Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think I read some manufacturers literature that stated their hollow point home defense ammo would not have sufficient energy to cause lethal injury after passing through a typical drywall wall.

 

Not to derail this further - but please stop. The amount of misinformation you are spreading around as advice or fact is ridiculous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh this was outside in the yard in front of the old dirt hill.

 

I used to be quite interested in ballistics when I was little... or at least interested in how much my little pellet gun could shoot through so I could brag to my friends lol

 

I see from your avatar that not much has changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - so now I'm telling people to fake a "crime scene" - one I did not create and I am "fear mongering" by citing a well known example of a fellow who is in jail for life for shooting/killing home invaders. I am public enemy number one!

 

Once again, let me make this perfectly clear. Nobody follow the advice that I posted. Nobody.

 

And I will again explain the reasoning for the advice given. It is not to please the cops, it is to please the jury. Chances are, if you defend yourself in a home invasion, you might just see yourself in court. Am I right or am I fear mongering? Or if you shoot a home invader dead, the cops will just clean up the mess, shake your hand and go away. So now you're in court, be it criminal or civil, and the other side is trying to paint you as neurotic fear mongering gun owner just wanting to shoot someone. The police can charge you with negligent discharge of a weapon, but the jury is the one that'll find you not guilty of the charge because of the "warning" intent. Her advice was from a culmination of an entire career in law enforcement and working with the courts and juries.

 

It is sad that we even have to think about these things because of the complex "duty to retreat" laws. Think too long and the bad guy gets the upper hand. Do what is instinctively right and face the possibility of going to jail for a long time.

 

Now can someone cite a case in NJ (your standards, not mine) where someone fired a warning shot and ended up in far worse shape legally than he otherwise would. Because I would say you are probably screwed whether you fire the warning shot or not. Just call 911 and wait, just like they want you to.

 

I can't believe I am even replying to this..

BUT DID YOU EVEN READ THE LINK YOU POSTED?

 

On 23 August 1999, Martin was charged with the murder of Barras, the attempted murder of Fearon, "wounding with intent to cause injury" to Fearon, and "possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life".[3]

English law permits one person to kill another in self defence only if the person defending him or herself uses no more than "reasonable force"; it is the responsibility of the jury to determine whether or not an unreasonable amount of force was used.[5] The jury at the trial were told that they had the option of returning a verdict of manslaughter rather than murder, if they thought that Martin "did not intend to kill or cause serious bodily harm".[6] However, the jurors found Martin guilty of murder by a 10 to 2 majority.[7]

He was sentenced to life in prison, the mandatory sentence for murder under English law.

 

this did not even happen in our country...

 

how about posting some instances where someone is rotting away because they did not fire a "warning shot" :facepalm:

 

the way NJ law is.. you are probably in MORE trouble by firing a warning shot..

the law allows for use of a firearm in the home to act against an aggressor if you feel your life is in immediate danger..

shooting a gun in any other situation is against the law... but maybe you know something I don't.. so how about some cases (in NJ would be nice.. but how about at least in this COUNTRY) where the individual was prosecuted because they did not first fire a warning shot.. I just spent a little time with google and I could not find a single case..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to derail this further - but please stop. The amount of misinformation you are spreading around as advice or fact is ridiculous.

 

Hello - I did not state it as fact, but rather I was paraphrasing some literature I had read. Here is the link to the website selling this ammo specialized for home defense which claims to be safer.

 

http://personaldefensesolutions.net/extreme-shock.htm

 

As far as the other comment I made about the "warning shot" (which I deeply regret now), it seems many of you cannot simply carry on a civil conversation on why this would be a bad thing without resorting to insults and piranha like behavior once there is a little blood in the water.

 

Don't worry, I am not "butthurt" about it. (seems to be a popular term here for people that have different opinions) Did I ever claim to be a lawyer or firearms expert? No, I didn't. Did I ever claim my opinions or comments are the word of God? No, I didn't. All of you "experts" can carry on with your big circle jerk. Maybe you can chase away every new member so you can all pat each other on the back. Sheesh.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See my sig? It has pretty much always said "Dupe........Aaaaargh!"

 

Why?

 

These were two responses I got from you friendly people in one of my first posts here. (I don't remember or care who posted those comments, but they were later removed) In that post, I stated that I was limited to a maximum of three purchase permits by my town. I had to scan and post the friggin' form to prove to you people I was telling the truth! This was a sign of things to come I suppose.

 

Can she fix NYC parking tickets too.........

 

No, she's retired. But I'm pretty sure she has killed more BG's and spent more hours in a courtroom than you or I. So put that in your hat and smoke it wise guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all seriousness, do your self a favor and and adhere to the following:

 

-Stop listening to others and do some research of the NJ Statutes on your own.

-Stop listening to others and get some Firearms training from a certified professional.

-Stop listening to others about how to evade a jury should an incident occur.

-Stop listening to others, if you have any questions ask them here and we will help if we can.

-STOP LISTENING TO OTHERS WHO GIVE BAD ADVICE..............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See my sig? It has pretty much always said "Dupe........Aaaaargh!"

 

Why?

 

These were two responses I got from you friendly people in one of my first posts here. (I don't remember or care who posted those comments, but they were later removed) In that post, I stated that I was limited to a maximum of three purchase permits by my town. I had to scan and post the friggin' form to prove to you people I was telling the truth! This was a sign of things to come I suppose.

 

I thnk you are misunderstanding things. I didn't read the thread where people asked you to post the form but there are good folks here that are working to bring all the local PDs into alignment and conformance. They want these forms so that they can approach the local PDs and get them to change their policies. People will surely believe that there are PDs that don't follow the rules laid out by NJ State.

 

Secondly, it irritates me that too many of the gun forums turn into a **** fest that if you shoot an intruder in a life or death situation in your home you'll be tried in court and most likely wind up in prison or spending $100,000 in legal fees to save yourself when no one can present a court case where this actually happening to anyone that followed the laws of his state. People envision either the intruder is coming at them with a weapon or the intruder is jumping out a window. In reallity, it is probably not so clear.

 

That intruder training class from GFH looks pretty intense if you get a chance to watch some of the videos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm immediately shooting until I feel that my family, my home and myself are safe. If there are investigations and/or legal issues to deal with later, at least I live another day to deal with those issues, unlike the intruder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thnk you are misunderstanding things. I didn't read the thread where people asked you to post the form but there are good folks here that are working to bring all the local PDs into alignment and conformance. They want these forms so that they can approach the local PDs and get them to change their policies. People will surely believe that there are PDs that don't follow the rules laid out by NJ State.

 

Secondly, it irritates me that too many of the gun forums turn into a **** fest that if you shoot an intruder in a life or death situation in your home you'll be tried in court and most likely wind up in prison or spending $100,000 in legal fees to save yourself when no one can present a court case where this actually happening to anyone that followed the laws of his state. People envision either the intruder is coming at them with a weapon or the intruder is jumping out a window. In reallity, it is probably not so clear.

 

That intruder training class from GFH looks pretty intense if you get a chance to watch some of the videos.

 

Whether or not the intruder is armed in NJ is completely irrelevant. Read the NJ statutes relating to use of force.

 

If are in your home and you feel that an intruder is threatening you, you may use anything up to and including lethal force. There's nothing in the statute about weapons, the amount of force allowed, or warning shots.

 

2C:39-4c

1) Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.2C:3-5, N.J.S.2C:3-9, or this section, the use of force or deadly force upon or toward an intruder who is unlawfully in a dwelling is justifiable when the actor reasonably believes that the force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself or other persons in the dwelling against the use of unlawful force by the intruder on the present occasion.

 

tab.gif(2)tab.gifA reasonable belief exists when the actor, to protect himself or a third person, was in his own dwelling at the time of the offense or was privileged to be thereon and the encounter between the actor and intruder was sudden and unexpected, compelling the actor to act instantly and:

 

tab.gif(a)tab.gifThe actor reasonably believed that the intruder would inflict personal injury upon the actor or others in the dwelling; or

 

tab.gif(b)tab.gifThe actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so.

 

And as for will you end up in court?

 

Since justification for use of force is an affirmative defense, you may be required to defend your actions in front of a jury. Depending on the prosecutor in your county you may or may not have to do this, but it is safe to assume that any time you intentionally injure another person you damn well better be prepared to justify your actions.

 

As for the advice about the warning shot after the fact. Think about this

 

bang bang bang bang.... ... ... bang

 

Unless you live in the middle of nowhere (this is NJ, you don't) Someone else is going to have heard this. They WILL be questioned by the investigators, so the investigators will know of this.

 

Either

a) You just executed him

b) You had an AD/ND

c) You faked firing a warning shot.

 

You don't think that any of these three possibilities will damage your credibility in front of a jury?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone in my home completely ignores the fact that he's staring down a loaded "ak" and takes one step towards me I'm immediatly assuming he's off his rocker and firing until the mag is empty or he's on the ground..

 

Lets not forget, people are insane and will cause harm to anyone anywhere for no rational reason

 

 

He should have been a smear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to derail this further - but please stop. The amount of misinformation you are spreading around as advice or fact is ridiculous.

I agree, and would even go further by saying this thread should be deleted if possible It could be miss cons-rewed as premeditated :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone in my home completely ignores the fact that he's staring down a loaded "ak" and takes one step towards me I'm immediatly assuming he's off his rocker and firing until the mag is empty or he's on the ground..

 

Lets not forget, people are insane and will cause harm to anyone anywhere for no rational reason

 

 

The scene 10 minutes after the end of the vid...

 

84aca56a45a5ed410.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether or not the intruder is armed in NJ is completely irrelevant. Read the NJ statutes relating to use of force.

 

If are in your home and you feel that an intruder is threatening you, you may use anything up to and including lethal force. There's nothing in the statute about weapons, the amount of force allowed, or warning shots.

 

[/size][/font]

 

And as for will you end up in court?

 

Since justification for use of force is an affirmative defense, you may be required to defend your actions in front of a jury. Depending on the prosecutor in your county you may or may not have to do this, but it is safe to assume that any time you intentionally injure another person you damn well better be prepared to justify your actions.

 

As for the advice about the warning shot after the fact. Think about this

 

bang bang bang bang.... ... ... bang

 

Unless you live in the middle of nowhere (this is NJ, you don't) Someone else is going to have heard this. They WILL be questioned by the investigators, so the investigators will know of this.

 

Either

a) You just executed him

b) You had an AD/ND

c) You faked firing a warning shot.

 

You don't think that any of these three possibilities will damage your credibility in front of a jury?

 

It's a bit late and your reply to my post has me confused. I'm not endorsing or condoning a warning shot. I didn't even talk about warning shots. I think they are stupid.

 

The only rebuttal to your post that I will make since I agree with most of it is to add the "reasonable person". Given the situation in your house with an intruder, a reasonable person must feel threatened. You may or may not feel threatened but it has to be reasonable. I wish I could find the GFH videos of this training on this. I saw a couple on the internet a month or two ago. One was a drunk guy that wondered into your house lost and drunk and disoriented. That seemed to be an example of an intruder that you couldn't shoot just because he was an intruder because he wasn't threatening.

 

The point of my post is that in real life you might have to deal with an intruder that is street smart and knows the laws of NJ and hopes you do too and won't shoot him in the back.

 

Guy coming at you, easy decision. Guy jumping out your window easy decision. Guy breaks down crying, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Don't shoot me. I got kids to feed." Maybe it's an act and he's got a knife or maybe it's not an act and he's not threatening you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. Guy breaks down crying, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Don't shoot me. I got kids to feed." Maybe it's an act and he's got a knife or maybe it's not an act and he's not threatening you.

 

He isn't going to get anywhere near me and I am not going to approach him. Cops would already be on the way and I would be ready to fire at him should it not be an act. Whether he is armed or not and regardless of what is coming out of his mouth, if he starts coming towards me with a gun drawn on him, he is most certainly threatening me.

 

Also, the second part of the definition of "reasonable belief" takes this into account. Per the law, if you order him to surrender (lay down and not move) and he begins moving towards you, he has refused to surrender and use of force is justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just have to throw my two cents in...

 

Never fire a warning shot in NJ. I don't know NY law, but in NJ, a "warning shot" is simply negligent discharge of a firearm (or "deadly weapon") and can result in criminal charges. Shoot only if you truly believe your life or another is in danger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious because a home invasion on the news had me thinking. I live in your typical sleepy NJ town, nothing much ever happens and my front doorknob general is unlocked when we're home during the day. However if I were faced with a true home invasion I'd be SOL because I don't have anything real handy unless I'm I the br. Have a young son that gets into everything. How do you guys that say that if you were charged you'd fire get to your gun? Because you would have mere seconds. Do you carry around the house? What's he solution here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious because a home invasion on the news had me thinking. I live in your typical sleepy NJ town, nothing much ever happens and my front doorknob general is unlocked when we're home during the day. However if I were faced with a true home invasion I'd be SOL because I don't have anything real handy unless I'm I the br. Have a young son that gets into everything. How do you guys that say that if you were charged you'd fire get to your gun? Because you would have mere seconds. Do you carry around the house? What's he solution here?

 

Some people do carry around the home, or may have access in different locations. As far as leaving doors unlocked, well I do live in a nice neighborhood but my family and I will always have the doors locked unless we are on the front porch. I don't go around wearing my tinfoil hat or anything like that, but I am prepared and ready when at home, and like I said I live in a nice neighborhood but I think that people who do this that live in crappy neighborhoods can only rib others who may not have anything worth robbing so they might as well go to a place where people have things.

 

Do I think all places are unsafe, No, do I think everyone everywhere should be vigilant, Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...