It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man Faces Jail After Protecting Home From Masked Attackers (with video footage)

page: 8
67
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
uh if people are firebombing his property dont you think HE did something bad to begin with?? Also if he guy has multiple cameras around his crappy property dont you again think there is a reason why... is this your average god fearing good citizen.. hell no, and he carries the gun, cameras, and dogs because he obviously isnt a good person to begin with and likely deserves more than jail for crimes he likely hasnt been caught for yet. Its not blind judgement, but common sense, afterall where this is smoke there is fire.....
edit on 25-1-2011 by hiii_98 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by RRJ58
 


He showed amazing restraint. If you are trying to turn me and mine in to fire roasted buzzrd snacks, I will use lethal force. At my home these guys would have caught rifle rounds with their chest. I do not shoot to warn. That puts innocents in danger.

If lethal force is used against me and mine it will be returned. That is especially true if they predators have me out numbered.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by romanmel
 



Although we disagree on our views of law enforcement in the United States, I am sure we can agree that the United States got it right in making it legal to protect your life and property with any means neccessary. If this happened in the United States, the police would have responded and the real criminals would have been charged not this guy who did exactly what he should have done.



What?? Have u ever called the police in the United States while a crime was "in progress"? 15-45min response times, cities or suburbs, depends on the time of day. AND... after u call the police, their USUAL reply to the victim is... "OK, so what did YOU do for this to happen?"
Next step is usually arresting the victim for some random violation the police happen to observe. They don't like responding to calls and not dragging someone away for something, and it's never the criminals in my experience. Get out from under that rock u live under.
edit on 25-1-2011 by JibbyJedi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by hiii_98
uh if people are firebombing his property dont you think HE did something bad to begin with?? Also if he guy has multiple cameras around his crappy property dont you again think there is a reason why... is this your average god fearing good citizen.. hell no, and he carries the gun, cameras, and dogs because he obviously isnt a good person to begin with and likely deserves more than jail for crimes he likely hasnt been caught for yet. Its not blind judgement, but common sense, afterall where this is smoke there is fire.....
edit on 25-1-2011 by hiii_98 because: (no reason given)


If you read the story, his neighbors farm animals kept coming onto his property, he asked many times to have them stop. They did not, so he shot one of the animals that came onto his property.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   


He showed amazing restraint. If you are trying to turn me and mine in to fire roasted buzzrd snacks, I will use lethal force. At my home these guys would have caught rifle rounds with their chest. I do not shoot to warn. That puts innocents in danger.


lol comments like that sound all cool and tough and macho, but the reality is kill a man and face the possability of going to jail for life. so now your in jail getting ass rapped by bubba how cool and macho are you now for "pumping rounds in them" as your the one now getting pumped! I dont agree with the justice system and wouldnt wager my freedom on it ever
edit on 25-1-2011 by hiii_98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by hiii_98


He showed amazing restraint. If you are trying to turn me and mine in to fire roasted buzzrd snacks, I will use lethal force. At my home these guys would have caught rifle rounds with their chest. I do not shoot to warn. That puts innocents in danger.


lol comments like that sound all cool and tough and macho, but the reality is kill a man and face the possability of going to jail for life. so now your in jail getting ass rapped by bubba how cool and macho are you now for "pumping rounds in them" as your the one now getting pumped! I dont agree with the justice system and wouldnt wager my freedom on it ever
edit on 25-1-2011 by hiii_98 because: (no reason given)


What do you suggest then. If someone comes onto your property and threatens you, what do you do ? What to you suggest everyone else does in an unknown situation which involves a perpetrator ??

If you disagree with what this guy did, or you disagree with protecting your property, please, provide a solution. Don't just say, "I hate guns" or " that's wrong" let us know if there is a better way. Do you plan to talk the perpetrators down, what ?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by hiii_98
 


He killed their chicken that was in his yard. He did this after asking them to keep said animal in their yard. I would hardly call shooting a chicken a good reason to firebomb a man while he lays sleeping.

Have you ever thought that the man may be a hoarder or picker that has had problems with theft? Could it be that he has been harrassed before and had the cameras for protective reasons? No he had a less than spectacularly maintained yard and cameras. He must be a criminal.

Your post reeks of ignorance. You have no proof that this man has ever done anything criminal. Yet you claim he deserves jail because he must be guilty of something he hasn't been caught doing. That kind of thinking is what leads to the loss of all liberty.

"Well we'll just lock you up for a couple of weeks."
"Why officer?"
"Well you had an alarm system, security cameras, and a gun."
"I owned them all legally."
"Yeah but that combination means you must be guilty of a crime we haven't caught you doing. So, we'll just lock you up as a deterent to your future criminal enterprises."
"Where is your evidence that I did anything wrong?"
"We don't need it. You just happen to posess the right combination of legal devices. Don't worry two weeks out of work and away from your family won't disrupt your life or hurt your professional prospects."



On top of that he has no right to defend his life because he must be guilty of a crime that there is no evidence to support. Wow. Very rarely am I so shocked by something on ATS.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by hiii_98
 


Actually in the state where I live, I would be completely with in my rights. I would be protecting my family and myself from an mminent threat of serious bodily injury or death. That means the shooting would be justified. I have studied the use of force laws for my state. I know when I can and can't use lethal force. This is one scenario where I could.

Good attempt at showing ignorance. It came through with flying colors.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrumsRfun
This was done in Canada and we have different gun laws.
I have found someone in my home once and laid a whooping on him without charges.
I agree with the authorities on this one...take his guns away.
This was an ongoing dispute with his neighbor and regardless of the situation...pulling a gun was a bad call on his part.
There is warranted force and unwarranted force....pulling a gun was not the right decision in my opinion.
We aren't Americans...our laws are different for a reason...if the first thing this guy thought of was to pull a gun then I am glad they have been taken away.

No offence to our gun toting American friends.
edit on 24-1-2011 by DrumsRfun because: (no reason given)
And what if the guy was sleeping?Pulling a gun wasn't the right decision?should he have talked to them and asked them nicely to stop?I would have shot them,no regrets,peopke should have the right to protect themselves and their property.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The Christian thing to do would have been to just shoot all three of them to protect himself, his wife, and his property. I'm rather disappointed he didn't kill these monkeys.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by VI0811
 


i'm fine waving a gun around in a bluff,but also a phone in my other hand calling the police.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by hiii_98
 


Actually in the state where I live, I would be completely with in my rights. I would be protecting my family and myself from an mminent threat of serious bodily injury or death. That means the shooting would be justified. I have studied the use of force laws for my state. I know when I can and can't use lethal force. This is one scenario where I could.

Good attempt at showing ignorance. It came through with flying colors.


i wish you luck testing that law, i myself wouldnt regardless how well i felt i knew my hillbilly rights



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrumsRfun
This was done in Canada and we have different gun laws.
I have found someone in my home once and laid a whooping on him without charges.
I agree with the authorities on this one...take his guns away.
This was an ongoing dispute with his neighbor and regardless of the situation...pulling a gun was a bad call on his part.
There is warranted force and unwarranted force....pulling a gun was not the right decision in my opinion.
We aren't Americans...our laws are different for a reason...if the first thing this guy thought of was to pull a gun then I am glad they have been taken away.

No offence to our gun toting American friends.
edit on 24-1-2011 by DrumsRfun because: (no reason given)




So, if this were done to you and your family, property, dogs, what is your solution? These days laws are to protect the criminal, not the innocent citizen.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by DrumsRfun
 


When the fire bomb was thrown onto the porch is where to attacker cross the line in the use of Deadly force. At this point the resident is in risk of grave bodily harm, and has the right to protect himself, even in Canada.

You cannot protect your animals lives , but you can protect your own... even in Canada.

Word of advise to my friends up North, Never even think that an American would not shoot you Dead when you throw a fire bomb onto the porch. Most of us would have shot you when the fire bomb was thrown at the dog.

These young men should have been fed to the hogs.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by hiii_98
 


Hillbilly rights... lol. I love how these anti-selfdefense and anti-gun folks can't argue logically. It is all about the personal attack.

The state I live in, North Carolina is far from a hill billy state. It is actually considerred one of, if not the most, "liberal" states in the south. It is considerred one of the most economically and racially integrated states in the country. Raleigh North Carolina is one of the five smartest cities in the country based on the concentration of people with post graduate degrees. Multiple cities have been ranked in the top places to live by various organizations for over a decade. It has been listed as one of the greatest places to retire to. The awards and accolades go on and on.

Sorry but most people disagree with your assessment of where I live. The Supreme court disagrees with you on the right to protect yourself with a gun. So, it looks like you're still swinging and missing.
edit on 25-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by hiii_98
uh if people are firebombing his property dont you think HE did something bad to begin with?? Also if he guy has multiple cameras around his crappy property dont you again think there is a reason why... is this your average god fearing good citizen.. hell no, and he carries the gun, cameras, and dogs because he obviously isnt a good person to begin with and likely deserves more than jail for crimes he likely hasnt been caught for yet. Its not blind judgement, but common sense, afterall where this is smoke there is fire.....
edit on 25-1-2011 by hiii_98 because: (no reason given)


Ok, I have to say that this is perhaps the closest response here to the traditional:

"Hey, look at the way she was dressed; she was asking for it" argument I have seen in this thread.

I just recommend people vote with their feet and vacate the cites with their restrictive gun laws or the states and countries with them; once they start taking it in the tax revenue shorts they will begin to realize this is not what you want.

Until then - you get to be bound by the laws of the people you elect.

That is why I chose to live in Missouri; like someone else said earlier - here, I can shoot you dead if you try to gain entry to my house or car and am immune from civil liability. Further, I can shoot you if you are committing a felony (like arson in this instance); on my property or in a public place without regard to the victim or if you wave a stick at me in my yard. Besides after 24 years of service 3 tours in Afghanistan, and Iraq along with other various sunny vacation spots around the world in Special Forces; I scare really easily and aiming for the head is just muscle memory.

I will shoot a thief or vandal on my farm dead for it as IMO taking my stuff or stock is literally taking food from my child’s mouth and therefore a threat to our lives.

That’s why people used to be able to use force to protect their property and the penalty for horse/cattle theft was death – because not having a means of transport or sustenance was death. Not everyone has insurance; it’s a racket anyway and not all goods are replaceable.

The “victim’s” his family can argue all they want that their 15 year old is an honor student (obviously not smart enough to stay alive) who while may have been misguided or misunderstood didn’t deserve to die for his crimes till they are blue in the face – immunity from civil suit! Meanwhile I’ll be sleeping like a baby.

My recommendation is move to a place where you can protect yourself because things are only going to get worse the further the economy collapses.

I would never live in a place where this was not the case...yeah the life here is simple, there are not many jobs but the cost of living is low and I can protect myself and my property. I'll take that trade.

I say go back to the old west – we would weed out a lot of weak people in the short term but in the long run we’d be better off.

edit on 25/1/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25/1/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SSDDay
reply to post by kerazeesicko
 

Blood thirsty? He didn't even shoot anyone... There were half a dozen men with covered faces throwing fire bombs... I bet you are man enough to beat em all up though right? LOL

Your post left me speechless. Little to much Canadian television I guess.



We are NOT all like that. BTW our tv sucks, we usually watch yours.
edit on 25-1-2011 by jerryk42 because: spelling



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by romanmel
 


Romanmel,

Please, read before you start police bashing randomly. This happened in Canada. Different country, different police different laws. So no, they are not working with the Department of Homeland Security.

What you describe in a community taking it upon itself to deal with its own security is lawlessness if you completely discount law enforcement and the judicial system.

I dont understand how law enforcement has been viewed as public servants and not as enforcers of the law.

Although we disagree on our views of law enforcement in the United States, I am sure we can agree that the United States got it right in making it legal to protect your life and property with any means neccessary. If this happened in the United States, the police would have responded and the real criminals would have been charged not this guy who did exactly what he should have done.

Maybe, you should be praising the United States, the "castle" laws adopted by most states, American law enforcement and its legal system because if this happened in the United States, they would all be concentrating on the real criminals not the guy who was defending his life and his property.


You are mistaken. Just do a search on youtube as (police charge victim). It happens quite often. Community Watch in the USA is encouraged by law enforcers and IS NOT "lawlessness". Protecting onesself is only common sense to most thoughtful citizens. Police are suspect in the US because they end up turning on victims quite often and rarely respond promptly, if at all. As for Police being public servants...I am 64 years old and as a child, Police WERE public servants not enforcer thugs.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
This is EXACTLY what I am talking about.

We the People have the right to protect ourselves and property.

YET the nanny state wants us under their rule and under their "protection"

The state does not want us to take care of ourselves as that would lead to.. GET THIS...

FREEDOM of THOUGHT and ACTION.

As long as people are dependent upon the state for "protection" and welfare than we will be held to their rules and accept whatever they hand to us in mass just so long as we get our free government cheese and don't have to pay our rent or power bill.

"Yussum Iz repote on muy neighbah just soze long az ya keeps dem checks come'n."
"Yussum I sends my childrenz to die...just keeps dem checks coming I gots my nailz to do"
"Sure will eat less than humane food, long as its cheap and free."
"Take my guns and rights please."



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by romanmel
 


Police are no longer public servants. I was reading the opinions of some police in a magazine while waiting for a job interview. According to an opinion in the magazine police are "street warriors, diplomats, then public servants."

If you go to the forums for police officers on the net you will get the same opinion. I disagree with it, but obviously the "war on" label has changed their view over the last twenty years.



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join