2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: Itsshowtime808 on April 26, 2021, 09:09:05 AM
-
Aloha everybody,
Me and a friend had a discussion about protecting your property with a gun in Hawaii...
Do you guys think it’s justified if you use your gun (to shoot) to stop someone stealing your car at your house? Private criminal or tow truck??
My friend thinks so, but I’m thinking you can’t... since we are pro-criminal here... (in the state)
Any thoughts would be much appreciated
Mahalos
:shaka:
-
Legally it is not ok. If you are not doing it self defense be prepared to spend a long time in jail, and lose all your guns for life.
Ethically, that's your own opinion. Depending on the crime the world will probably be a better place without another criminal. Though its not our job to decide that, its the justice system.
-
Legally it is not ok. If you are not doing it self defense be prepared to spend a long time in jail, and lose all your guns for life.
Ethically, that's your own opinion. Depending on the crime the world will probably be a better place without another criminal. Though its not our job to decide that, its the justice system.
That’s what I was thinking
So basically I told my friend, your rather serve jail time or just buy another car??
Will probably be less time working to save for another one then spending X amount of years...
-
It is not legal to use deadly force to protect your property. You can only use deadly force if you believe you are in danger of death, serious injury, kidnapping, rape, or sodomy. See the HRS about it and read the other sections on use of force.
You can use "reasonable" force to protect your property. But there is also a section in the HRS that states you must surrender your property upon demand as well.
-
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol14_ch0701-0853/HRS0703/HRS_0703-0304.htm
-
Steps in getting robbed.
1. Show fear of the criminal.
2. Give up property to criminal
3. Get as much info about the criminal i e. physical description
4. Call 911
5. wait for an officer to arrive
6. file report
7. wait and hope for your property to be returned to you
Granted these steps may be null and void if the criminal decides to hurt or kill you.
-
OP,
Since your friend is wrong and you are not 100% sure, I would recommend read the entire HRS 134. I do this often myself, just to keep up to date on stuff. And because it's written in legaleze, I have to read 1 sentence some times 4-5 times before I understand them. Also look up any other HRS that would apply to you.
Here is a perfect example: Many people thought rifle mags were limited to 10 rds. HRS states "fits into a PISTOL". Our HRS defines what a rifle is and even defines what an "assault pistol" is. So because the current HRS sates only pistol, and not "pistol and/or assault pistol and/or rifle", this is why the mags have always been legal. The reasoning that I always here is that assault pistols are illegal here, so that's why the mag law doesn't apply. Which is not true. And then add in the past 2 years, they tried to ban rifle mags by crossing out the word "pistol" and replaced it with "firearm" confirms what I said.
By me reading the HRS often, I also found out what a "deadly or dangerous" weapon is. So the K-Bar TDI knife that I wanted to carry daily fits into that category. So that is why I never purchased 1. And when I do buy a folding knife, I make sure I read what the manufacturers description is.
-
It is not legal to use deadly force to protect your property. You can only use deadly force if you believe you are in danger of death, serious injury, kidnapping, rape, or sodomy. See the HRS about it and read the other sections on use of force.
You can use "reasonable" force to protect your property. But there is also a section in the HRS that states you must surrender your property upon demand as well.
What’s considered reasonable force?? Baseball bat? Blunt object?
-
Steps in getting robbed.
1. Show fear of the criminal.
2. Give up property to criminal
3. Get as much info about the criminal i e. physical description
4. Call 911
5. wait for an officer to arrive
6. file report
7. wait and hope for your property to be returned to you
Granted these steps may be null and void if the criminal decides to hurt or kill you.
I like this layout :rofl: :rofl:
I’ll send it to him :rofl: :rofl:
Hopefully the end of a barrel is good enough of a deterrent... I feel like if they do get in your house, it’s game on though, fear for safety is automatic as you have no walls/door to protect you
I would rather go to jail than get killed... that’s just me
-
My personal interpretation depends on what the definition of "property" is.
If property includes all your belongings -- cars, money, credit cards, cell phone, GUNS, AMMO, etc. -- then you are not allowed to use deadly force. If the intention of the criminal is to simply take your stuff and leave you alone, then you are not justified in using deadly force. This is particularly true if the thief is running away from you with your stuff.
If, however, property means your yard or home, then YES! You can stop someone from entering your property if you believe their intentions are to harm you or your family/friends there. The person coming onto your property can stand around and refuse to leave, and you can't use force. Call 911. But, if you are in your house and they are trying to break in, you are free to assume they are going to assault and injure you. Self defense is legal.
Best plan is to call 911 and LEAVE THE LINE OPEN. Let the dispatcher and the 911 system record what's going on. They'll record you warning the person to stop, to leave, and to come no closer, or else you'll shoot them. There's a clear recording of the events to show you did everything right.
Also, make sure his fingerprints are on the large kitchen knife the Cops find next to the body.
-
What’s considered reasonable force?? Baseball bat? Blunt object?
For specifics, you would have to read case notes. But that's a bigger google than most people are able to do. Some stuff on the HRS has case notes already on the bottom of the page. Like the deadly weapon section. Nun-chucks are not deadly nor dangerous weapons. And a diving knife is not considered a dagger (sharp on both sides). Stuff that is also illegal to carry, dirk, dagger, billy, metal knuckles, blackjack.
I'm no lawyer so take this with a grain of salt. I would say a bat is not reasonable force. But pushing or pulling might be,and probably punches and kicks. Now a blunt object, say you end up killing the guy. The object falls into the "deadly or dangerous weapon" which would be an object used not for it's intended purpose. So you pick up a stabler and smash someone on the head with it. A staplers purpose is to staple stuff. Not smash in skulls. Key would be what would a reasonable person under the same conditions do. But then you add into the "what if's", a female who is 5'1 and 95lbs using a bat against a 6'2, 300lbs person.
Same goes with storing of firearms if no minors are present. Our HRS does not say you need a safe. But what would a reasonable person do? Would they leave their rifle on the kitchen table and then leave the home? No they wouldn't. But maybe inside the gun case in the closet. But if you got a good atty, they could argue that your doors are locked and windows closed, so your home is secure. But that would be a stretch.
-
have gun on hip while trespasser is trying to steal property
trespasser, "you value your property more than someone's life."
me, "we are in agreement. you value my property more than your life." ;)
-
"you value your property more than someone's life."
That's another thing I can't stand that stupid people say. Then you reply what your ethics are and they get all mad and say you have a shame on you type attitude.
-
in many areas of Texas, it is my understanding that you can. . .
here? well. . . :kickcan:
-
If you follow the news it becomes readily apparent that bodies are being discovered all the time, but rarely does the media provide context or follow up. I wonder about the ratio of how many are not discovered for every one that is found. It is likely that the lack of adequate stand your ground laws has created a clandestine culture of shoot, shovel, and shut up. This mistrust of law enforcement is extremely dangerous to a civilization by encouraging a parallel legal system run by the worst sort of people
-
I have a backhoe and have couple holes pre dug. That's for my future tilapia pond I say. Can't be too prepared where I live.
-
It is not legal to use deadly force to protect your property. You can only use deadly force if you believe you are in danger of death, serious injury, kidnapping, rape, or sodomy. See the HRS about it and read the other sections on use of force.
You can use "reasonable" force to protect your property. But there is also a section in the HRS that states you must surrender your property upon demand as well.
As I understand it, you have to surrender your property but that is if someone has a claim to it. So you couldn't shoot or beat the repo-man for example.
-
Aloha everybody,
Me and a friend had a discussion about protecting your property with a gun in Hawaii...
Do you guys think it’s justified if you use your gun (to shoot) to stop someone stealing your car at your house? Private criminal or tow truck??
My friend thinks so, but I’m thinking you can’t... since we are pro-criminal here... (in the state)
Any thoughts would be much appreciated
Mahalos
:shaka:
On the surface, no, you can't shoot someone just because they are stealing your car, even if it is in your driveway. But as with all legal things, it depends on the circumstances.
So say you walk outside to confront the thief and he pulls out a knife to scare you and he is in close proximity to you, then you could be in a justifiable use of force situation. Or say your child was sitting in the back seat while the thief is stealing the car, justified shooting. So it all depends how the situation plays out, the risk to you or another that factors in.
-
As I understand it, you have to surrender your property but that is if someone has a claim to it. So you couldn't shoot or beat the repo-man for example.
Theres a part that mentions "upon demand". Right of claim is abother section
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
-
CMO66,
I demand you give me all your money, guns and ammo.
-
CMO66,
I demand you give me all your money, guns and ammo.
:rofl: :rofl:
-
Thanks guys,
Like I always tell my friends, “Last Resort”, after owning a firearm, I really do understand and believe in the saying “with great power comes great responsibility”. Especially after having to go through obstacles in getting a letter to acquire.
I admit that Hawaii is pretty chill compared to the mainland and with crappy 2a laws, I still opt to stay here because of aloha spirit and how cool most people are.
No crazy protest/riots, pretty low covid cases, great weather, and for myself I got 90% or my family and friends here.
I do hate this state in the sense or cost of living and in the job market, it’s not what you know, but who you know, which works out both positive and negative for myself.
Been watching a lot of ASP (active self protection) on youtube and what John says on his channel always try to resort to deescalating and your cool.
Will definitely read the HRS a couple more times and try to put footnotes on “possible translations” :rofl: :rofl:
Sorry for the rambling but I digress...
Appreciate you all and am glad to have a resource like this on 2ahawaii
:shaka: :shaka:
-
Theres a part that mentions "upon demand". Right of claim is abother section
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol14_ch0701-0853/HRS0703/HRS_0703-0304.htm
The only place I see the word demand has to do when a thief demands you not do something.
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 have wondered how these use of force laws interact with citizen arrest laws. One the one hand you have to try and avoid using force by retreating if safe, but on the other hand if you are trying to citizens arrest someone, force may be necessary.
-
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol14_ch0701-0853/HRS0703/HRS_0703-0304.htm
The only place I see the word demand has to do when a thief demands you not do something.
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 have wondered how these use of force laws interact with citizen arrest laws. One the one hand you have to try and avoid using force by retreating if safe, but on the other hand if you are trying to citizens arrest someone, force may be necessary.
It’s probably rhetorical but that’s why Hawai’i is pretty much pro-criminal in my eyes :rofl:
The flee or retreat clause was probably written by a grown version of a kid who was picked on in high school.
I would find it hard to do citizens arrest without using force unless things line up like, you have the perp cornered with your car pretty much pinning the perp to a wall without actually hurting or killing..
Situations like this probably only happen in the movies
-
In Hawaii, if you had a criminal pinned against the wall with your vehicle, not injuring him but he couldn't escape, you will probably get charged with kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon. After all, you did hold him against his will and you could have easily killed him.
Criminals have rights. You, not so much.
-
Any attempt at doing the job the police say they are supposed to be doing will result in extreme consequences.
If everyone discovered they can do a better job as their own first responders, since they are already "on the scene," the myth of "Protect and Serve" would no longer be marketable.
-
In Hawaii, if you had a criminal pinned against the wall with your vehicle, not injuring him but he couldn't escape, you will probably get charged with kidnapping and assault with a deadly weapon. After all, you did hold him against his will and you could have easily killed him.
Criminals have rights. You, not so much.
My disclaimer will be: “he threatened to come back and finish the job”. So I wanted him caught and put away
-
CMO66,
I demand you give me all your money, guns and ammo.
I must comply, if I owned any firearms, reloading supplies, ammo, preps, coms, body armor, NODs, and money.
-
Thanks guys,
Like I always tell my friends, “Last Resort”, after owning a firearm, I really do understand and believe in the saying “with great power comes great responsibility”. Especially after having to go through obstacles in getting a letter to acquire.
I admit that Hawaii is pretty chill compared to the mainland and with crappy 2a laws, I still opt to stay here because of aloha spirit and how cool most people are.
No crazy protest/riots, pretty low covid cases, great weather, and for myself I got 90% or my family and friends here.
I do hate this state in the sense or cost of living and in the job market, it’s not what you know, but who you know, which works out both positive and negative for myself.
Been watching a lot of ASP (active self protection) on youtube and what John says on his channel always try to resort to deescalating and your cool.
Will definitely read the HRS a couple more times and try to put footnotes on “possible translations” :rofl: :rofl:
Sorry for the rambling but I digress...
Appreciate you all and am glad to have a resource like this on 2ahawaii
:shaka: :shaka:
No one in Kenosha, WI was pretty chill until recently. So the point is there are cities that burn all the time, but there are also cities that "never thought it would happen to them".
John is correct. I rather be wrong and go home, than stay and try to prove I'm right and end up in jail, in court, or harmed. So the saying "an armed society is a polite society" makes sense.
-
It’s probably rhetorical but that’s why Hawai’i is pretty much pro-criminal in my eyes :rofl:
The flee or retreat clause was probably written by a grown version of a kid who was picked on in high school.
I would find it hard to do citizens arrest without using force unless things line up like, you have the perp cornered with your car pretty much pinning the perp to a wall without actually hurting or killing..
Situations like this probably only happen in the movies
Sometimes people have health issues that prevent them from fleeing to safety (sore knee, sore back, fat, etc...)....just saying.
-
https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol14_ch0701-0853/HRS0703/HRS_0703-0304.htm
The only place I see the word demand has to do when a thief demands you not do something.
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 have wondered how these use of force laws interact with citizen arrest laws. One the one hand you have to try and avoid using force by retreating if safe, but on the other hand if you are trying to citizens arrest someone, force may be necessary.
How I understand it is that you can use reasonable force to protect your property, but not deadly. So you don't have to surrender the item upon demand if you're using reasonable force.
-
How I understand it is that you can use reasonable force to protect your property, but not deadly. So you don't have to surrender the item upon demand if you're using reasonable force.
That might be right. So if he is stealing your TV and the only way you have to stop him is shooting him in the face it isn't allowed, you have to "surrender" the item. But if you could tackle him then you are covered.
Security at stores aren't LEOs but they can use force to detain suspects so clearly there is some leeway for non LEOs to use force in apprehending criminals.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKbUdLd6Xuc
-
She was fired for violating store policy. But Dana White offered her a job and she now works at UFC office in Vegas. This was preCOVID, IDK if she's still there.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKbUdLd6Xuc
Part of that guy's punishment should be that he has to publicly acknowledge he got taken down by a girl for the rest of his life.
-
Part of that guy's punishment should be that he has to publicly acknowledge he got taken down by a girl for the rest of his life.
Or next UFC match...
-
A few years ago, two criminals tried to rob my friend's jewelry store in Las Vegas. He wrestled away a handgun from one of them, shot him in the back as he ran away, and killed him. No charges against my friend.
-
A few years ago, two criminals tried to rob my friend's jewelry store in Las Vegas. He wrestled away a handgun from one of them, shot him in the back as he ran away, and killed him. No charges against my friend.
NV has a little more common sense that HI. It's also how your friend articulated why he shot. In NV, you can use deadly force if a violent crime (robbery) is being committed. Compared to HI, it has to be a belief of death, serious injury, etc...
I would consider your friend lucky that some prosecutor wasn't trying to make a name for themselves.
-
it's pretty BS that we aren't allowed to protect our property using deadly force IMO. especially since criminals seem to want to use a firearm increasingly more now days to rob people.
-
I like Dana White's principles. I wasn't a fan of MMA but after seeing the values he upholds I watch a bit.
The Myeni case should be concerning to all of us in Hawaii. We could be seeing our rights stripped away to protect criminals. Maybe our political leaders would like Hawaii to be more like a Zulu Nation much like how they want housing to be like Singapore. Maybe they'll pass a law where at a specific time anyone can come onto your property for what ever reason. We've seen during this 'pandemic' many rights that were shelved. We don't know our rights anymore and we sure don't fight for it. If you think people are willing to fight for rights go out and into a store without a mask.
-
HI is a criminals paradise. No one is armed, at most it's a knife or OC. And even they do get arrested, they will be released early, unless they chose the wrong person to violate (like an assistant prosecutor).
-
HI is a criminals paradise. No one is armed, at most it's a knife or OC. And even they do get arrested, they will be released early, unless they chose the wrong person to violate (like an assistant prosecutor).
. . . Or state officials.
Here is a new tactic that criminals might use.
Criminal: I like your shiny diamond ring, auntie. You hand it over, and I be nice. You not give it to me and I twist it off.
Woman of the House: That was a threat to my life, and I shoot your head off.
Justice Dept. State of HI: The shooter is charged with second degree murder. Reasoning, the criminal did not attack her. Taking a ring off a finger, even with the use of force, is not the threat of deadly bodily harm.
Here is another case criminals can win. Suppose your dog hears a burglar in the house, and the dog bites the thief's arm. With his free arm, he starts to beat the dog with a bat. Homeowner sees his/her beloved pet being struck and nearly killed. Homeowner shoots the thief. Guess who gets to sue the homeowner for the use of deadly force? The perp. Nothing in the law prevents this egregious misapplication of justice.
-
. . . Or state officials.
Here is a new tactic that criminals might use.
Criminal: I like your shiny diamond ring, auntie. You hand it over, and I be nice. You not give it to me and I twist it off.
Woman of the House: That was a threat to my life, and I shoot your head off.
Justice Dept. State of HI: The shooter is charged with second degree murder. Reasoning, the criminal did not attack her. Taking a ring off a finger, even with the use of force, is not the threat of deadly bodily harm.
Here is another case criminals can win. Suppose your dog hears a burglar in the house, and the dog bites the thief's arm. With his free arm, he starts to beat the dog with a bat. Homeowner sees his/her beloved pet being struck and nearly killed. Homeowner shoots the thief. Guess who gets to sue the homeowner for the use of deadly force? The perp. Nothing in the law prevents this egregious misapplication of justice.
Case #1: If the ring-thief is killed, it's her word against the dead attacker's. Unless she incriminates herself, she only has to say she feared for her life. If the guy was armed, the fear is even more reasonable. If he lives, it's still he said - she said. Whether or not he intended to hurt her IF she complied, he still admitted hurting her was contingent on her resisting. Nothing in the law negates assault charges if the victim doesn't cooperate. :crazy:
Case #2: The law allows residents to assume if someone is committing violence on their property and they were not invited, it's reasonable to assume the person is a threat. Whether or not lethal force is needed is not a factor. Private citizens are not trained police officers. We do not have to adhere to a continuum of force policy. If we can retreat, that's always an option, but inside your home, you have no DUTY to do so.
In all cases, use of lethal/deadly force is a life changing decision. Even if it's 100% justified, the gov't doesn't seek to prosecute, and the threat happened to be a serial killer, you still have to deal with PTSD and the guilt of having to take another person's life.
I'm not so concerned about what the state will do to me. I know deep down that I will only pull a trigger if it is my last option. Anyone who says otherwise ("I know where to dig the hole") should not offer anyone advice. Do what you want. I'll do the same.
Actually, there is something in the law that PUNISHES the state for "the egregious misapplication of justice." Aside from civil remedies for violating your Constitutional rights, state officials can also be prosecuted if their actions are that egregious. I'd refer you to the Kealoha case and all the people charged and convicted for their illegal abuse of power. That's not the norm, but safeguards do exist.
-
A couple of weeks ago, I visited my bank to pay the mortgage. Outside, a flimsy armored car was parked, and three guards entered the bank openly carrying pistols (holstered). Because (it seems) guards are one of the few professions that are allowed to carry guns, why don't more people train to be guards? This is probably one of the safest jobs you can find. Why? Thieves seem to like to break into armored vehicles when the drivers are eating food or getting massaged. Or, the guards are co-conspirators in the robberies.
https://www.khon2.com/local-news/2-men-involved-in-armored-car-heist-charged-with-conspiracy/ (https://www.khon2.com/local-news/2-men-involved-in-armored-car-heist-charged-with-conspiracy/)
The more thieves learn about Hawaii being a criminal paradise, the more likely the roaches will move from red states to paradise. With roaches, you need to plant bait wisely. Put defective guns with squibs in easy to find boxes that say Glock or Colt. Robbers try to be clever by not carrying guns, but when they find a gun in your house, their natural instinct is to point the gun at you. At that stage, you can fire in self-defense.
Have you ever wondered why gun stores in this state are almost never robbed? Because illegal guns are easy to find, and the gun stores essentially carry little cash.
-
A couple of weeks ago, I visited my bank to pay the mortgage. Outside, a flimsy armored car was parked, and three guards entered the bank openly carrying pistols (holstered). Because (it seems) guards are one of the few professions that are allowed to carry guns, why don't more people train to be guards? This is probably one of the safest jobs you can find. Why? Thieves seem to like to break into armored vehicles when the drivers are eating food or getting massaged. Or, the guards are co-conspirators in the robberies.
https://www.khon2.com/local-news/2-men-involved-in-armored-car-heist-charged-with-conspiracy/ (https://www.khon2.com/local-news/2-men-involved-in-armored-car-heist-charged-with-conspiracy/)
The more thieves learn about Hawaii being a criminal paradise, the more likely the roaches will move from red states to paradise. With roaches, you need to plant bait wisely. Put defective guns with squibs in easy to find boxes that say Glock or Colt. Robbers try to be clever by not carrying guns, but when they find a gun in your house, their natural instinct is to point the gun at you. At that stage, you can fire in self-defense.
Have you ever wondered why gun stores in this state are almost never robbed? Because illegal guns are easy to find, and the gun stores essentially carry little cash.
It's not enough to be trained as a guard. Unless you are on the clock at your security guard job, you can't carry. If you aren't employed as a guard, your security guard training doesn't authorize any carry privileges. Permits to carry for guards are issued in conjunction with your employer. No security guard employer, no permit.
There are security guards on this forum. I'm sure they can fill in the details, but that's the basic situation as I understand it.
As for gun shops being robbed, most employees are permitted to carry while working. The laws allow you to keep firearms at your place of business as long as the owner approves. Carry of firearms in Hawaii is not prohibited in private spaces (it actually is in some other states without a carry permit :crazy:). So, having a store with armed employees works just like having armed guards at banks. Robbers pick the path of least resistance.
-
I plan to dial 911 and keep it on if I ever find myself in a potentially dangerous situation.
And I will speak loud and clear and if possible encourage the f**kn perp to do the same. (You know, pretend to not hear and ask the asshat to repeat....."eh?? wat you said?? hah???)
You know, it's bad enough that Hawaii has a kinder and gentler approach to treating criminals. But to also let them go or dismiss the case (as most often happens than not) is just mind-boggling. The least they can do is prosecute to the full extent of the law (does Hawaii even know this phrase?) instead of treating these low life bastards better than the victimized law-abiding citizen.
Duty to retreat, they say? Yeah, I guess have to. Not worth it with these stupid laws. Never even once thought about it when I was younger but now that I'm old I sometimes think about it and say f**k it, ainokea. Take my chances.
-
I plan to dial 911 and keep it on if I ever find myself in a potentially dangerous situation.
And I will speak loud and clear and if possible encourage the f**kn perp to do the same. (You know, pretend to not hear and ask the asshat to repeat....."eh?? wat you said?? hah???)
You know, it's bad enough that Hawaii has a kinder and gentler approach to treating criminals. But to also let them go or dismiss the case (as most often happens than not) is just mind-boggling. The least they can do is prosecute to the full extent of the law (does Hawaii even know this phrase?) instead of treating these low life bastards better than the victimized law-abiding citizen.
Duty to retreat, they say? Yeah, I guess have to. Not worth it with these stupid laws. Never even once thought about it when I was younger but now that I'm old I sometimes think about it and say f**k it, ainokea. Take my chances.
Keep in mind the 911 recording can be used in court. And under stress, u may say something bad.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Keep in mind the 911 recording can be used in court. And under stress, u may say something bad.
Do ya feel lucky, punk?
Well, do ya? :shake: :thumbsup:
-
Do ya feel lucky, punk?
Well, do ya? :shake: :thumbsup:
He did recover from COVID, so. . .
-
He did recover from COVID, so. . .
I was lucky. Lol
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
I was lucky. Lol
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
So, are you the type that when you’re lucky, you want to say go Vegas and test the good luck? Or the type where you think “damn, I used my good luck, so now can’t take chances?”
So yeah, you never answered FJ’s question. ???
:rofl:
-
So, are you the type that when you’re lucky, you want to say go Vegas and test the good luck? Or the type where you think “damn, I used my good luck, so now can’t take chances?”
So yeah, you never answered FJ’s question. ???
:rofl:
I was illustrating what you might not want recorded on that 911 call.
-
So, are you the type that when you’re lucky, you want to say go Vegas and test the good luck? Or the type where you think “damn, I used my good luck, so now can’t take chances?”
So yeah, you never answered FJ’s question. ???
:rofl:
The wife and i have an agreement. If we ever hit the mega bucks, $1 mil is going toward lawsuits for gun rights.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
I was illustrating what you might not want recorded on that 911 call.
Yeah, I got that. I was just teasing CMO
-
The wife and i have an agreement. If we ever hit the mega bucks, $1 mil is going toward lawsuits for gun rights.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
So do ya feel lucky? Huh punk? 8)
:rofl:
-
So do ya feel lucky? Huh punk? 8)
:rofl:
Thats gun to buy is also on the list. I shot someones highway patrol revolver when we had the last gathering. I really enjoyed it. I think it was stangs? Or maybe OFs.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Thats gun to buy is also on the list. I shot someones highway patrol revolver when we had the last gathering. I really enjoyed it. I think it was stangs? Or maybe OFs.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
I wouldn't mind a Dirty Harry gun as well. I have a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag. That's a fun gun to shoot at the sihouette range, but with a 7.5" barrel, it's a beast.
I bet you shot dogman's. I have a predecessor (or at least I believe so) of that highway patrolman revolver. dogman told me about the differences before, but I forget.
-
I wouldn't mind a Dirty Harry gun as well. I have a Ruger Redhawk .44 Mag. That's a fun gun to shoot at the sihouette range, but with a 7.5" barrel, it's a beast.
I bet you shot dogman's. I have a predecessor (or at least I believe so) of that highway patrolman revolver. dogman told me about the differences before, but I forget.
After shooting dogman's 500, mrs. CMO wants 1. The only thing holding us back is ammo. Last trip we made to Vegas (2019) I did see 50 cal ammo on the shelf, among other cool ammo like rock salt shotgun, dragons breath, 223 blanks, RIP ammo, etc.... But I didn't look if they had 500 AE ammo. Since I don't reload, that would be the best option, to bring back from Vegas.
-
After shooting dogman's 500, mrs. CMO wants 1. The only thing holding us back is ammo. Last trip we made to Vegas (2019) I did see 50 cal ammo on the shelf, among other cool ammo like rock salt shotgun, dragons breath, 223 blanks, RIP ammo, etc.... But I didn't look if they had 500 AE ammo. Since I don't reload, that would be the best option, to bring back from Vegas.
Uh, first thing. Does Mrs. CMO frequent these boards?
Second, I've shot said 500 and others. As much fun as dogman has shooting those, after maybe 2-3 shots, I'm over it. haha
-
Uh, first thing. Does Mrs. CMO frequent these boards?
Second, I've shot said 500 and others. As much fun as dogman has shooting those, after maybe 2-3 shots, I'm over it. haha
Luckily she doesn't. But I fill her in on important stuff. I know she wont shoot it often, but I buy what the wife wants. Happy wife, happy husband who can spend $ on what ever he wants like a 1911 and all the gear needed.
Sorry if I derailed this thread OP.
-
Keep in mind the 911 recording can be used in court. And under stress, u may say something bad.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
I hear you and agree 100%. There's a lot of responsibility and discipline involved in gun ownership. I am committed to these virtues and can only hope through training that when the time comes I do the right thing.
-
I hear you and agree 100%. There's a lot of responsibility and discipline involved in gun ownership. I am committed to these virtues and can only hope through training that when the time comes I do the right thing.
You seem like a very honorable person with high morals. Good to have folks like you on the board. Need more of ya. :thumbsup:
-
I hear you and agree 100%. There's a lot of responsibility and discipline involved in gun ownership. I am committed to these virtues and can only hope through training that when the time comes I do the right thing.
I hope you and everyone here has some kind of self defense insurance. It can cost as little as a box of 9mm a month. Because all it takes is an over zealous prosecutor or social pressure and you end up in a court room. Even though the law is on your side,i t will cost money for your defense. And you don't want to go cheap, public defender route. Unless you have to.
-
I hope you and everyone here has some kind of self defense insurance. It can cost as little as a box of 9mm a month. Because all it takes is an over zealous prosecutor or social pressure and you end up in a court room. Even though the law is on your side,i t will cost money for your defense. And you don't want to go cheap, public defender route. Unless you have to.
Makes me want to call my insurance agent and check whether my liability protection would come into play for a defensive shooting.
-
Makes me want to call my insurance agent and check whether my liability protection would come into play for a defensive shooting.
If youre referring to homeowners, most exclude discharge of a firearm and may have a sub limit.
Best bet is to have your own.
Even insurance from an employer may vary...
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
Makes me want to call my insurance agent and check whether my liability protection would come into play for a defensive shooting.
I can answer that.
Not if you hit the person you intended to stop and no one else.
Liability Insurance covers injury to others that you cause by accident or negligence. Like someone slips on your steps, someone falls in your pool, or your dog bites someone (Beware of Dog signs don't protect you legally).
Liability Insurance will not cover someone else if you intentionally shoot them. No different than if you drove you car into the ocean and filed a claim. Intentional acts not covered.
Then there's the "who's covered" aspect. Liability implies your insurance pays someone other than you. You cause a car crash, liability coverage, which is mandatory, pays for the other driver's damages. IF you have comprehensive (collision) coverage, they cover your damages, too, if it's your fault.
So, in the case of you shooting someone in self defense, who would they pay? Not the person you shot, because it's not a "liability" claim -- the injury was intentional. Not you, because they'd be paying the policy holder for an intentional act -- something insurance companies spend lots of money investigating every year to avoid doing. Think arson...
This is why requiring gun owner insurance is such a farce. The people calling for these laws don't get these facts. They think you, as a danger to others, should have insurance that they, as potential victims, can file a claim to cover their loses. Basically, you own a gun, you kill 10 people at work, the families of the victims get paid through insurance. Easier than suing a shooter that commits suicide or dies from a Cop's bullet, right? Only if the Insurance companies lose their minds and write policies for this.
I have heard of someone shooting and missing the first shot when their front door was kicked down. That shot hit the neighbor's house across the street. Homeowner's Liability coverage paid for the repairs. Luckily, no one there was injured. That was accidental damage, though.
None of this covers you for legal fees, lost work, replacing a gun taken as evidence, etc. That's what the Gun Owner's Insurance policies do such as USCCA.
-
My homeowners excludes intentional discharge. But ND is covered. So if 1 says they accidently shot the bad guy, they might have a claim. But u might be screwed legally in court.
Most self defense insurance wont pay if you're found guilty. But if u are guilty, is paying back the defense cost spent really on your priority list. Esp if u got 20 years in jail.
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
-
My homeowners excludes intentional discharge. But ND is covered. So if 1 says they accidently shot the bad guy, they might have a claim. But u might be screwed legally in court.
Most self defense insurance wont pay if you're found guilty. But if u are guilty, is paying back the defense cost spent really on your priority list. Esp if u got 20 years in jail.
So, if that is what happens, who gets the payout? The shooter (you) or the shootee (bad guy)? If you claim it was intentional, the bad guy has no claim. If both you and he both say it was an accident, he would get paid -- but why would you claim that? Is he blackmailing you? Was your justification for the shooting questionable? Is this supposed to be "hush money?"
-
Makes sense.
-
You seem like a very honorable person with high morals. Good to have folks like you on the board. Need more of ya. :thumbsup:
I appreciate the compliment. But I'm just a regular guy brought up from old-school parents. My father used to always say "Eh boy, you no make me shame, you unna stan?" Lol! It literally equates to dirty lickins if I step out of line!
And I also believe your exemplary comments describe the majority of the members here. :shaka:
-
I hope you and everyone here has some kind of self defense insurance. It can cost as little as a box of 9mm a month. Because all it takes is an over zealous prosecutor or social pressure and you end up in a court room. Even though the law is on your side,i t will cost money for your defense. And you don't want to go cheap, public defender route. Unless you have to.
Yeah, I've been thinking about it for quite a while lately. More so now that I'm retired, my wife will soon retire, and we are soon to be empty nesters. My two oldest already have flown the coop and my youngest just bought herself a townhouse and will move in with her boyfriend soon.
I feel more vulnerable now with just me and the missus alone. My paranoia (fueled by all this violence going on here and on the mainland) makes me contemplate something like USCCA.
I haven't gotten to finding out if these companies offer pricing for HD only, since our state doesn't issue CCW's and I don't have a CCW license in other states and am not interested since I don't travel much to the mainland.
-
I can answer that.
Not if you hit the person you intended to stop and no one else.
Liability Insurance covers injury to others that you cause by accident or negligence. Like someone slips on your steps, someone falls in your pool, or your dog bites someone (Beware of Dog signs don't protect you legally).
Liability Insurance will not cover someone else if you intentionally shoot them. No different than if you drove you car into the ocean and filed a claim. Intentional acts not covered.
Then there's the "who's covered" aspect. Liability implies your insurance pays someone other than you. You cause a car crash, liability coverage, which is mandatory, pays for the other driver's damages. IF you have comprehensive (collision) coverage, they cover your damages, too, if it's your fault.
So, in the case of you shooting someone in self defense, who would they pay? Not the person you shot, because it's not a "liability" claim -- the injury was intentional. Not you, because they'd be paying the policy holder for an intentional act -- something insurance companies spend lots of money investigating every year to avoid doing. Think arson...
This is why requiring gun owner insurance is such a farce. The people calling for these laws don't get these facts. They think you, as a danger to others, should have insurance that they, as potential victims, can file a claim to cover their loses. Basically, you own a gun, you kill 10 people at work, the families of the victims get paid through insurance. Easier than suing a shooter that commits suicide or dies from a Cop's bullet, right? Only if the Insurance companies lose their minds and write policies for this.
I have heard of someone shooting and missing the first shot when their front door was kicked down. That shot hit the neighbor's house across the street. Homeowner's Liability coverage paid for the repairs. Luckily, no one there was injured. That was accidental damage, though.
None of this covers you for legal fees, lost work, replacing a gun taken as evidence, etc. That's what the Gun Owner's Insurance policies do such as USCCA.
Good points on what to ask about my existing policy.
I had considered an umbrella policy but hadn't asked about that type of thing.
-
Good points on what to ask about my existing policy.
I had considered an umbrella policy but hadn't asked about that type of thing.
If I understand umbrella policies, they are meant to increase the coverage limits of your auto, home and liability policies. So, it's cheaper, and often required, for you to increase the limits of your existing policies before trying to get an umbrella policy.
$1M coverage can run $150-$300/year not including your base policies' premiums.
Umbrella policies are for those who want the peace of mind that their insurance can cover much more liability and legal payments than their existing policies. Say you hit a woman in a crosswalk, and she'll never work again. Your $500K payout from your auto policy won't cover the medical bills plus her lost income -- let's go with $1.2M total.
Your auto policy would pay the first $500K, and you'd be personally liable for the remainder, if not in current assets, perhaps in garnished wages for the rest of your working life.
The Umbrella policy would cover the $700K over the auto policy limit PLUS any additional legal expenses incurred.
I doubt any umbrella policy adds additional coverage like use of firearms.
I used to get a rider on my homeowners to cover high value items like jewelry. After a few years, it was obvious I could have put that money in the bank and used it to replace my jewelry in less than 10 years of paying the extra premiums. An umbrella policy could be used to supplement your coverage of such items, including firearms, if they don't require adding a rider to the policy first. Firearms coverage on my policy is pretty low, I think in the $2000 range.