Long Island Man Arrested For Defending Home With AK-47

reply to post by AzoriaCorp


Oh thats HILARIOUS! I read in the article that you can only counter a force with a comparitive force, and within a certain range of situations I can understand the legitimacy of that.
However, twenty plus threatening males are far more deadly than one dude with an assault rifle, and far more imposing. At least if someone is pointing an AK in your face, you know you arent going to suffer long when it goes off, but beatings can take ages to kill a person, not to mention that an assault rifle can be overcome by one man if that man is sufficiently angry, scared, or well trained. Twenty unarmed thugs however would be a great hand to hand score for a movie character, and an almost impossible target for your average man on the street.
I would say that the gang of men on this mans drive constituted at least as great if not greater a threat, than ever Mr Greir and his AK did.

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
he should have just shot every single one of them.

they threatened to kill his family this shouldnt even be an issue.

I am really of the mind that, rather than spraying bullets at them and killing the gang, the homeowner should have immediately taken off his pants, defecated on the ground, picked up the feces and started hurling the turds at the assailants.

This is a very effective technique used by the most primitive primates to ward off territorial invaders.

I really believed that the gang members would have run away, and nobody would ever bother him again.

In fact, I'm thinking that if I ever have to deal with a mugger, robber, bully, etc., I just may use this "tactical turd technique" as a defense.

I understand that the homeowner felt challenged when the gang member dared him to use his weapon. However unless he felt that his life or the lives of his family (or anyone else he could legally protect) were in immediate danger he should never have produced a weapon of any kind. Please don't misread this as me not standing up for his right to defend his life, family, and property as I FIRMLY believe it is his right and duty to do so.

I have a concealed carry permit and was taught in my class that you should NEVER EVER fire a warning shot because you are liable for every round fired from your weapon of choice. If one of his warning shots had hit some hard object in his lawn there is a good chance of a ricochet; therefore a chance of an innocent bystander being injured or killed.

Before I go on a pages long rant about the sorry state of our judicial system I'll sum this up by saying that if he felt threatened his first shot should have been at the most immediate threat with follow up shots kept to a minimum until he was no longer in danger.

Cops need to quit eating donuts and start doing their job. If there's 2000 members of MS-13 in that county, then that's 2000 examples of cops being worthless instead of getting their job done. No wonder pigs are so quick to Taser people and beat senior citizens. They're tired of feeling impotent against real criminals.

New York and most of the people in it really are a useless bunch. Same with California. Get rid of those two states and this would probably be a pretty well-balanced country.

Originally posted by mattifikation
New York and most of the people in it really are a useless bunch. Same with California. Get rid of those two states and this would probably be a pretty well-balanced country.

Excuse me but not Everyone in the state of NY is useless and im sure the same goes for Cali residents aswell.Its not our job to fight the crimes yet we get punished for doing what the authorities dont have the guts to do.They should be the ones held responsible for the crappy jobs they do not the people who live in the state.

reply to post by VAPatriot


While we're not on your list, we call it the "Make My Day" law here in Colorado. And yes, if you fail to leave my premises, when directed to do so, you will be "persuaded" with extreme prejudice, as this law has been clearly defined, established, enforced and utilized in this great state.

Originally posted by VAPatriot
New York does not have a Castle Doctrine Law.

31 States have some form of Castle Doctrine and/or Stand Your Ground law. Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming have adopted Castle Doctrine statutes, and other states (Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own.

Virginia has this written into the states constitution.

Colorado has one, too. Here it is called the "Make My Day" law. One has the right to defend their property with lethal force.

TITLE 18 CRIMINAL CODE : ARTICLE 1 PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO OFFENSES GENERALLY 18-1-704.5 Use of deadly physical force against an intruder.

Statute text (1) The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.

(3) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force.

(4) Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force.

www.coloradomakemyday.org...

reply to post by Unit541


You owe me a coke

haha

What this man should have done while outside is first yelled, "STOP! DROP YOUR WEAPON!!" two times at the crowd. Then he could have told the police that he saw a weapon in the crowd. After that, if any one member of the crowd approached him, he could claim he felt threatened that the gun was passed to the assailant in the crowd. There is NO WAY anyone could counter that claim. Since these people were part of a crowd/riot, if one person in the crowd has a weapon, then the entire group is considered a threat and the man would have had the right to fire a warning shot.

The problem here is that this guy doesn't understand how the law works and so he told the PIGS the truth. The MS-13 crowd, however, knows the law, and they knew that if they could get the guy to fire a warning shot that he'd get in trouble. So this guy played right into their game.

If he had yelled, "STOP! DROP YOUR WEAPON!!" into the crowd, no one in the crowd would know whether or not he was telling the truth, and they would know that he was paving the way for witnesses to testify that they heard his warning, and that means he was getting ready to fire his weapon after perceiving a threat (either real or unreal). The crowd, knowing this would have dispersed before the warning shot.

Originally posted by MMPI2

Originally posted by RelentlessLurker
he should have just shot every single one of them.

they threatened to kill his family this shouldnt even be an issue.

I am really of the mind that, rather than spraying bullets at them and killing the gang, the homeowner should have immediately taken off his pants, defecated on the ground, picked up the feces and started hurling the turds at the assailants.

This is a very effective technique used by the most primitive primates to ward off territorial invaders.

I really believed that the gang members would have run away, and nobody would ever bother him again.

In fact, I'm thinking that if I ever have to deal with a mugger, robber, bully, etc., I just may use this "tactical turd technique" as a defense.

Seriously, though...what about my tactical turd technique?

I really think that this would work, especially given the unconventional nature of the act.

I value your opinions. What are your thoughts?

while i applaud the man of the house for defending....well....HIS HOUSE, and it's occupants...the tactical turd would have left a stinking impression on the group of gang bangers.... "nah holmes...leave him alone man...he tosses turds (points to a fellow member) he took a head shot last weekend..aint been right since.."

First off, no citizen should be able to have a AK47 in their home. I don't care if you "have the right to bear arms." The concept of having a machine gun is illogical and dangerous to yourself, your family and the people that reside near by.

God, I question the intelligence of Americans sometimes.

reply to post by VAPatriot


Thank you ! I was not aware of this particular item. I wish we all had rights, and this case has me truly boiling. I am sure there are many more who are incensed by this ridiculous group of felony charges against a husband, father, homeowner, who did his best in the face of terrifying danger. Kudos to him. I will be sure to share this info and promote discussion of such. Love.

reply to post by ronpip


He knows better. You can't shoot people outside. He did good. He has a family to protect.

he did the right thing, when they threatened his family and his life he should of just opened fire, he showed restraint. now the gangbangers will think twice knowing they have to face an ak-47. if he didn't do that he would have been double checking his back and not knowing whether they will come and kill his family or not. that's no way to live.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


an ak-47 levels the odds when you have 20 potential armed gangbangers.

reply to post by harrytuttle


thanks for the tip.

reply to post by SeventhSeal


Well, if you had been in his situation you'd probably be nothing more than a grease stain on the pavement now... God only knows what would have happened to your family. As a result, it would've been yet another case study in 2nd Amendment rights on the six o'clock news that right wingers would use as an excuse to give the NRA more money...

Sometimes you lefties can be your own worst enemy, I swear to God.

reply to post by AzoriaCorp


Hell, just going to link my thread on this travesty-Long Island Man Arrested For Defending Home With AK-47

See my position there!

Going to link this reply from my thread to this thread.

hmmm, seems there was a relative outside that the "gangbangers" were concentrated on.

reply to post by sdcigarpig