Author Topic: Called Police 2nd time in a week  (Read 3943 times)

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #90 on: December 29, 2008, 04:51:41 PM »
Post your sources, I've been to Cambodia, I have a large extended family of Cambodians. I've also met Hang Ngor on several occasions, had dinner with him quite a bit. I've had the privilege of hearing quite a bit about the war. Post your sources please.

As for the rest, well here's a start: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html

Your link regarding the Nazis is in regards to a well known falicy of what "could" have been an organized Jewish revolt in Germany.  I did not argue that the Jews could have or would have revolted, I argued that their ability to own firearms were taken away PRIOR to the general populace and by order of the govt.  Also, did you notice the quote by Hitler in the footnotes?  You need to head to the ER, you just shot yourself in the foot.  ;)


Ah yes, you want to play the "I know so-n-so, he told me XYZ" game with me.  If you truely did meet who you say you did and kneww him as well as you say you do, then feel very blessed.  As for my sources on the Khmer Rouge, the first or second chapter of "The Stones Cry Out", by Molyda Szymusiak (Buth Keo) details all they were instructed to leave behind or give up (including any weapons).  I'll dig out the page number, keep your bonnet on.  Also, "Year Zero Death", by Raymeond Naqui (spelling?) displays a very vivid picture of the structure of how the Cambodians were re-educated and also detailed the "absolutes", as in no weapons, no unapproved education, no unassigned food, no nothing without a Khmer Rouge approval.  I'll see if I can dig out my research projects and get even more sources for some exact quotes.  But, if you really think the Khmre Rouge was going to let the people have firearms, or they didnt detail that it was forbidden and for people to turn in any firearms... then you didnt learn anything when you were being spoken to by Haing Ngor, which whom you say you know (or knew, actually).  The Khmer Rouge was absolute.   

Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #91 on: December 29, 2008, 06:05:37 PM »
Quote
Killing an intruder may seem like a cut and dry matter to you.  Yet, there are many shades of gray that can be applied to that.  Killing an intruder, armed, who is actively intent on harming you and yours is one side.  Killing an unarmed intruder who is a stupid kid on a dare from his friends, or an out of work parent just trying to feed their children is the other.  The law must be taken into account in all matters, not just the ones you see as pertinent.

Its funny how this urban myth persists. :lol The "out of work parent stealing to feed his kids"? :rofl

Out of all the tens of thousands of thieves, burglars,robbers, dope dealers...ect I pinched in my career I cant name one who was doing it to "feed his kids". :lol Mostly, 95%, were stealing, burglarizing, and robbing, in order to buy drugs or otherwise support their narcissistic lifestyle. Even boosters, "shoplifters", are either druggies or just dont want to pay for their batteries or diet pills. Even 95% of pro boosters are junkies. I worked a methadone clinic off duty for about a year once and it was like Old Home Week from my retail security days where I would pinch up to 85 boosters in a 20 day period.

This "feeding his kids" thing is just hilarious to us in Law Enforcement. Hahahahahaha. But do keep informing us on current trends Moray. We need the laugh.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline 1pLUs44

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #92 on: December 29, 2008, 07:04:26 PM »
You know, there was a time when crime wasn't a problem. That was back when if a criminal was caught red handed by the owner, the owner could shoot to kill to defend what was rightfully his.

I fail to see where the problem with that stance is. Texas did a good thing in my opinion by bringing that back into todays age.

Criminals feel they are entitled to someone elses property, and they'll continue to feel that way until someone stops them.

Everyone says, "Is it worth killing someone over a TV?" How about the civilized people wake up, take a stand, and make the criminals say to themselves, "Is this TV really worth me getting shot over?"

In the Joe Horn case, he saw a crime happening right in front of him, he acted in accourdance with the law, and killed two people who in my opinion deserved to be killed. They were career criminals, illegal aliens to boot, one had already served time for drug trafficing and was then deported, only to return illegaly and continue to commit crimes. Mr Horns actions prevented who knows how many more crimes from being committed, yet people want to condemn him for doing what the law allowed him to do.

I think once a person starts down a road of criminal behavior, they deserve whatever they get. Break into my home, I'll drop you where I find you, and I wont loose sleep over it. Would I shoot someone over my TV, or a loaf of bread? Sure will. It's not theirs, it's mine, and if they come into my home to take what's mine, I will stop them. I don't care what their background is, I don't care about their "reason", "excuse", whatever they have for their behavior. They DO NOT have a right to come into my home and take what is mine, but I should have the right to defend what is mine.

+1
No one knows what the future may bring.

Offline dentin

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 738
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #93 on: December 29, 2008, 07:09:41 PM »
Being that I am a Policeman Frenchy I think I have a pretty good idea about what would happen.

Trust me, anything that "could" happen is a whole lot better then you being the dead body in your house.

Allow me.. "`tis better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6".
"The more I see of the depressing stature of people, the more I admire my dogs."
 Opinions are like Armpits..everyone has two and sometime they both stink!
"No matter how much things change, They remain the same"

Offline culero

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #94 on: December 29, 2008, 07:37:38 PM »
Culero,

I'm aware of the Texas law and a rather controversial shooting that happened recently there. Texas isn't the entire US, much as Texans would like to think they are. (I'm married to a Texan)

I wasn't sure you were aware of what exactly Texas law regarding the use of deadly force to protect property is, due to the portion of your post that I quoted:

"You defend life with deadly force not property. Not even LEO's are authorized to shoot fleeing burglars, thieves, shoplifters or con men unless life is in danger so why would you think you are."

This statement is wrong, in Texas. If you will read the statutes I posted for your convenience, you will see that the use of deadly force is indeed authorized to not only defend property, but to prevent those caught in the act of committing property crime from escaping with that property.

You are required to use no force or as little as is feasible if possible, but if you aren't capable of stopping the crime any other way, you are free to use deadly force. The circumstances and the capabilities of the person on the scene are relevant, which is why I pointed out that there are different expectations for LEOs and citizens.

Based on this post, even though you say you understand the Texas law, I doubt that you do.


Do you really feel trespass is a capital offense subject to the death penalty? Particularly trespass on property not your own that has been abandoned?

No I do not. Neither does Texas law. This bit is part of why I don't believe you understand it. Trespass is not mentioned anywhere in the statute excerpts I posted, nor did I mention it. I am only addressing your apparent misunderstanding about protecting property (specifically, the loss thereof).

I also do not believe that property crime is or should be a capital offense, in case you are wondering. But I do agree with the concept behind this facet of Texas law - that a property owner should be able to act in whatever way necessary to stop someone they've caught in the act of taking their property. If that property owner has no other way to do that, and kills the thief, I am 100% OK with that.

If it was me in that situation, I might or might not use deadly force. I would use less or no force if possible. If less or no force was not an option, I would still decide if the circumstances warranted the thief's death - for instance, I wouldn't kill someone for stealing an orange off one of my trees, or kids that were toilet-papering my house at night.

I'm glad that Texas law allows property owners the freedom to use their judgment and act as circumstances warrant.

And, speaking to your Joe Horn reference, I believe he acted legally. If I was his neighbor, I'd be grateful for his courage. He's going to have to suffer consequences that I wouldn't want to have to suffer, and probably wouldn't have to defend a neighbor's property. But, he did eliminate a couple of amazinhunks that I doubt anyone in the neighborhood will miss, and I bet his neighbors see less burglary in the near future, so I won't condemn him for what he did.


I have an idea that the law in Texas is going to be tightened up a bit. Frankly, I think the Castle Doctrine is fine but it was taken to an extreme in the Texas statute you cited and I don't doubt that there will be some modifications to it.

Again, you demonstrate your misunderstanding of Texas law here. This isn't about Castle Doctrine at all. Its about prevention of loss of property. There is a big difference.

I don't have a bit of a problem with a person defending his family and himself in their home against an unlawful home invasion. I do have a problem with a civilian leaving their home and family to go hunting for bad guys on a neighboring piece of property, especially an abandoned piece of property.

I agree, mostly. Just as all LEOs are not equal, neither are all citizens. Generalization is something I'll always quibble with. In this case, my quibble is that some (many) cops are less qualified than some (many) civilians in this regard.

My stance is that when I see a crime being committed, I should report it to law enforcement and stay out of their way while they do their job. I believe that's what you are recommending, so I don't think we are really that far apart in terms of what we advise people to do.

I'm just trying to point out that while the advice you are giving regarding the law may be true in some places, its not true everywhere.


Unlike almost everyone else here posting "expert opinion" here on the board, I've had to go hunting for bad guys on unfamiliar property and in the dark. Even for somewhat familiar property it's not something an untrained civilian should be doing. It's something I won't and don't do any longer either since I've retired. I'll be happy to stay in a spot and defend it until help arrives.

Again, I agree.

Interesting anecdote:

A few years ago, a local citizen observed someone breaking into his neighbor's garage. He called the police, then went outside with his pistol. The burglar saw him and took off running. The citizen shouted for the burglar to stop. He didn't. The citizen shot him in the back, killing him.

The grand jury (correctly, IMO) no-billed the citizen.

The police, when they investigated, found a large cache of stolen property in the burglar's apartment. They cleared a boat-load of local burglaries.

I and many others in this community are grateful to the citizen who shot the scumbag. It could have been any of our houses next. This is an example of why I am glad Texas law is as it is, and will work to see it stays that way.

“Before we're done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!” - Adm. William F. "Bull" Halsey

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9884
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #95 on: December 29, 2008, 08:54:51 PM »
Your link regarding the Nazis is in regards to a well known falicy of what "could" have been an organized Jewish revolt in Germany.  I did not argue that the Jews could have or would have revolted, I argued that their ability to own firearms were taken away PRIOR to the general populace and by order of the govt.  Also, did you notice the quote by Hitler in the footnotes?  You need to head to the ER, you just shot yourself in the foot.  ;)


Ah yes, you want to play the "I know so-n-so, he told me XYZ" game with me.  If you truely did meet who you say you did and kneww him as well as you say you do, then feel very blessed.  As for my sources on the Khmer Rouge, the first or second chapter of "The Stones Cry Out", by Molyda Szymusiak (Buth Keo) details all they were instructed to leave behind or give up (including any weapons).  I'll dig out the page number, keep your bonnet on.  Also, "Year Zero Death", by Raymeond Naqui (spelling?) displays a very vivid picture of the structure of how the Cambodians were re-educated and also detailed the "absolutes", as in no weapons, no unapproved education, no unassigned food, no nothing without a Khmer Rouge approval.  I'll see if I can dig out my research projects and get even more sources for some exact quotes.  But, if you really think the Khmre Rouge was going to let the people have firearms, or they didnt detail that it was forbidden and for people to turn in any firearms... then you didnt learn anything when you were being spoken to by Haing Ngor, which whom you say you know (or knew, actually).  The Khmer Rouge was absolute.   



So basically you're taking the lack of ownership of ANY possessions and trying to turn it into a 'they took their firearms' argument. The fact is that the average cambodian civilian did not own firearms, and still do not.

You said:
Quote
Ask the victims of Pol Pot what they were told to first do prior to going to the instituionalizing "gatherings" (they were to turn in all firearms).

Which is rubbish, because they didn't own firearms. The only other people with firearms would've been regular armed forces or police, and they were usually killed on the spot.

Play the I know so and so card? I dunno, I've been part of a khmer family for around 20 or so years now. I got married in phnom penh. I think I have a fair idea of what went on there. And what you're saying about the cambodians and firearms being handed in is a very very long stretch of the imagination.

Offline culero

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #96 on: January 01, 2009, 12:59:24 PM »
Not going to ave a pissing contest with you over laws and law enforcement. When you put your bellybutton in a uniform and do the job for a few years, you can start to talk to me about it. Until then you are another self proclamed expert with no clue about the subject other than reading and talking.

I guess you hit the PM button by mistake.

I'm not surprised to hear you say this. You have no idea who I am or what my background is, but being a donut shop expert you can just intuit it. Typical response from exactly what's wrong with law enforcement in this country.

FYI, I've known a lot of cops in my time. I admire most of them because they are mostly professional in their behavior and they mostly do a good job of what they are supposed to do. I appreciate that very much. The entire community should.

Unfortunately, many of them do suffer from the delusion they are the sole and exclusive repository of wisdom regarding any subject that relates to how they earn a living. They seem to think they are somehow anointed
priests who possess knowledge that may only be known by the initiated.

Of course I understand that they have to deal with a butt-load of stupidity on a daily basis, and sympathize with that. Its got to be frustrating. I also understand that they study and train to do what they do, and therefore are entitled to be regarded as expert in their field.

Its still no excuse for arrogance. I find it unfortunate that a class of people who are otherwise fine folks who deserve to be admired tend to also be obnoxious when discussing their jobs or anything related to that subject.

FYI, Maverick, with all due respect you are the one here that doesn't know what the hell he is talking about.

The only thing I ever disputed here with you was the truth about your comment that deadly force is only legal when used to defend life. I only sought to add to the discussion that this isn't necessarily the case, and cited Texas law as an example.

Every reply you've made since then (until you decided to switch to the "I'm an expert so STFU" argument :)) has demonstrated both your lack of understanding the law as it applies in Texas, or your apparent refusal/inability (choose one) to read it, or perhaps just your disgust at being called out because you're Mighty Cop. Its all in very simple and plain to understand language - deadly force is allowed to be used in defense of property in Texas. Its all I ever argued with you about.

You've tried to stretch me into advocating shooting trespassers (which this was never about), you've tried to dodge the corner into Castle Doctrine (which this was never about), you've tried to move the discussion to people doing something illegal like going armed onto property they don't own or have an invitation to (which this was never about), you've even ignored that I have specifically agreed with you regarding how I should behave in these situations.

Just the fact that some lowly civilian tried to comment to you regarding a point of law from his home state has apparently annoyed you, now to the point of using the "I wore a badge, I know All, so you STFU!" argument. Please, spare me.

As a parting shot, I'm amused to remember the last time I disputed with a group of cops about something related to shooting. I heard a lot of the same kind of BS you're pitching now, until it was my turn to shoot. Taking all their pot money home was nice, but the looks on the arrogant salamanders' faces was priceless :)

“Before we're done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!” - Adm. William F. "Bull" Halsey

Offline texasmom

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6078
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #97 on: January 01, 2009, 01:34:40 PM »
Hornet, the difference being the value of life placed over all else.  That is a value this nation holds dear, both to the betterment and the detriment of its' citizenry. You may not agree, but there is a gradation in your response to a situation, in the law. 

Killing an intruder may seem like a cut and dry matter to you.  Yet, there are many shades of gray that can be applied to that.  Killing an intruder, armed, who is actively intent on harming you and yours is one side.  Killing an unarmed intruder who is a stupid kid on a dare from his friends, or an out of work parent just trying to feed their children is the other.  The law must be taken into account in all matters, not just the ones you see as pertinent.

Sorry, not seeing shades of gray there either.  If someone is willing to take a stupid dare ~ the reason it's 'dared' in the first place instead of a commonplace act is that there's a possible deadly consequence.  If an out of work parent is trying to feed their kids, they need to swallow their pride and get over to the local food bank instead of entering the home of others to steal.

The law is taken into account in all matters regarding intruders.  If they enter, they're taking the chance that they'll be killed for it.  If they're only injured & not killed they ought to consider themselves lucky; if they're killed it will serve as a reminder that breaking into someone elses home has consequences of the deadly kind.

<S> Easy8
<S> Mac

Offline culero

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #98 on: January 01, 2009, 02:13:50 PM »
Sorry, not seeing shades of gray there either.  If someone is willing to take a stupid dare ~ the reason it's 'dared' in the first place instead of a commonplace act is that there's a possible deadly consequence.  If an out of work parent is trying to feed their kids, they need to swallow their pride and get over to the local food bank instead of entering the home of others to steal.

The law is taken into account in all matters regarding intruders.  If they enter, they're taking the chance that they'll be killed for it.  If they're only injured & not killed they ought to consider themselves lucky; if they're killed it will serve as a reminder that breaking into someone elses home has consequences of the deadly kind.



I agree with all that. But, I agree with MORAY, too. Just because its justified doesn't mean it shouldn't be avoided if possible. While you are right in that one's actions expose oneself to consequences, its also true that circumstances can moderate consequences. Even if you are entitled within the law to use deadly force, doing the right thing means making sure you don't unless necessary.

“Before we're done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!” - Adm. William F. "Bull" Halsey

Offline minke

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 619
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #99 on: January 01, 2009, 04:28:35 PM »
After reading all these posts i'm rather glad I live in a country with tight gun control laws. I have a good security system,flood lights and a fluffy white alsatian,more than sufficient. As it has been pointed out,most burglars anywhere are opportunist dopeheads looking for the easy break in. Ive never understood the need for a huge arsenal of weaponry to defend your property. For some people out there their biggest concern in a break-in would be "desert eagle,AK or spas 12? hmmmmm."
If you want to use an automatic rifle to defend your family,then so be it. It'll probably scare the heck out of them, but cant see how spraying bullets is gonna help. You really need more than 6 bullets to protect your loved ones? It'll only take 1 to open pandora's box.
Dont get me wrong tho, I'd own a firearm if I was in the US. probably not an AK47,with its sucky fire selection switch,i'd empty the mag into the ceiling. Revolver sounds more than adequate.

my 2 cents (adjusted for inflation)

Offline texasmom

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6078
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #100 on: January 01, 2009, 04:53:45 PM »
I agree with all that. But, I agree with MORAY, too. Just because its justified doesn't mean it shouldn't be avoided if possible. While you are right in that one's actions expose oneself to consequences, its also true that circumstances can moderate consequences. Even if you are entitled within the law to use deadly force, doing the right thing means making sure you don't unless necessary.

Yeah, I agree with that as well.  I guess it's just easier to say that I agree with you than it ever is to say I agree with Moray because his posts are so pompous and holier than thou.
<S> Easy8
<S> Mac

Offline SFRT - Frenchy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5420
      • http://home.CFL.rr.com/rauns/menu.htm
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #101 on: January 01, 2009, 05:09:40 PM »
Hey I like this Texas chick  :cool:
Dat jugs bro.

Terror flieger since 1941.
------------------------

Offline Hornet33

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2487
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #102 on: January 02, 2009, 09:02:39 AM »
Yeah, I agree with that as well.  I guess it's just easier to say that I agree with you than it ever is to say I agree with Moray because his posts are so pompous and holier than thou.

 :aok  You got that right. Shades of grey is just anouther way of saying you are unwilling to take a stance on right and wrong but are willing to put your and your families life on the line for a "what if" situation. I consider anyone in my home uninvited a direct personal threat against me no matter what their intentions are and I will deal with that threat in the most expediant manner available to me. Steel on target, center mass, till the target is on the ground. The way I was raised and my personal beliefs will let me sleep at night afterwards.
AHII Con 2006, HiTech, "This game is all about pissing off the other guy!!"

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #103 on: January 02, 2009, 12:07:41 PM »
Quote
FYI, Maverick, with all due respect you are the one here that doesn't know what the hell he is talking about.

Actually Maverick sounds like he's forgotten more then you've ever known. Even worse you sound like a fool Culero.

That rant of yours sounded like you just got off your ritalin.

Quote
As a parting shot, I'm amused to remember the last time I disputed with a group of cops about something related to shooting. I heard a lot of the same kind of BS you're pitching now, until it was my turn to shoot. Taking all their pot money home was nice, but the looks on the arrogant woots' faces was priceless


Ever notice how these characters with their Internet cop obsessions never fail to say how they can outshoot the police?
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline culero

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Called Police 2nd time in a week
« Reply #104 on: January 02, 2009, 12:27:31 PM »
Actually Maverick sounds like he's forgotten more then you've ever known. Even worse you sound like a fool Culero.

That rant of yours sounded like you just got off your ritalin.

So, you also believe that Texas law does not allow the use of deadly force to protect property? If so, you're just as off-base as Mav on this.

Ever notice how these characters with their Internet cop obsessions never fail to say how they can outshoot the police?

No cop obsession at all here. If I'd wanted to be one, I would have been. I've declined more than one invitation to join a local police force. I respect the job, but its not for me.

Ever notice how many cops seem to think you have to be a cop before you know how to read and understand the law? Ever notice how many cops seem to think you have to be a cop to be a disciplined shooter? That's more akin to obsession, or rather delusion, if you ask me. Practice makes perfect, buddy, and the law is a public document. You work for the taxpayers, not the other way around. Get over it.

“Before we're done with them, the Japanese language will be spoken only in Hell!” - Adm. William F. "Bull" Halsey