Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Flipperk on September 18, 2009, 10:57:25 AM
-
with a samurai sword, the suspect died from blood loss there after. The student heard rumbling going on down stairs in his home (with his 4 room mates), and armed with a samurai sowrd went to check it out. He went into the garage to see the man crounched under a table and thats when the intruder lunged at him. The student then swung the sword and hit his upper body causeing huge laserations and also cutting off his left hand. Possible charges (if any) are still being reviewed against the student.
The suspect has had a long history of break ins with 29 arrests, and his last release was just on Sept. 12.
video here: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80752482/ (http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80752482/)
wtf?? charges being reviewed!?!? self defense, too bad for the suspect but seriously, you break into someones home eventually you will get someone who will kill you.
:aok+1 for the student
-
Hooray
-
You run into this a bit when someone defends themselves with an "exotic" weapon. Oddly enough, just shooting an intruder seems to have a better "gut check reaction" with the sheeple and "authorities" than maiming them with a bladed weapon, however totally unreasonable that is.
-
yes I agree, The law is to strict on people defending their home or to prevent the harm or loss of life to themselves or another person, In the UK a few years ago someone broke into a farmers house who was armed, the farmer shot him with his shotgun in self defence and went to prison for manslaughter IRRC.. It was all over the news.
-
LOL...shouldn't be looking at these boards while I'm working.
Had the urge to go check my katana.
-
I heard about the farmer incident.
Honestly, here in the usa, if someone tresspasses on your property and he falls into your pool and dies, ITS YOUR FAULT no matter how well you have in fenced out.
WTF!?
-
"He killed me Mel. He killed me with his sword."
Bet yah he didn't see that coming! Twenty nine buglaries ? I doubt they'd put me on that jury. JUDO CHOP!(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rpg010.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)
-
"He killed me Mel. He killed me with his sword."
Bet yah he didn't see that coming! Twenty nine buglaries ? I doubt they'd put me on that jury. JUDO CHOP!(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rpg010.gif) (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)
brings a whole new meaning to caught red handed. :D
-
swords kill people...... we need more sword control laws........... you should have to take a 6 week safety training course then provide 6000 forms of ID and submit to several background checks blah blah etc etc
sword safety needs to be at the forefront of legislation............ without more laws how can we safely feel at peace while all these swords exist
:x
-
swords kill people...... we need more sword control laws........... you should have to take a 6 week safety training course then provide 6000 forms of ID and submit to several background checks blah blah etc etc
sword safety needs to be at the forefront of legislation............ without more laws how can we safely feel at peace while all these swords exist
:x
You know, there is some backwoods moron who knows someone, who knows someone that knows someone, with connections in Washington D.C. thinking exactly that, and seriously.
Can't wait...we have laws against high capacity semi-automatic weapons because of maybe 100 trailer trash morons over the past 30 years, it's just a matter of time before we have "blade control" laws.
-
They can have my fixed bladed home defense weapon when they pry it from my cold dead hands...
-
I don't see anything wrong with him using the sword as self defense, heck, I would have done the same thing if someone lunged at me cause he's then a threat to my life and if I have the weapon advantage...........sucks for the sucker on the receiving sucks.
-
I say we should all go back to swords anyway because of the training it takes to use effectively, as opposed to a gun which any moron can figure out which way to point.
-
He should have used a bat. Then they could require 20 forms to get bats. Baseball players would need to submit their training certs and and and .... :rolleyes:
-
You know, there is some backwoods moron who knows someone, who knows someone that knows someone, with connections in Washington D.C. thinking exactly that, and seriously.
Can't wait...we have laws against high capacity semi-automatic weapons because of maybe 100 trailer trash morons over the past 30 years, it's just a matter of time before we have "blade control" laws.
The worst part of all of that....
...its true :cry
-
Just goes to show the old saying:
Never bring a hand to a swordfight :D
-
I've tried look up laws on Katanas or swords in general as I own several (pre-Japanese ban) that have already been in the states for some time(not the cheapy stainless steel pieces of junk)..
There are no such laws in the works as swords are held under the same laws as knives (in the US).. Having one in your home for ornamental or protection reasons is absolutely legal.. You just can't walk down the street with it..
Also, the stories you hear of criminals getting seriously injured or dying and then the victims being sued is the stuff of urban legends.. I've tried to find cases where the criminal actually won and I was unsuccessful.. BUT, I did find this on Snopes, so I guess we can all see that this is pretty much BS, as I'm sure we all suspect...http://www.snopes.com/katrina/crime/drowned.asp (http://www.snopes.com/katrina/crime/drowned.asp)
I live in Indiana and we have some of the best Castle Laws next to Texas..
AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning firearms and self-defense.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana:
SECTION 1. IC 35-41-3-2 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2006]: Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; only and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, or curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(c) With respect to property other than a dwelling, or curtilage, or an occupied motor vehicle, a person is justified in using reasonable force against another person if the person reasonably believes that the
force is necessary to immediately prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect. However, a person:
(1) is not justified in using deadly force; unless and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
only if that force is justified under subsection (a).
(d) A person is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person and does not have a duty to retreat if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or stop the other person from hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight. For purposes of this subsection, an aircraft is considered to be in flight while the aircraft is:
(1) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the doors of the aircraft are closed for takeoff; and
(B) until the aircraft takes off;
(2) in the airspace above Indiana; or
(3) on the ground in Indiana:
(A) after the aircraft lands; and
(B) before the doors of the aircraft are opened after landing.
(e) Notwithstanding subsections (a), (b), and (c), a person is not justified in using force if:
(1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime;
(2) the person provokes unlawful action by another person with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) the person has entered into combat with another person or is the initial aggressor unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the other person the intent to do so and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action.
(f) Notwithstanding subsection (d), a person is not justified in using force if the person:
(1) is committing, or is escaping after the commission of, a crime;
(2) provokes unlawful action by another person, with intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or
(3) continues to combat another person after the other person withdraws from the encounter and communicates the other person's intent to stop hijacking, attempting to hijack, or otherwise seizing or attempting to seize unlawful control of an aircraft in flight.
-
I love how "DOES NOT HAVE A DUTY TO RETREAT" is all over this thing.... :rock
-
I love how "DOES NOT HAVE A DUTY TO RETREAT" is all over this thing.... :rock
After doing some more research, I have found that the states of Iowa, New Hampshire(doesn't surprise me), Virginia, New Mexico, and D.C. have no Castle Laws...
But they do have a law which says you have a "Duty to Retreat".. Depends what state.. Some say you have to retreat completely(leave your home and belongings) if you and your family are
under threat..
You will never catch me living in any of these states...
Several states(Including my state of Indiana) have what is called "Stand your ground Law" which basically says if you are under attack from a violent aggressor(this includes your home being robbed, car being stolen, etc.) you have the right to use deadly force to protect yourself, your family and your possessions.. This also extends to a third party(seeing a neighbor being attacked)..
-
The dude was basically a guy with no life, no future, and he could of hurt someone or even killed. A student not only does self-defense but kills the guy and they "review" charges? What? :huh
The poor guy could have been dead or hurt if he hadn't defended himself, plus he got rid of a pest which you can't just shoot and leave like nothing happened. :furious
-
swords kill people...... we need more sword control laws........... you should have to take a 6 week safety training course then provide 6000 forms of ID and submit to several background checks blah blah etc etc
sword safety needs to be at the forefront of legislation............ without more laws how can we safely feel at peace while all these swords exist
:x
They've DONE it in Australia man.
-
The dude was basically a guy with no life, no future, and he could of hurt someone or even killed. A student not only does self-defense but kills the guy and they "review" charges? What? :huh
someone was killed, surely its reasonable to investigate and establish whether the killing was legal?
-
someone was killed, surely its reasonable to investigate and establish whether the killing was legal?
I'm quite sure it was legal, the perp was in their home illegally, attempting to rob them, and he lunged at the guy and the took that as a threat to his life and reacted the way most people would.