Interesting facts (truth)coming out about Trayvon

[themondtster]

oh i thought he jumped in the back...he actually jumped in the passenger side seat? dude what state do you live in that is insane. I mean fuck that situation sounds like what you need a gun for in the first place...if the fact he jumped into the car wasn't debated, how in teh world....??

I forget exactly what my aunt said, but had something to do with the guy bot actually showing a gun, no gun found on him, and I believe the police said after he drew his weapon since the other guy didn't have one showing he should have gave him the chance to flee. This was awhile back right around the time car jackings started becoming big so it was kind of extreme. Goes along with point I was talking about how you have to use good judgement with self defense because it can backfire on you.

Sent from my PG86100 using EliteFitness

 

[redsamurai]

The application contains the rules and regulations. There are no separate bylaws or code of conduct other than a quick lecture basically telling you that you better be able to prove you or your family was in imminent danger, and a warning that you can still be charged with a crime or sued. Then there's the off- the-record comments telling you to make sure you shoot to kill to minimize a lawsuit.

That's all there is to it in San Diego. I'm betting it's about the same in most other states.

there was a whole pdf file on CCW laws here for OH. I know CA has one of those, you prbably just haven't seen it. I'll bet CA's is twice as long too. lols

 

[WoodyO]

there was a whole pdf file on CCW laws here for OH. I know CA has one of those, you prbably just haven't seen it. I'll bet CA's is twice as long too. lols

We do. And it's basically the same thing for all states that have CCW. It's pretty much impossible to get a CCW in CA. Only the sheriffs office will do it. None of the regular police stations will approve an application.

Classes are taught by fellow gun nuts and they consist of hypothetical stories and situations, and how the instructor feels those situations should be played out.

 

[redsamurai]

A real debate is based on cut and dry facts, not a slippery slope argument.
Just sayin'

I cut segments directly from OH CCW laws....that would tend to be facts no?

 

[jnevin]

Not after you try to interpret them.

 

[jnevin]

I really don't care, I'm just giving you a heads up irregarding his technique.

 

[redsamurai]

We do. And it's basically the same thing for all states that have CCW. It's pretty much impossible to get a CCW in CA. Only the sheriffs office will do it. None of the regular police stations will approve an application.

Classes are taught by fellow gun nuts and they consist of hypothetical stories and situations, and how the instructor feels those situations should be played out.

you can't be serious...seriously? Just some good old boys who do the teaching? wtf?

anyway, it's not quite the same thing for every state because they have different SYG laws. I was looking at what's your duty to retreat in the case of say a fistfight. If someone starts a fight with you in a bar it doesn't say you have a duty to look for a possible retreat first. Heck, i think it might still be legal to punch some guy if he comes on to you unprovoked. I'm serious...it may have changed now but back in 2000 I took a CJ elective class and back then it was legal, if you weren't in a gay bar or otherwise place where someone would rationally assume you were gay....if a guy made a pass at another man who was straight you could whoop him legally. Obviously if you stroll into an all dude bathhouse where they hand you lube and condoms at the door....u ain't covered. So is there not an increased amount of responsability as it relates to altercations if you're packing? I mean explain to me how the law views it the same given the fact there's language in the CCW laws that state how and when your SYG gets refreshed. It's obviously different.

 

[jnevin]

Like I said. That's not a verifiable fact, it's an opinion.

 

[redsamurai]

Not after you try to interpret them.

well if someone else has a different interpretation I"m all ears...seriously if I'm wrong I don't care. It's a kind of a pertinent subject and I find the debate fascinating, as long as the people I'm debating with are actually adding something....which Plunk never does. Just review his statements. It's the same thing. I'm sure there's a vibram or all natural pot joke somewhere here. That's what he does. It's less than nothing.

 

[redsamurai]

Like I said. That's not a verifiable fact, it's an opinion.

what isn't?