We are educating the BGs - defense of property - Page 2

We are educating the BGs - defense of property

This is a discussion on We are educating the BGs - defense of property within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Treo Do you have any data to back this up? I was wondering the exact same thing. Because if there is concern ...

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 74
  1. #16
    VIP Member Array Janq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    6,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Treo View Post
    Do you have any data to back this up?
    I was wondering the exact same thing.

    Because if there is concern for what is posted here then why would those same BGs with lots of time and interest to 'study' not simply go to Officer.com, PoliceOne.com and state/local police forums such as MassCops.com...all being open to the public to read & review as well as even participate amongst?

    That is what I'd do.

    As to civilians the BGs who would spend time reading a forum like this would also know by now to reference the very often mentioned here and everywhere DoJ Bureau of Statistics website which also is freely accessible.
    There they would find and learn that less than 3% of the nations non-police citizens are licensed to keep/carry a firearm.
    They would also learn from the above police sites that each state has it's own laws, as noted by the OP, and thus there are various restrictions and even in some states public listing of homeowners who have such licenses and/or how to FOIA request a list of said persons.

    All of this and much much more is public information available to most any person with access to a computer and internet service, as at most any public library or prison computer lab.

    Concern that BGs might be reading this forum and thus being taught by us our own 'tactics' is IMHO weak.
    Yeah there is a possibility for as much but on the balance such a concern is mitigated by the very many Bgs who don't read, can't hardly read never mind comprehend and very much by the numbers of GG civilians who read these forums and walk away smarter, wiser and overall for the better including safer.

    - Janq

    P.S. - If I were a BG smart enough to read, review and research tactics at sites like this...I would also be smart enough to know, if not learn quickly, that is an inefficient use of time.
    A more efficient use of time would be to read sites that teach how to electronically break into corporate systems so as to sponge money from those groups and score big returns with a minimum of personal risk. Such sites do exist as well with forums.
    Or I'd be such a smart criminal mastermind that I'd not be even thinking about nickle & dime scores knocking over Ma & Pa Home-Owner for their flat screen TVs and savings bonds as 'hidden' in the sock drawer.
    "Killers who are not deterred by laws against murder are not going to be deterred by laws against guns. " - Robert A. Levy

    "A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman." - Florida Div. of Licensing


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Do bad guys read forums like this, I don't know if they do or not. If they do the premise that the OP makes is probably correct. If they don't, real live teaches the BG the same thing that he would learn if he read these types of forums.

    If the BG goes and demands money, keys, whatever from someone and that person hands it over says don't hurt me and waits to call the police after the BG leaves, it is pretty likely that the BG is going to try it again, and again, and again, and eventually he will either get caught, someone will stand up to him, or get lucky and live off of other people hard work.

    What is a life worth and what are you allowed to do if someone is holding you up or stealing your BBQ grill? Each state has its own laws that tells you what is legal and what a life is worth. Whether or not you agree with that is up to you. If you choose to let them take the wallet or grill or car or whatever is your call. After you make the call then it depends on what the state law is, and whether or not there will be any reprecussions from it.

    As far as the book in the In Gravest Extreme, I have never read it, I am sure it is probably a good read and might get around to it one day, but just because Ayoob thinks or says you should or shouldn't act in a certain way does not mean that is what I have or need to do. Yes he is considered an expert in his field and has been called to testify in cases or whatever. But I certainly think that when writing his book, and offering it up as a teaching tool, or in his classes, he takes every precaution to cover his arse. If he had written the book based on Texas law and told folks that it was fine to go out at night and shoot someone for criminal mischief, he would probably have a couple of results. Not too many books being sold and someone would probably sue him for selling advice that landed them in jail.

    Will I stand by and let someone take my stuff, or willingly hand it over to them, probably not. It is mine, if they want something similar they need to get a job, and get stuff themselves. Is my stuff, no matter what it's worth, more valuable than their life, yep. They are the ones putting a lesser value on their life by engaging in activities that could get them placed in jail, hurt or dead. Again, each state has their own set of rules that determine what a life is worth. If a criminal is smart they will pick a state that places a very high value on their life. Texas is not one of them, and allows me to a wide range of options in protecting both my family and my property. God I love Texas.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  3. #18
    Member Array hengst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    185
    Sticks
    Just wanted to say that you put together a really good summation of Colorado laws. And I agree 100% with your posted views.
    And if any BG's are reading this forum then they will know that it is wise NOT to steal from either of us.

  4. #19
    Member Array DBRideout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    near Royal Gorge Bridge, Colorado
    Posts
    114
    To assume the BG's are NOT reading this is equally unprovable. I think there is a little picking the fly poop out of the pepper going on here...
    “Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility.”

    “A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”

    Sigmund Freud

  5. #20
    Distinguished Member Array tiwee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oz
    Posts
    1,708
    Tactically, going outside in the dark creates opportunities for your enemies.
    I am talking about when something unusual is underway outside at night. We come and go at night all the time. We also sit outside at night when the weather is nice. The 13th and 14th of this month, we will be outside at 0-dark thirty to watch the meteor shower. Back to the tactics.


    To see the possibilities, go outside tonight after dark and conceal yourself as if you were protecting your 'pardner' in crime. Let's say your 'pardner' is going to steal your car or clean out your shed. Once concealed, call your spouse or friend to exit the house and approach your vehicle, shed, etc. Decide who will win the gun fight. You(hidden and motionless) or your friend(moving with the house or streetlight or moon or city glow as a backdrop). Or who will get the drop on whom.

    For me, it is not about them stealing my property. It is about staying safe so I can protect the wife and any others in the house. In our particular situation, once I am out of commission, the rest are at risk.

    By the way, my insurance has a deductible. I think I am out $1000, before the insurance starts paying. The truck and my kids car do not have comprehensive coverage. Basically, anything taken from outside our place is a total loss. Still, I am not going outside on the bad guys terms in the dark.

  6. #21
    Member Array Ramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    167
    Is one's life worth more than the virginity of a daughter, or the beating by a thug of one's wife?
    This is why I hate explaining myself or my personal beliefs on forums and such. People go off on tangents that don't even relate to what I said. I'll do it anyway.

    I am not a murderer and I don't want to ever think of myself as a killer. I'm perfectly willing to let people live in peace if they let me live in peace. People make good choices and bad choices. People who are peaceful people can become heartless killers and even those who where heartless killers still have a chance to become better people even up to their last moments on this earth.

    I don't follow laws because they're the law I follow laws because I believe in them. If the law says I can kill someone for stealing my lawn gnome I still wouldn't. If they broke into my house I would but i know I would still feel bad after doing it. It's just how I am and while others may feel differently then me. My weapons exist to defend life not take it. If someone where trying to steal my weapons I would also shoot them because if they do take them, they will be used to kill others that's the only property I would defend. Because I don't want anyone to die.

  7. #22
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,061
    Quote Originally Posted by DBRideout View Post
    Like John Wayne said in the movie The Alamo:
    "There's right and theres wrong, you gotta do one or the other. You do the one and your living, you do the other and you may be walking around but your dead as a beaver hat"
    Pithy, and it works for the big screen. But life is a bit different, in practice. It's not simply "one or the other," with "the other" being that denigrating, coddling, pride-swallowing path only cowards walk.

    Besides, in the hypothetical John Wayne's era, in the film, one's own government didn't come knocking in order to string you up merely because you're the one left standing. Sadly, this is the reality for many people across this country. Ayoob's on the right track, in the book In The Gravest Extreme.

    What is Ayoob saying, basically, by having a more-conservative standard for when you're going to step up to the bar and take out your criminal? Essentially, if you want to be relatively assured of being "covered" by the law in taking down criminals, you'd damned well better have finger marks going all the way around your neck and be seen with the criminal on top of you at the moment you stop him in his attack. Anything less is somewhat less certain as to outcome.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramen View Post
    My bar-be-que grill costs me $299 ... If I shoot someone because they're stealing my grill that means I've priced human life at $299.
    Plus the tens of $thousands to keep your butt out of prison, the harm to your career, reputation, loss of friends. Meaning, the $299 will end up being literally nothing in comparison to the larger costs.

    Reality is somewhat closer to this rendition of the "other" road.

    In Oregon, a distinction is made between person crimes and property crimes. Basically, though, the "reasonable man" standard is the judge. As such, while you get to legally make your own call at the moment, and you get wide latitude in Oregon, OTHERS get to judge that call as to THEIR read of the law, what THEY believe is just and moral, etc. In short: roulette, much as anywhere else save a few states, in which the degree of vehemence used in coming after you depends greatly on the politics in the winds that day.

    In Oregon, the relevant statutes include:
    • 161.205 Use of physical force generally.
    • 161.209 Use of physical force in defense of a person.
    • 161.215 Limitations on use of physical force in defense of a person.
    • 161.219 Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person.
    • 161.225 Use of physical force in defense of premises.
    • 161.229 Use of physical force in defense of property.
    • 161.235 Use of physical force in making an arrest or in preventing an escape.
    • 161.239 Use of deadly physical force in making an arrest or in preventing an escape.


    Specifically, 161.229 describes the basic legalities as to the use of physical force in defense of property:

    161.229 Use of physical force in defense of property.

    A person is justified in using physical force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission by the other person of theft or criminal mischief of property. [1971 c.743 §26]
    Deadly physical force may be used only in regards the trespass, not the theft/damage of goods:

    161.225 Use of physical force in defense of premises.

    (1) A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what the person reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.

    (2) A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (1) of this section only:

    (a) In defense of a person as provided in ORS 161.219; or

    (b) When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser.

    (3) As used in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a) of this section, “premises” includes any building as defined in ORS 164.205 and any real property. As used in subsection (2)(b) of this section, “premises” includes any building. [1971 c.743 §25


    So. In Oregon, at least, you're perfectly legally allowed to judge for yourself and take the steps you believe are warranted to stop trespass, stop theft, stop criminal mischief, and certainly to stop violent attack of a person. But what will be allowed will be judged by others after the fact, after you've hung it well out on the branch. And, if history is any judge in the case law in Oregon, the judgment varies over time as to what the People will allow you to do in defense against crime, irrespective of how you see it at the time.

    In other words: caution is due. Ayoob's guidance, then, will tend to be the more conservative handling, given the much wider latitude given to after-the-fact judges of your actions, given how the legal system is set up to "catch criminals" or those deemed to have done wrong (in spite of the law apparently being supportive of such actions).

    Personally, here is my basic take. I refuse to be a victim, and yet I have insurance. I do not have $100M sitting in the Cayman Islands ready to "cover" me, whether I flub it or not. I don't feel my $200 stove is worth my life, let alone a CD from my car's interior or a shovel from the shed. I value upstanding human life. I believe in standing up for what's right, but I won't do it blindly and idiotically when very little chance of survival or stopping the crime exists, viewing that as mere pointless flamboyance without benefit to anyone. I believe in stopping even basic crime, though I'll temper my response by the real threat posed by the circumstances, depending. I will not allow physical attack on me or mine, and the criminal's continued attempts to take me or mine down will be met with the force required to stop it, no matter what it costs the criminal, even if it kills him. You want my life? Come and get it, 'cause it's not negotiable. All situations are different, though I will tend toward the result that helps best assure survival for me and mine. That is the point of the exercise, after all.

    YMMV, as I'm sure you'll agree, and that'll remain yours. Mine will remain mine.
    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.

  8. #23
    Member Array DBRideout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    near Royal Gorge Bridge, Colorado
    Posts
    114
    Where do you draw the line? Each person, each incident will determine that at the time of happening. We can't even say what we will do, because we don't know the variables. We can say what we think we might do, or what we would like to do but until something happens, it's all wind.
    You can say what you've done in the past, but that does not mean you would do it the same way the next time, the variables will have undoubtedly changed, but you'll at least have a better idea of what to expect from yourself and from others...
    BTDT
    “Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility.”

    “A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”

    Sigmund Freud

  9. #24
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    Interesting post; I like to think back to conversations I had with my grandfather on the subject of lawlessness since he grew up during the depression when quite a lot of thievery and robbery was going on; His take on that sort of thing was that trying to assign a dollar value on human life was, and is a waste of time because life is an intangible asset that has limitless value. depending on how the person lives it.

    He did, however go on to say that allowing someone to steal your possessions just because you had insurance was just as bad as stealing your neighbors' things. I was confused by this, and he elaborated by saying that what was going to be the eventual undoing of our country would be a moral decay and a toleration of lawless behavior, rather than a military conquest. He also said that the toleration of a thief is a toleration of the behavior, and eventually has implications for everyone. It starts with the thief probably not facing the consequences of his actions, by someone just giving them what they want without a fight; then it continues in the higher cost of insurance which can be viewed as a tax on everyone who has it because of the thousands of people who also have the same attitude. And it costs us still more later on when this thief is finally caught because then we have to pay to try him, convict him then incarcerate him as well. And putting him in jail merely prepares him for bigger and better crimes when he gets out later on.

    So in summary, he said standing up to thieves and criminals and protecting what you worked and toiled for is cheaper in the long run, both financially and for society as well. What is killing us now are penal codes and judicial systems that now work to protect the rights of the criminal more than the law abiding citizen. He finished by saying that the only thing that would swing things back in the other direction was if we began reaching the tipping point, which he also feared would probably be too late for us as a nation; as he opined at the time "You will know the end is near when the construction of prisons outstrips the construction of schools". Grandpa passed away in 1993, but his words stay with me to this day. Four years before he passed, a would-be home invader tried to force his way into his home. Even at 70, Grandpa disabled the revolver the BG had by jamming the web of his hand between the hammer and frame then twisted it away and proceeded to beat the crap out of the BG with his bare hands. By the time police arrived the BG was unconscious and had to have his jaw wired together.

    When my horrified mother asked why he fought back against a man half his age with a gun, he calmly said "because what he was doing was wrong, this is MY home he is trying to rob and I am not going down without a fight". At that point, my mother told him that he should quit being so "black and white" about things because the world was just "shades of gray". My grandpa then became angry, poked his finger in my Moms' chest and told her in a very stern voice, "Julie Ann, the world is shades of gray for Liberals and Lawyers, it is and always has been black and white for the rest of us since God made the world".

    I brought this up when I read someone's opinion of the world being shades of gray, which it is not and never has been. My take is that life boils down to the choices we make, and the things we tolerate as normal behavior. I choose to fight for my family and my home and my possessions only because I was taught that failure to do so was a resignation and a surrender to the thief and the criminal that they could impose their will upon you, that it was easier to appease them than to resist them. If I have learned anything from my grandfathers' generation it was the folly of appeasement when dealing with these kind of people.

    Looking back on my Grandfather's musings, especially reading his memoirs he was astoundingly prophetic in his description of our current situation. Sometime I may post these musings with the dates he wrote them down, it is very interesting, especially his experiences during WWII when he fought in the Pacific Islands with the Marines........

    OK, I'm done....
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  10. #25
    Member Array DBRideout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    near Royal Gorge Bridge, Colorado
    Posts
    114

    Thumbs up

    Bravo! Well said edr9x23super! Well said!
    “Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility.”

    “A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity”

    Sigmund Freud

  11. #26
    Distinguished Member Array Guardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Wichita Falls, Texas
    Posts
    1,618
    I also love the part where someone on here mentioned the part of they found people funny who found things just black and white. I find people funny who don't flind the world black and white most of the time. Every now and then, there is a gray area, but not to often.

    As far as BGs reading these forums, who cares, it's good they read they and know that there are so many folks that are armed and we are growing day by day and that every day, more and more Americans are not going to just lay down and become victims for these worthless pieces of garbages. Read up boys and girls, you enter most houses belonging to members here or enter on property owned by members here, kiss your butts good bye. Think about it and have a nice day.

    As far as any arguments of people being inside of a dwelling/house, apartment,, it doesn't matter, if their brave enough to enter someone place you live, their brave enough to hurt you and your family, they give up their right to live on this planet in my view.
    "I dislike death, however, there are some things I dislike more than death. Therefore, there are times when I will not avoid danger" Mencius"

  12. #27
    Senior Member Array Rob P.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    In the sticks
    Posts
    631
    The biggest problem I have with the whole "I'm just defending my property because I refuse to be a victim at any time" line of thinking is that EVERY situation is different.

    Thus, the armed BBQ grill theft for one individual may be different than the unarmed lawnmower-jacking that someone else is involved in.

    Now, some places let you respond with deadly force in defense of property. Some places don't. And some only after you've tried to retreat first. This means that each situation, in each jurisdiction is different and needs to be evaluated at the time it happens. NO ONE can "pre-plan" what they are going to do except in generalities. And, if you do "pre-plan" I would not recommend that you post the most aggressive response planned on the 'net as your "strategy."

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array JerryM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramen View Post
    This is why I hate explaining myself or my personal beliefs on forums and such. People go off on tangents that don't even relate to what I said. I'll do it anyway.

    I am not a murderer and I don't want to ever think of myself as a killer. I'm perfectly willing to let people live in peace if they let me live in peace. People make good choices and bad choices. People who are peaceful people can become heartless killers and even those who where heartless killers still have a chance to become better people even up to their last moments on this earth.

    I don't follow laws because they're the law I follow laws because I believe in them. If the law says I can kill someone for stealing my lawn gnome I still wouldn't. If they broke into my house I would but i know I would still feel bad after doing it. It's just how I am and while others may feel differently then me. My weapons exist to defend life not take it. If someone where trying to steal my weapons I would also shoot them because if they do take them, they will be used to kill others that's the only property I would defend. Because I don't want anyone to die.
    I agree. I would not shoot a person to prevent theft of anything I own. My point is that one cannot put a dollar figure on whether or not he would shoot. But if my family and I were stranded for a long time, and the meager food we had was necessary to survive, I would use deadly force to protect it from being taken away. I would share, but would not permit theft when it would or might result in the death of my family.

    edr9x23super,
    I think your grandfather was a wise man.

    These things are not always siimple, and unless there were unforseen circumstances that required otherwise, I would always seek to obey the law.

    Regards,
    Jerry

  14. #29
    PM
    PM is offline
    Senior Member Array PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    662
    Kansas says "I have to fear great bodily harm or death to use deadly force" but they also say "I no longer have a duty to retreat" or to put it another way "If I am there legally I have a right to self defense." I would say that if I went out to investigate a noise, that may be a thief of any stripe, I am in a gray area of the extended castle doctrine. If on the other hand I am rolling up to my home at O'dark:30 and I see some one coming out of my shed and ask them what in the world they are doing and they make a threat of "great bodily harm" I am then within my right to SD. If I walk into my home or I am in my home and find someone other than the three humans, 1 K9 and/or two felines walking about the house; I am in "fear great bodily harm or death" from this person(s) and again I am within my right to SD.

    In other words; I do not think Kansas law allows me to "hold someone who is a thief of real or personal property" nor do I believe that some one stealing my real or personal property outside of my (our) presences is a "threat of great bodily harm or death to myself (or my family); therefore deadly force is not allowed.

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array elkhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    562
    My take, if I understand Sticks OP, is in how to ensure that BG understands that entering my property to do crime can be a deadly exercise.

    "So punk, do you think that BBQ Grill is worth dying for? Well punk? Do ya?"

    "I don't want to kill you, and you don't want to be dead. So I suggest you reconsider your plans."

    I personally do not want to kill over that BBQ Grill, but neither do I want any BG to think I am a safe target.
    It's not unheard of, for a more organized BG to steal something, and just wait for insurance to replace with brand new. That brand new item may just be the original intended target.
    I would rather have BG understand that a repeat performance would be deadly for BG, and that thought should be deterrent enough.
    It’s so much easier now days, to "Love and honor" my wife, when she is armed, and shoots a better group than I do. (Till death do us part, eh?)

    “The way you get shot by a concealed weapons permit holder is, you point a gun at him,” the Sheriff said.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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. Disasters and property defense?
    By mr.stuart in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: April 18th, 2009, 04:36 PM
  2. Educating your friends
    By Headshrinker in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: March 11th, 2009, 04:02 PM
  3. Non lethal in defense of property/legal assault?
    By C9H13NO3 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 6th, 2009, 10:07 PM
  4. Educating the Sheep
    By Hydrashok Glock in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: December 1st, 2008, 06:00 PM
  5. Property Defense in Florida
    By NKMG19 in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: April 15th, 2008, 11:52 AM

Search tags for this page

sc defense force bg david h krumwiede coin

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors