Denis W. Veteran Posted April 2, 2009 Veteran Share Posted April 2, 2009 Yes I do. The last poll that was for Canadians only I did not vote in. I had enough respect not to vote for something in a Country that I have no allegiance to. I wish that some of you people would show the same respect. The next poll I see that says Canadians only I will make my voice heard and my vote heard. You can take that to the bank. :angry: Sorry, but no one asked you to police this poll. Thank you very much. :rolleyes: How do you know they voted? They could've just null voted, and fact is, I will to respect the wishes of the OP. That doesn't mean we're barred from replying, does it? edit: actually it does say US citizens only... still though, it's hard to restrict a topic to a country only on a global forum like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 Sorry, but no one asked you to police this poll. Thank you very much. :rolleyes:How do you know they voted? They could've just null voted, and fact is, I will to respect the wishes of the OP. That doesn't mean we're barred from replying, does it? edit: actually it does say US citizens only... still though, it's hard to restrict a topic to a country only on a global forum like this. I was just responding to a post. The OP says US citizens only. From now on when someone from Canada has a poll for Canadians only I will vote in it thank you very much. I am not policing anything. All it takes is common courtesy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deletedxyz Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 *yawn* Yes, I feel totally safe with strangers carrying guns around because they're paranoid about getting attacked. /s Keep your guns at home and protect your own domain and let the police police the public. You can police your own private property but don't try to act like you're the enforcement just because some guy brandished a gun and threatened someone in a band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 I was just responding to a post. The OP says US citizens only. From now on when someone from Canada has a poll for Canadians only I will vote in it thank you very much. I am not policing anything.All it takes is common courtesy! Do you understand the difference between a vote and a post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+shift. MVC Posted April 2, 2009 MVC Share Posted April 2, 2009 Count the votes and the posts. You are not from the US so you should not even be posting in this poll. I think you said posting in this poll? And I'm asking you WHO are you to tell me which threads I should and should not post in? Sure I'll refrain from voting, but since when did you control my right to post in a thread? I fail to understand your logic there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 I think you said posting in this poll? And I'm asking you WHO are you to tell me which threads I should and should not post in?Sure I'll refrain from voting, but since when did you control my right to post in a thread? I fail to understand your logic there. This poll/topic is meant for US citizens only. I do not want to turn this into the classic "guns are bad, mmkay" discussion which usually originates from those living outside the US. The above is from the OP. It is not about posting it is about voting. Do you understand the difference between a vote and a post? Yes Joel and I also can read what The Op posted. Do you understand what common courtesy is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 Keep your guns at home and protect your own domain and let the police police the public. You can police your own private property but don't try to act like you're the enforcement just because some guy brandished a gun and threatened someone in a band. No person that carries should EVER in any way act like law enforcement. The police however, are never anywhere when you need them. You're out in public, get attacked, you could be seriously hurt, or dead by the time help arrives. Yesterday, two men attacked/beat, a guy then robbed him in the afternoon in the middle of the bank parking lot. A person has a right to defend themselves ANYWHERE. The supreme court has already voted, and other lower ones have as well, it is NOT a right for the police to give protection. There was a lady a few years ago who had a retraining order against a guy, he killed her...her family attempted to sue the police for letting it happen but they ruled that the police have no obligation to protect anyone against a murder. I don't know about you, or anyone else. If I have to defend myself, I will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 The above is from the OP. It is not about posting it is about voting. So again; what proof do you have that someone from outside the US voted? Yes Joel and I also can read what The Op posted. Do you understand what common courtesy is? Yes, and courtesy would also be to stop flogging the dead horse that you think is a zebra. The OP's concern has been addressed, and all you've done is muddy the waters by consistently misunderstanding plain English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 So again; what proof do you have that someone from outside the US voted?Yes, and courtesy would also be to stop flogging the dead horse that you think is a zebra. The OP's concern has been addressed, and all you've done is muddy the waters by consistently misunderstanding plain English. I misunderstood nothing. There is a difference between a post and a vote but when you ask me a question, no matter how stupid the question is, I will answer it. Now I suggest that we move on and let the voting begin. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deletedxyz Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 A person has a right to defend themselves ANYWHERE. I agree with that. I definitely support people carrying arms but I hate it when I see situations, in which some guy brandishes a gun during a bank heist and some guy who had a gun decides to shoot and KILL him instead of crippling him. That's where I draw the line with common sense. People who own guns should also exercise reason, common sense and intelligence instead of promoting the stereotype that all gun owners are backward hicks who just grumble that they prefer their guns over their freedom of speech or privacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 I agree with that. I definitely support people carrying arms but I hate it when I see situations, in which some guy brandishes a gun during a bank heist and some guy who had a gun decides to shoot and KILL him instead of crippling him. It isn't really easy hitting small places that are always moving, like legs, arms. It's easier to shoot center of mass. and you never shoot to kill, always shoot to stop. Which is really what it is, you shoot to stop a threat, once the threat is stopped no reason to keep going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 I agree with that. I definitely support people carrying arms but I hate it when I see situations, in which some guy brandishes a gun during a bank heist and some guy who had a gun decides to shoot and KILL him instead of crippling him. That's where I draw the line with common sense. People who own guns should also exercise reason, common sense and intelligence instead of promoting the stereotype that all gun owners are backward hicks who just grumble that they prefer their guns over their freedom of speech or privacy. Sorry but you only use your weapon to Kill. If you are not willing to do so, then you should not carry one. I was trained as a Police Officer to only pull out my weapon if I was going to use it and shoot to kill. If you just wound someone you are opening up a large avenue of litigation. Like you violated his rights to rob you. The same usage of a weapon applies to civilians even more so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deletedxyz Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 Sorry but you only use your weapon to Kill. If you are not willing to do so, then you should not carry one. I was trained as a Police Officer to only pull out my weapon if I was going to use it and shoot to kill. If you just wound someone you are opening up a large avenue of litigation. Like you violated his rights to rob you. The same usage of a weapon applies to civilians even more so. This is exactly why I have problems with people carrying guns. If strangers are allowed to kill just because they feel threatened, then that's ridiculous. Let's have some common sense and not always be paranoid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 This is exactly why I have problems with people carrying guns. If strangers are allowed to kill just because they feel threatened, then that's ridiculous. Let's have some common sense and not always be paranoid. You do not seem to understand what I am getting at. If you do use your weapon and do not kill the person that is attacking you, he/she will sue the pants off of you. Get some training in the use of deadly force and then respond. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 This is exactly why I have problems with people carrying guns. If strangers are allowed to kill just because they feel threatened, then that's ridiculous. Let's have some common sense and not always be paranoid. You have to have good reason. You have a right to defend yourself or another person (atleast here). If you have reason to believe of serious bodily harm, Rape, Kidnapping, or murder. If someone comes up and you don't have all the reason to believe they can seriously hurt you, then pepper spray. If the person keeps up, they can get drawn on and told to stop or get on the ground. The choices and actions that they make after that is up to them. Depending on what state people are in, if you are out in public, you MUST retreat to safety if it is possible. If it is NOT POSSIBLE for you to retreat to safety, you may defend yourself. If you're at home, or at work, you DON'T have to retreat and you may do as you wish. Although there, the criminal could actually sue you and win if they hurt themselves or you hurt them.....*sigh* I hope our Castle Doctrine passes this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 You have to have good reason. You have a right to defend yourself or another person (atleast here). If you have reason to believe of serious bodily harm, Rape, Kidnapping, or murder. If someone comes up and you don't have all the reason to believe they can seriously hurt you, then pepper spray. If the person keeps up, they can get drawn on and told to stop or get on the ground. The choices and actions that they make after that is up to them. Depending on what state people are in, if you are out in public, you MUST retreat to safety if it is possible. If it is NOT POSSIBLE for you to retreat to safety, you may defend yourself. If you're at home, or at work, you DON'T have to retreat and you may do as you wish. Although there, the criminal could actually sue you and win if they hurt themselves or you hurt them.....*sigh* I hope our Castle Doctrine passes this year. Yes is some states but not in Florida. In Ohio if you are in your own home you have to leave your house if at all possible. If not and only then can you use deadly force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 Yes is some states but not in Florida. In Ohio if you are in your own home you have to leave your house if at all possible. If not and only then can you use deadly force. Wow, that is sad in Ohio. I am happy with my state, although FL is REALLY nice I think. Except no open carry. I am happy my license to carry is accepted down there when I visit though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ Rogue ~ Posted April 2, 2009 Author Share Posted April 2, 2009 Yes is some states but not in Florida. In Ohio if you are in your own home you have to leave your house if at all possible. If not and only then can you use deadly force. I didn't know that. So Ohio has a duty to retreat law? That's seriously messed up. Remind me to never move to Ohio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 I didn't know that. So Ohio has a duty to retreat law? That's seriously messed up. Remind me to never move to Ohio. It took years to get the Governor and legislature to approve a CCW bill and then they put this into it. I wish I could leave Ohio and go back to Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+shift. MVC Posted April 2, 2009 MVC Share Posted April 2, 2009 You do not seem to understand what I am getting at. If you do use your weapon and do not kill the person that is attacking you, he/she will sue the pants off of you. Get some training in the use of deadly force and then respond. :) On what grounds would he have to sue you given the circumstance that you shot him in self defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakey_snake Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 In Ohio if you are in your own home you have to leave your house if at all possible. If not and only then can you use deadly force. Sec. 2901.09. (A) As used in this section, "residence" and "vehicle" have the same meanings as in section 2901.05 of the Revised Code.(B) For purposes of any section of the Revised Code that sets forth a criminal offense, a person who lawfully is in that person's residence has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense, defense of another, or defense of that person's residence, and a person who lawfully is an occupant of that person's vehicle or who lawfully is an occupant in a vehicle owned by an immediate family member of the person has no duty to retreat before using force in self-defense or defense of another. http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_SB_184 This is why you don't trust everything written on the internet folks. ;) In Ohio you only have a duty to retreat if not in your residence or vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~ Rogue ~ Posted April 2, 2009 Author Share Posted April 2, 2009 Thanks Shakey. I wasn't going to bother looking it up considering I don't live in Ohio. Thank you for the clarification, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 On what grounds would he have to sue you given the circumstance that you shot him in self defense? Violation of his civil rights. All this talk about the law has nothing to do with Civil law. The party can and will sue you. There is quite a difference between civil & Criminal Law, just ask OJ Simpson. He was found not guilty in a criminal law but guilty of wrongful death in a civil lawsuit. In Ohio you only have a duty to retreat if not in your residence or vehicle. Thanks, I was told this by a police officer. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+shift. MVC Posted April 2, 2009 MVC Share Posted April 2, 2009 Violation of his civil rights. All this talk about the law has nothing to do with Civil law. The party can and will sue you. There is quite a difference between civil & Criminal Law, just ask OJ Simpson. He was found not guilty in a criminal law but guilty of wrongful death in a civil lawsuit. I see...legally it makes enough sense, though I don't see how it makes sense to shoot only to kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted April 2, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted April 2, 2009 I see...legally it makes enough sense, though I don't see how it makes sense to shoot only to kill. Go find a police officer and ask him how he was trained on the use of his weapon. One in The US. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts