BRaptor

From what I had known of him before, he's been: Anti-2A Hypocrite Bit of a lush/drinker Pointless/senseless pontificator (when he's drunk, anyway) and now, he's a home-invasion robbery victim. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h6eMx8qYAupeLDmAEFILQLZ4HVQA?docId=624fb3f556bd4f23b721e752b492f9d4 From the Associated Press At least he stuck to his "guns" and kept himself completely disarmed at home, just like he wants you and me to be! I'm very thankful that neither he nor his family members were hurt.

It's a tough scenario. I'd be willing to bet, even if in a state with a strong castle doctrine, you're gonna get charged, because you shot a cop while he was on duty (they're not regular citizens, they do have a special place in the law, and with that special place comes a special obligation, too. But, they're certainly not above the law, either.). I think it would come down to (assuming you're still alive, of course) convincing a jury that you had no idea they were officers. Things to consider: whether the officers announced on entry, whether they had identifying marks, the amount of light in the room and probably some other factors that I have no idea about. It's a horrible situation to be in, for sure; you likely just killed a man because he made a mistake of not announcing in the heat of the moment. Regardless of criminal repercussions, that would weigh heavily on my conscience.

Sorry about popping off like that. I had just finished responding to something that the anti-gun blogger (in the other thread) had said to me. I was not in the right frame of mind to respond to a friendly post. I misinterpreted your post, too. As for the peeing comment, it was half-jest. I think it's a possible explanation of what he was doing in the bathroom. Kid ran from the cops on the street (ok, that's bad), thought he made it home safe (which is why he walked in his front door, rather than run) and went to take a leak. Of course, it's still tough to get past him hanging out in the bathroom for so long with the police (or someone, if one wishes to believe he didn't know it was the police) trying to kick in the front door.

Ding ding ding....winnar! This boy flipped on his "crew" and probably gave the prosecutor some very good intel. Thus, he gets a slap on the wrist as a reward for being more of a criminal than any of us could ever think of being (remember, Aitken got 7 years for MUCH less). Plus, he's a former police officer, which means not only was he probably part of organized crime, but he also betrayed the public trust (something courts don't like, when officers go bad). NJ at its best, making deals with the devil. On the other hand, it's kind of nice to see NJ go "soft" (LOL) on someone for breaking these stupid gun laws.

Here, let me Google that for you: http://abclocal.go.c...york&id=8537038 I absolutely believe that the police's "reason" for the "stop and frisk" is piss-poor. I "adjust my waistband" every now and again, too. Even in public! Does that make me a target for stop and frisk? sheesh. But the minute you start to run when the police approach you, you (legally) enter a different world. Running from the police is sufficient to give rise to probable cause for temporary seizure of and search of the person, exigent circumstances of the person's mobility combined with the likelihood of loss of evidence should the police go apply for a warrant gives you an exemption from the warrant requirement. The fact that he entered his home (which is sacred 4A territory) means they need an exception to enter w/o warrant. Here, probable cause is based on the running, now there is Hot Pursuit exception to the warrant requirement combined with concerns of loss of evidence for exigent circumstance (now "justified" by the fact that the PD found him in the bathroom, apparently flushing drugs....but I wonder why it took him several minutes to flush the drugs...doesn't make sense). Thus, from the looks of this case, it's fairly well-settled law that no 4A violation occurred from the entry. BUT, the NYPD is NOTORIOUS for harrassing, stopping and frisking minorities for seemingly no reason, and making $hit up to justify a stop and frisk. As a department, they have a fantastic reputation as jack-booted thugs. I hate their policies, even if they are "effective." So, his running might be "justified" to avoid harassment. Unfortunately, running from the police is not a recognized way of dealing with police harassment. Especially in NY (state, not just City), pretty much the only way to deal with harassment is a Section 1983 lawsuit. I think the entry is MUCH more easily justified. The shoot, not so much. How would you like it if someone burst in on you taking a pee and shot you? (oversimplification, meant to be funny, please don't take it seriously)

I use AVG It's free, does a good job, and doesn't gobble up your computer's resources.

It is the other side. Refusing to engage the police in a conversation and running from them like a criminal are two very different things (as SCOTUS has already decided). Please don't mischaracterize this person's behavior. Also, if you had read my post carefully, I NEVER said it was ever sufficient grounds to kill someone. In fact, I said the opposite. Please stop it.

HA!! She wrote me this response, because I followed up. Edited to Add: I specifically told her in my follow-up that she didn't owe me anything. I told her that I had just hoped that she would fulfill the 1st Amendments intentions of encouraging intelligent discourse. She has, obviously, refused. Se la vie (I also "speak a little french.")

I spent a lot of time responding to most of her ignorance. She didn't approve my comment. Though, she approved and responed to many other comments that made "us" look bad or that she could quickly and easily dismiss. Shocking, I know. My comment completely called into question EVERYTHING that she said (outside of the racial implications, because those had already been disproven). Yes, not a peep out of this self-righteous.......nevermind. I hate people that are ignorant who are completely dedicated to remaining ignorant.

I watched this on the news the other night. This reporting is EXTREMELY one-sided and disgusting. The Exigent Circumstance is called Hot Pursuit. The police had identified this "youth" out on the street as a suspicious person and attempted to approach him. The youth ran, the police followed. The youth ran into his house, the police followed. What happened inside is anyone's guess, but this "kid" was no angel and no stranger to police (at least two prior arrests for marijuana and burglary). There is surveillance video of the guy running from police when they try to approach, and the police chasing him all the way home. The police say he was in the bathroom (flushing drugs) when they found him. Now, no matter what crimes this kid committed, or his criminal history, he didn't deserve to be shot for them. But, if he made some moves or had an object that made an officer believe that he had a weapon and that officer feared for his life, then, sorry, you're gonna get shot. There is much more to this story than was reported.

Thanks!

Can a brother get a link?

New Video: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/video/6715311-seen-at-11-whos-packing-heat/ In hindsight, this was probably the most pro-gun piece the reporter could get past the editor, so long as it had a "girl power" message attached.

The video is now on its way to another 10:1 negative rating. When I voted, it was only at about 3:1 negative. KEEP IT UP!

Hmmm.....a group made up entirely of government's executive leaders, who are representing and acting in their official government capacity are selectively deactivating ratings and comments on certain of their videos and they're deleting comments made by Americans. Hmmmmm......very interesting You say 80% dislike. I choose to see it as 8:1 AGAINST these MAIG idiots. Now, it's up to 10:1. We ARE the majority.

I hear ya. I was born and raised in FL. This is what freedom smells like, my friends: http://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/ocala/recarea/?recid=40236 The link is about the free, open-to-the-public, self-policed pistol, rifle and shotgun range in the Ocala National Forest. It's paid for and maintained by the state of FL. Well, it's "free" in that it's paid for out of tax dollars levied on firearms and ammunition.

I'll answer the questions inline below, not because I'm trying to be a jerk, but because it's easier. Hope this helps.

The first rule about the pie is. We do not talk about the pie.

I propose Friday the 3rd at 7pm. I went to Rutt's once for a Subaru meet-up. The place is a dump and the food is incredibly greasy. Perhaps that's what you yanks like? None-the-less, I'll tackle the "Ripper." LOL

Welcome to the forum! Yeah, that story (told in its various forms) still makes me smile, even though it is a bit flippant for my tastes.

Sadly, this Bill has been flopping around Trenton for the past 8 years. It will be introduced. Then the idiot leadership in the Senate will send it to the committe on Law and Public Safety, where the idiot leadership there will let it languish for the remainder of the 2012 legislative session. I've written my "representatives:" Nia H. Gill, Thomas P. Giblin and Sheila Y. Oliver. They wouldn't dignify my brief, calm, polite letters which took quite some time to write, and requested responses with any kind of response. Not a peep out of those three clowns. Perhaps you could write your representatives. Maybe they respect your vote. :thsmiley_deadhorse:

I carry my "expensive cutlery" (SOG Tomcat 3.0) everywhere, every day. I use it on a regular basis both at home and away from home. It holds an edge better than any blade I've ever had, the action is smooth and the grip is extremely comfortable. I only need a "lawful reason" to carry my SOG. My lawful reason? For anything that a good folding knife is useful for. You want details? I want my lawyer. You want to "confiscate" it? You'll regret it.

I don't know what all the bashing is about. A cup of drip coffee at Starbucks costs about the same as anywhere else. Plus, the staff understands "small, medium and large." It's not like they'll spit on you for asking for a medium cup of drip, black or with room for milk. In fact, they'll smile and say "$2.05, please." Better, yet, if you want some "skinny, frappa mappa, chai, machiato," they have the staff that can provide that product, too! It's funny how all you "free marketers" bash a place that's done such a great job of succeeding in a nearly totally OPEN/FREE market. Engage in hypcricy much? I'll be at Starbucks on the 14th. Open your minds, and you might go back after the 14th.

NY State is one of the FEW "duty to retreat states." I guess she missed that part in her bar exam studies? If there is an opportunity for the "victim" to retreat in complete safety, they must do so, no lethal force is permitted. There are few exceptions, but playing "Gran Torino" isn't one of the exceptions.

Anyone else catch this one? Now, I'm not naive. I know some kids drink. But mom appears to be in on it and condone the activity. I think it's a little stupid to just spout this little fact out to the police and the media. Stay classy, LI!