1LtCAP

ask and ye shall receive. http://law.onecle.com/new-jersey/2c-the-new-jersey-code-of-criminal-justice/3-4.html 2C:3-4. Use of force in self-protection. 2C:3-4. Use of Force in Self-Protection. a. Use of force justifiable for protection of the person. Subject to the provisions of this section and of section 2C:3-9, the use of force upon or toward another person is justifiable when the actor reasonably believes that such force is immediately necessary for the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful force by such other person on the present occasion. b. Limitations on justifying necessity for use of force. (1) The use of force is not justifiable under this section: (a) To resist an arrest which the actor knows is being made by a peace officer in the performance of his duties, although the arrest is unlawful, unless the peace officer employs unlawful force to effect such arrest; or (b) To resist force used by the occupier or possessor of property or by another person on his behalf, where the actor knows that the person using the force is doing so under a claim of right to protect the property, except that this limitation shall not apply if: (i) The actor is a public officer acting in the performance of his duties or a person lawfully assisting him therein or a person making or assisting in a lawful arrest; (ii) The actor has been unlawfully dispossessed of the property and is making a reentry or recaption justified by section 2C:3-6; or (iii) The actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm. (2) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to protect himself against death or serious bodily harm; nor is it justifiable if: (a) The actor, with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily harm, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or (b) The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that: (i) The actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor; and (ii) A public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform such duty, effect such arrest or prevent such escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom such action is directed. (3) Except as required by paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity of using force when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action. c. (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. (2) A 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: (a) The actor reasonably believed that the intruder would inflict personal injury upon the actor or others in the dwelling; or (b) The actor demanded that the intruder disarm, surrender or withdraw, and the intruder refused to do so. (3) An actor employing protective force may estimate the necessity of using force when the force is used, without retreating, surrendering possession, withdrawing or doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do or abstaining from any lawful action. L.1978, c.95; amended 1987, c.120, s.1; 1999, c.73.

i have one person that i am responsible for. that is mom. no one is gonna get through me in my home to hurt her. in the op scenario, i see silhouettes with guns, i'm doing what i gotta do to keep her safe. she only has me to depend on. take this all how you want to, but it's not intended in a bad way.

has anyone linked this guy to the statutes?

also take note of the name.

I MAY just upgrade, and give the one i'm using now to my mother........

how do you like it? how's it record? in segments, or constant? does it automatically loop over old stuff when it runs outta room?

nah...if it were one of them, it'd be lost.

what dash cam you running? mine can't zoom like that.......

but how do we find someone to run against those schmucks that may have a chance? there's a lot of you that are very politically savvy in here.....you're the guys we need to hear from on how to get a good guy in the office........or even just whom that good guy may be.......

it doesn't matter what letter comes after their name. as long as they're a friend of ours.

this was my point. cc is no friend of ours.....but he is a major improvement over what we've had for the last decade or so. now is the time to find someone to improve on him. find someone who IS a friend of ours. someone that has the balls to continue in the right direction, and keep the nazis in check.

INSTEAD of that, what can we do to ensure that there is a freedom friendly candidate on the ballot? what needs to be done, who can we try to get on there? now's the time to start. actually it's a bit late.....but if we start now, maybe we'll have success in getting someone better than cc, rather than one of the nazis that's hoping to take his place.......

i'd rather see em keep the v8 in there......and add twin turbos to that.

not to hijack....but is that your nova in the pic? gotta post em man! don't see those anymore.

they seem to be available almost everywhere for 20-30 bucks. several vendors here sell em, there's a private party in the classified selling them......

in my truck, i keep it all the way in the back. in a car, in the trunk.

unless we wake up enough people to get someone better.

i don't know why they felt the need to redesign the plugs. maybe a gm engineer came over and sabotaged it, lololol. overall, i feel that the 4.6 could've been every bit the engine that the current 5 liter coyote is. it's really a good strong design, with what appears to be many features taken from the old 427 sohc......with the exception of a dohc version, and not enough cubes. the current coyote engines are incredible. they've got torque right off idle, and pull right to redline. i've read reports of guys building(or using power adders) them up to nearly 1,000hp on the stock block. i think that the oil pump drive gear is the weak point in them right now, as i've also read a few reports of them breaking under high hp loads. can't wait to see what ford does with the gt350 next year. rumor mill says a flat plane crank 5.2 liter just over 500hp.

if i recall, there's something like 3 different versions of the 5.4 liter in the trucks, and each has it's own spark plug problem.

it'd be nice if they'd build something like that in the price range of the vette, and make it a vette killer.

they always try to put down american stuff. your mileage is thanks to two overdrives though if you've got a manual trans. hell.....could you imagine the mileage i'd get in my gt doing 70 only turning 1300rpm?

the one i'm looking at will need cleaning inside. it's been setting for about 6 years. needs a new top. i think it's just under 100k miles, and is a 91 if i recall(can't get into my invoicing system from home to be sure) and the price is right....as in well under 2k.

that's all?? or is that avg? i get 26-28 at 75-80mph in my gt./.....that's on the highway though. that said....i got a customer selling a miata, that i've been looking REALLY hard at.

you can still have that. there's a 72 f100 for sale by a customer of mine. beautiful truck. 390 automatic with a bench seat. no electronics at all. it'll get about 7mpg, handle corners like they're not there(helps keep the tow trucks in business, lolol), has a single speaker stereo, accelerate like a slug with salt poured on it, and might even start on the first try when it's zero degrees outside.

yep. the one that's shutting the radio off is programmed to do that.