If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

[Wilbur Right]

I hope you won't think I'm a raving paranoiac in calling attention to this. What is happening in Germany, France, Denmark and in other European cities will soon be happening here.

Ah another HOPE dashed. But you do seem nice and very sincere.


Police train pretty hard with firearms. they miss their targets in real life.
Soldiers spend a lot of time at the firing range. Most of the ammo fired in battle never hits anything.

While your training idea sounds fine, who is going to spend a certain amount of time every day or couple of days firing a gun when they have never had a reason to pull a gun on somebody in their lives?

Most peole think ok, I got my gun, I got my CCW now bring it on. Ima bad mutta fukka with my gun. No practice necessary.

As I think Mike tyson said; everybodies got a plan till they get punched in the face.

Eveybody is Rambo till someone is firing rounds at you. Or they smash you in the head with a bat.

But curious, how many times have you had to shoot someone or defend yourself with a gun?. And how many rounds do you fire a day/week to keep yourself ready to go?

 

[Wilbur Right]

the requirements for obtaining CCW. In addition to that, the federal government should put in place a subsidized training program for all civilian CCW applicants. The cost of this training should be affordable and available to anyone who wishes to carry a gun.

Another big governmnet program. No thanks.

What about those billions we spend on the military. And those SWAt units. And the National Guard. And on and on.

I think the government spends enough on defense. If a private citizen wants to exercise their right to a fire arm, it is up to the citizen to pay for their own training.

You know we hav 100 million people with guns in this country. they are stopping crime (according to some) at the rate of 2.5 million DGUs per year.

And some are ready to start the revolution.

What more do you want?

 

[JoeMoma]

But if not properly licensed to do so, isn't carrying a firearm a chargeable offense in NYC? So shooting the perp makes the victim liable to be charged also, no?

More on this issue:

Back in the 1970s a medical electronics repair technician named Bernhard Goetz often traveled by subway during the early morning hours with expensive test equipment. After being assaulted and robbed twice Goetz applied for a carry permit but was denied. So he took a pistol course, obtained and carried an illegal .38 revolver.

One night at 2AM, while riding on a deserted subway train, Goetz was approached and surrounded by five youths who menacingly demanded money from him. Goetz drew his illegal gun and shot three of them, paralyzing one, and the other two fled. Goetz then got off the train and disappeared.

This incident became a sensation and for several months Goetz was celebrated by New Yorkers as the "Mystery Shooter" -- a genuine folk hero.

Believing his celebrity would protect him from prosecution, Goetz surrendered after three months. He was tried and sentenced to a one year prison term. But all the detectives assigned to the shooting quietly agreed they really made no effort to find the "Mystery Shooter." And most insiders agree that Goetz's mistake was disappearing instead of just waiting for the police and surrendering himself -- because he surely would have been acquitted for the shooting and gotten a slap on the wrist for the illegal gun.

Seems to me that his mistake was turning himself in since the detectives really made no effort to find him.

 

[eagle1462010]

Hmmm.........thread still going on..............

Officer............why did you shoot the man with the knife 6 times.................

Me.................It's a revolver and only holds 6 rounds.........sorry I didn't have more ammo than that......

Officer..........

 

[MikeK]

Seems to me that his mistake was turning himself in since the detectives really made no effort to find him.

Exactly.

I was told by a NYC cop I knew that the detectives assigned to that case were making no real effort to find the "Subway Shooter." One reason is they admired what he did, but the main reason is there would have been a public sense of outrage if they caught him -- because the People identified with what he did. Subway crime went down to virtual zero for months after his action.

But hero worship began to fade when an over-confident Goetz turned himself in and began running his mouth. The public was expecting a Charles Bronson but they got a Pee-Wee Herman with a smug attitude.

 

[MikeK]

I hope you won't think I'm a raving paranoiac in calling attention to this. What is happening in Germany, France, Denmark and in other European cities will soon be happening here.

Ah another HOPE dashed. But you do seem nice and very sincere.


Police train pretty hard with firearms. they miss their targets in real life.
Soldiers spend a lot of time at the firing range. Most of the ammo fired in battle never hits anything.

Have you considered what the same situations would be if the police and the military had no training at all? Give that some thought. I'm not recommending perfection -- just improvement.

While your training idea sounds fine, who is going to spend a certain amount of time every day or couple of days firing a gun when they have never had a reason to pull a gun on somebody in their lives?

Anyone who wishes to obtain a CCW. Their choice.

Most peole think ok, I got my gun, I got my CCW now bring it on. Ima bad mutta fukka with my gun. No practice necessary.

That's your assumption, which certainly isn't based on the record of licensed and trained gun owners in America -- very few of whom ever perpetrate gun crimes.

As I think Mike tyson said; everybodies got a plan till they get punched in the face.

I don't know if Tyson ever said that. But if he did one would experience a far different reaction from punching an ordinary individual in the face than he would from punching Tyson. (Don't you agree?)

Eveybody is Rambo till someone is firing rounds at you. Or they smash you in the head with a bat.

But what if you're not the target of the attack but rather an armed bystander? No "Rambo" factor there, just conscientious response. Get out of the habit of thinking only of yourself.

But curious, how many times have you had to shoot someone or defend yourself with a gun?. And how many rounds do you fire a day/week to keep yourself ready to go?

I could tell you anything. Would you believe it? So what's the difference?

Draw your own conclusions. (You're good at that.)

 

[Maryland Patriot]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot.

 

[MikeK]

the requirements for obtaining CCW. In addition to that, the federal government should put in place a subsidized training program for all civilian CCW applicants. The cost of this training should be affordable and available to anyone who wishes to carry a gun.

Another big governmnet program. No thanks.

What about those billions we spend on the military. And those SWAt units. And the National Guard. And on and on.

I think the government spends enough on defense. If a private citizen wants to exercise their right to a fire arm, it is up to the citizen to pay for their own training.

What I am recommending is based on the probability that the American People will soon become aware of the need for a substantial number of armed citizens, because the nature of the threat we are faced with is such that the military can't deal with it without a declaration of martial law and the police are too few and far between to immediately confront the allah-akhbar folks who undoubtedly will be making the rounds more frequently. We are engaged in a very special kind of war, one which the People must be prepared to deal with at the citizen level.

In terms of cost for a civilian training program, the money wasted on redundant militarization of the civilian police would more than pay the cost. Less than ten percent of the money wasted on the wholly counterproductive drug war would easily pay the cost. You should be focusing on existing waste rather than seeking to avoid the cost of a necessary program.

In simple terms, as you soon will be made to realize, there is an urgent need for more armed citizens in the U.S. The cost of training them will be minuscule in proportion to its value.

You know we hav 100 million people with guns in this country. they are stopping crime (according to some) at the rate of 2.5 million DGUs per year.

Most of them need training -- although they would vigorously disagree. But it's necessary for the impending purpose.

And some are ready to start the revolution.

And some are ready to die for the opportunity to strike at infidels and earn a trip to paradise. What would you suggest we do about that? Or do you think what I'm saying here is exaggerated hysteria?

What more do you want?

I want less, not more. Less uninformed anti-gun rhetoric. Fewer Americans who know nothing about guns, who are afraid of guns, and who are not inclined to defend themselves or their fellow citizens under any circumstances.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot,

assumption on your part. No more or less valid than an assumption that they saw the slasher running away and would have been able to get off a shot. Or, someone else saw it happen and shot the slasher.
You try to offer assumptions as fact and it just cant work.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot,

assumption on your part. No more or less valid than an assumption that they saw the slasher running away and would have been able to get off a shot. Or, someone else saw it happen and shot the slasher.
You try to offer assumptions as fact and it just cant work.

Read the damn story in the OP. Never saw it coming.

 

[theHawk]

Your defense attorney will have an easier time defending you IF you dont shoot them in the back. Something about shooting someone when they are running away from you might cause the shooter a problem.

Not if he/she is justified in shooting him.

In the topic example, shooting this slasher in the back as he's escaping would be perfectly justifiable because of the imminent threat he represents. But if there are a lot of witnesses around it is advisable to verbally command him to stop before pulling the trigger.

Yeah....you can't shoot someone running away.....if you do you are going to jail.

Someone running around with a knife after stabbing someone can be shot from any direction. He's an imminent threat to any human being he comes across.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot,

assumption on your part. No more or less valid than an assumption that they saw the slasher running away and would have been able to get off a shot. Or, someone else saw it happen and shot the slasher.
You try to offer assumptions as fact and it just cant work.

Read the damn story in the OP. Never saw it coming.

read the damn story yourself tardo, she saw it coming. She saw him before he slashed.
wont even point out that it was one of those filthy subhuman illegals you have woody for.
way to go liberals, flood the country with illegal criminals, and take away the right for a citizen to protect themselves or others.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

If someone slashes your face with a knife, do you have the Right to shoot them?

Yes, only as you can see in this case, the gun does you no damn good.

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot,

assumption on your part. No more or less valid than an assumption that they saw the slasher running away and would have been able to get off a shot. Or, someone else saw it happen and shot the slasher.
You try to offer assumptions as fact and it just cant work.

Read the damn story in the OP. Never saw it coming.

read the damn story yourself tardo, she saw it coming. She saw him before he slashed.
wont even point out that it was one of those filthy subhuman illegals you have woody for.
way to go liberals, flood the country with illegal criminals, and take away the right for a citizen to protect themselves or others.

She saw him at the last second, didn't even know he cut her right away, dumbfuck. That's what "sneak attack" means.

“All of a sudden, I feel a presence behind me, so I turn to look and he grabbed my phone, and my first instinct was to grasp on tighter to the phone,” Santos said. “I think he took that as me trying to fight back. I didn’t really see what he cut me with, he just slashed my cheek.”

 

[Wilbur Right]

But what if you're not the target of the attack but rather an armed bystander? No "Rambo" factor there, just conscientious response. Get out of the habit of thinking only of yourself.

You might want to check with a cop or attorney as to what charges you would face if you shot and killed someone who may have attacked someone else, but didnt attack you.

What happens if you start shooting at a criminal that didnt attack you and you miss the criminal and shoot some innocent person. Do the cops just let that little mistake slide by?

And some are ready to die for the opportunity to strike at infidels and earn a trip to paradise. What would you suggest we do about that? Or do you think what I'm saying here is exaggerated hysteria?

Exaggerated hysteria? Yep. Well that and we must sure waste a lot of money on a military and security apparatus if we cant stop the muslim hoard you are anticipating.

I thought those hundreds of billions of dollars we spend were good for something? Not in your opinion eh?

 

[2aguy]

helps out the next victim.

Nope. They never saw them coming, or got off a shot,

assumption on your part. No more or less valid than an assumption that they saw the slasher running away and would have been able to get off a shot. Or, someone else saw it happen and shot the slasher.
You try to offer assumptions as fact and it just cant work.

Read the damn story in the OP. Never saw it coming.

read the damn story yourself tardo, she saw it coming. She saw him before he slashed.
wont even point out that it was one of those filthy subhuman illegals you have woody for.
way to go liberals, flood the country with illegal criminals, and take away the right for a citizen to protect themselves or others.

She saw him at the last second, didn't even know he cut her right away, dumbfuck. That's what "sneak attack" means.

“All of a sudden, I feel a presence behind me, so I turn to look and he grabbed my phone, and my first instinct was to grasp on tighter to the phone,” Santos said. “I think he took that as me trying to fight back. I didn’t really see what he cut me with, he just slashed my cheek.”

Let me rewrite that moment in time.....as he slashed me, I shot him until my gun went dry.....I am alive and he is in the morgue...and I saved others from getting slashed....

 

[gallantwarrior]

I wouldn't hesitate shooting them even after the slashing. I would claim trauma. The jury would vote for me...I would hope.

You might be wrong about the jury. Too many see the $$$ and think, "what if I were able to sue someone for a big payout?"

 

[Maryland Patriot]

I wouldn't hesitate shooting them even after the slashing. I would claim trauma. The jury would vote for me...I would hope.

You might be wrong about the jury. Too many see the $$$ and think, "what if I were able to sue someone for a big payout?"

The jury does not get any money, so that makes no difference to them. or shouldnt

 

[MikeK]

Exaggerated hysteria? Yep. Well that and we must sure waste a lot of money on a military and security apparatus if we cant stop the muslim hoard you are anticipating.

Who said anything about a horde? Did what recently happened in Paris, Cologne, Denmark, Sweden and San Bernardino involve hordes. Or would you say they were examples in the incipient stage of a new kind of invasive warfare? A "horde" would be easy to deal with because it's big and visible. This new enemy is not.

I thought those hundreds of billions of dollars we spend were good for something? Not in your opinion eh?

Do yourself a favor and read this: 15 Facts About Military Spending That Will Blow Your Mind

There's a lot more on the same subject available via Google. Educate yourself a bit and we can continue the discussion.

 

[MikeK]

You might want to check with a cop or attorney as to what charges you would face if you shot and killed someone who may have attacked someone else, but didnt attack you.

An armed citizen has the same rights and responsibilities as a police officer when confronting a dangerous felon. If while you are armed you observe a violent attack take place in your presence and you use your weapon to either effect a citizen arrest of the attacker, or if you are forced to shoot him because he resists or attempts to flee after demonstrating he is a menace to society, so long as you have acted within the boundaries of necessity and your action is appropriate, what charges could be lodged against you?

It's your scenario, so what charges do you have in mind?

What happens if you start shooting at a criminal that didnt attack you and you miss the criminal and shoot some innocent person. Do the cops just let that little mistake slide by?

Of course not. What happens if a cop does that? (Think it never happens?)