or Federal or anything uniform would be unconstitutional and lead to more regulation, it would be nice if the states all felt the same way about their respective laws. Preferably, TX laws become uniform. About the only thing we need to work on for our laws is open-carry...
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  13. #43
    Senior Member Array walvord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    St. Charles County Missouri
    Posts
    991
    This is the way things should be. If you don't enter the owner's house via the door bell method, well then, you take your chances.
    The most exhilarating thing in life is getting shot at with no results.
    - Winston Churchill
    Endowment Life Member - NRA
    Life Member - GOA
    Member - Oath Keepers, SAF, CCRKBA
    U.S. Army (72G) 1975-1980

  14. #44
    Senior Member Array Ragin Cajun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    809

    Helping others and worried about being sued...

    I think it is plain selfish if you see a crime going on, like the one mentioned about the guy over the woman stabbing her and not interviening just because you are worried about being sued. It the right thing to do and personally, I would NOT be able to sleep at night knowing I watched some thug kill an innocent person and did nothing to stop it when I could have. Not all situtations are justified to go stick yourself in the middle of, but some are. I can see not getting involved when there are two men fighting with guns, gang bangers shooting each other, or other situtations like that.

    To each their own but for all the "Me and My" folks, you can't protect your family 24 hours a day. Something may happen one day to them and you won't be there to protect them. You would only hope that someone whould step up and help them out. What if your wife or child went to the mall and some guy grabbed them and was trying to abduct them. There are 4 or 5 people watching the whole thing go down, being good witnesses. You later find that out from the police report. I'm sure you would tell them, thanks for being a witness, I wouldn't have got involved either. No! You would be outraged that people just watched and no one did anything to stop it.

    I'm a firm believer that one day we will all have to answer for our actions here on earth. This world is becoming more and more everyday a "It's all about me" place. That is why it going to crap so quickly. Sure, there are a lot of bad people out there but if the good people would band together and help each other out more, the good would definitly out weigh the bad.
    Okay, flame away!

  15. #45
    Ex Member Array BikerRN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    State of Discombobulation
    Posts
    5,253
    Not going to "flame you".

    The world and society being what it is has helped to make me what I am. I do not look for help from a stranger. I have helped strangers and have been the recipient of another's help and kindness, but I in no way depend on it.

    Biker

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. New TV Show: The Best Defense (Merged X 2)
    By Rob Pincus in forum Defensive Books, Video & References
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: December 30th, 2009, 10:21 PM
  2. prosecution for legal modifications?
    By Thanis in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: December 11th, 2009, 02:00 PM
  3. Courtroom Tactics-Defending the Self-Defense Case (Merged)
    By BikerRN in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: August 5th, 2009, 07:55 PM
  4. 12 ga. Home Defense-Buckshot Only? (Dupe threads merged)
    By Bart in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: July 27th, 2009, 09:37 AM

Search tags for this page

lawton burglary

,

prosecutions for self defense

,

what happened to jimmy hecksel

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors