Ethics & Rights  - 
 
To fight or not to fight...that is the question
2
George Hayes's profile photoJim L.'s profile photoChris Mason's profile photoRichelieu Williams's profile photo
16 comments
 
Very true.  We don't have a "Castle Doctrine' Law in Virginia.  You must "retreat' until you can retreat no more before you can exercise lethal force.  Then it's going to be a very gray area...My take is this, you want to break into my home and can subdue my 100lb land shark.  Go ahead.  You can have my stereo, computers, DVD player, flat screen TV.  I have insurance for those.  Come near my wife or son and I don't care what the law says, "It's on"...
 
+Chris Mason Really? No Castle Doctrine in Virginia? There has to be some form of the law in place. Very interesting, I'm gonna have to look into this and get back to you. 

Does this mean if someone enters your home Virginia expects you to run from your own home versus stand your ground?
Jim L.
 
an unjust law is not a law. 
Jim L.
 
+Richelieu Williams The denial of the ability to defend your life, liberty and property so that you can pursue happiness. If any law deemed valid impresses an undue burden on my ability to affect the positive outcome of the defense of the aforementioned, inherent rights,  then that law is henceforth unconstitutional as it a direct violation of the Bill of Rights. No law can tell me with which what arms I can use to defend myself with; and no, I'm not talking about a .50 cal on the roof of my car or a tank or a nuclear weapon or a shoulder fired rocket, RPG or other such weapons that are not in common use for core lawful purposes. 
 
Some people want gun control, I want gun education

+Jim Losi just for the record I posted this article to open eyes to the fact that you have a choice when you feel threatened. Personally I have always been the type to err on the side of caution. If I have an opportunity to avoid a situation, that is the route I am taking 100% of the time. 

Unfortunately their are some who are using threatening or self defense type situations as a reason to pull the trigger when they had other options. What they need to know is if they had and opportunity for avoidance available to them at any point during these situations and they did not take advantage of them, then they can expect to face a world of trouble if they used deadly force when they didn't need to.

We can greatly reduce the amount of unnecessary deaths in this country with just a little bit of education and training. All we ever see is the numbers about the amount of deaths. I want to see the numbers involving the amount of deaths that could have been avoided had the shooter been educated. 
Jim L.
+
1
2
1
 
+Richelieu Williams The statistics are already lacking in accuracy when it comes to guns preventing crimes. This is especially evident in cases where the gun was never fired by the defender. 

That being said, I cannot argue against gun education. It's very important. Situational awareness is always a good thing to employ, and to that same effect, your post is mostly about circumstances and not about anything concrete. 

I would run into this type of Q&A when I was instructing in the dojo. We would teach a technique and then it go off into a "Well, if you did this then I was just do this and".. rinse repeat.

The bottom line here is:
1. Know your tools
2. Don't PUT yourself into bad situations
3. Use your best judgement in resisting force.

#3 includes all aspects of assessment, and intelligently disarming the situation up to and including the use of deadly force. 

I have been in enough confrontations to tell you more often than not, the person(s) attempting to accost you are not concerned with your wit. This is, of course, not inclusive of every situation, but my personal experience tells me to err on the side of making sure I get out alive no matter what. 
 
Only a crack head would believe you have a duty to retreat.
Jim L.
 
+George Hayes you have a duty to resist tyranny, whether it is the government or the persons(s) attempting to hurt you and others. 
 
+Jim Losi well said sir...#2 is the one I think most everyone has a problem with...putting ourselves in bad situations that is.
 
+Jim Losi I know that. If you read my posts and visit my sites you will tend to see I provide 100% information a lot of people get upset with because it often includes topics like how to make full auto weapons from hardware parts, bombs.... and so on. I think people need to know what reality is rather than live in a fantasy world.

If people are informed then the government can't pull the wool over their eyes. They can choose to ignore reality but that is them.

This week alone I consulted for 2 school ISDs. Both of which are revising policy based on the fact I proved what they thought they knew was false.
 
+Richelieu Williams The only policy they if they were truthful that does anything for school safety is the one regarding teachers possibly being trained or getting security into the school. The rest are more about control of the populace and provide no safety or security.
 
+George Hayes let me be more specific...here is what you said...

"This week alone I consulted for 2 school ISDs. Both of which are revising policy based on the fact I proved what they thought they knew was false."

I am asking what policies are you claiming they revised after your interaction with them?
Add a comment...