Leaderboard

That doesn’t make sense, and frankly it isn’t helpful. You can not use deadly force to prevent suicide. Full stop. There are no “but”s, “technically”s, or “actually”s. You simply can not do it.

I

That loop is what keeps the end from sticking out and tenting your shirt. I have also found that if you use a t-shirt over the belt without that loop, your shirt can get cought on the shirt as you lift it up on the draw. I always use the loop now. Looks better and functions better. You can buy them separately now on Kore's site. https://www.koreessentials.com/products/belt-keepers FYI, I'm very happy with my Kore belts.

IANAL, but that's a park, so, no. But why would one need protection in that park? Woman sexually assaulted at gunpoint in D&R Canal State Park - centraljersey.com

I used a company called Steve Rich Environmental. They charged me 1200 bucks and there was zero problems. I would use them again in a heart beat.

For now, we are screwed and have to comply if we wish to carry. Hopefully this is challenged sooner rather than later. All the fees associated with the process should be enough to file a motion to stop this. What other Constitutionally protected rights require citizens to spend several hundreds of dollars and many,many, MANY hours before that right can used? None. The Bill Of Rights lays out actions THE GOVERNMENT is restricted from engaging in. Citizens shouldn't have to pay the government extraordinary fees to NOT restrict their rights. This is nothing short of extortion. And, IMHO, it is simply more intentional obstacles put into place by our "leaders" to make the process as difficult as possible so people say "To hell with this! It's not worth my time and money!". Imagine the uproar from the left if before people were allowed to vote they had to pass tests, invest hours and hours of time going here and there completing tasks, needed to have notarized letters from multiple people saying the voter was a good citizen and didn't have anything that would disallow them to vote AND pay hundreds of dollars before they could vote! Every two years. Cities would burn.

Lol we're so off course here. Ok, let's just not use deadly force to stop suicide. Back to the topic at hand. Is anyone filing motions against this stuff? Have lawsuits been filed? Anyone peaceful protesting? Or are we just kinda screwed into submission?

Jesus… Deadly force can also stop littering, speeding, jaywalking and shoplifting. Doesn’t mean you are permitted to do it!

You’re right. That is deadly force. If they live, it’s also aggravated assault. If they die, it’s murder. That’s probably universally in the US. You’re out of your mind if you think that whacking someone in the head with a bat is an appropriate response to someone threatening suicide. So what? If my aunt had balls, she would be my uncle. But she doesn’t, so she’s still my aunt (maybe not a great comparison for 2023, but you know what I mean). There is no exemption. You are not permitted to use deadly force to prevent suicide. I have stopped more than a few myself. I am sorry you had to experience that. It’s a lonely, terrible, and hopeless feeling staring at someone ready to jump, swing, stab, or shoot themselves and trying to talk them out of it. But never once have I had the thought - “I know, let’s shoot them!”

The example you gave has nothing to do with that, the shooters actions were to stop something else. I believe that would be considered deadly force in ALL places.

Dude, just give up this stupid quest of yours to be right. You are obviously ignorant to the facts and making yourself look like a fool. Kinda wondering why you are stuck on this incredibly improbable scenario like Rain Man and rejecting the contributions to this thread made by an actual expert . That was a rhetorical question, please do not feel compelled to answer it because it will not be responded to. Just accept the fact that you are wrong and move on. I think we are done here discussing your absurd claim that deadly force is appropriate to prevent suicide. It was a ridiculous premise to begin with. Seriously, let it go and if you can't, then go hire Evan Nappan for a proper legal answer that will straighten you out. That would be the prudent thing to do before you go out looking to prevent suicides with deadly force.

Bud, with all respect - you couldn’t be more wrong about what I know. And - I knew you were going to cherry pick this exact instance. First - this incident in Ohio in 1993 has nothing to do with current NJ use of force laws. Second - That sniper had to have special permission from superior officers to take that shot. Third - That was not just to stop a suicidal person. That was a standoff with an armed individual that was pointing a gun at other people as well as himself. He may have also been suicidal, but soon as he points the gun at others he becomes a threat to the public at large. The force employed by the sniper was authorized because it was justified to prevent the danger of serious bodily injury or death to the general public. That’s a completely different situation than a mere suicide. And before you go there - “Suicide by cop” isn’t really suicide. It’s a bad guy threatening violence on others to invoke a known outcome. From the “defenders” point of view, the use of deadly force was to prevent serious injury or death to themself or another, not to stop a suicidal person from completing the act. Just like stopping a “suicide bomber” - from a use of force standpoint, you are not using deadly force to stop someone from successfully completing suicide. You are preventing a deadly attack on the public.

Gotcha. I figured it was just an artifact of copy/paste from the document to the forum.

I think we need to enact Safe Lawmaking and Proficiency Qualification statutes requiring that anyone who wants to work in the New Jersey Legislature needs to pass several tests. If they can't demonstrate an ability to write a law that makes sense, they can't run for office.

Again. My explanation has little to do with NJ law. I am simply explaining how deadly force can be used to stop a suicide , period. The poster questioned why would an exception such as use of deadly physical force to stop a suicide be put in a law as of its an oxymoron to use such force. Remember that in some places a chokehold is now considered deadly physical force. Knocking someone out with bat to the head is considered in some places deadly physical force . Deadly physical force can stop a suicide . That’s why it might be written into a law to stop a suicide.