another home invasion

[l730dc]

http://www.wbal.com/article/100100/2/template-story/Shots-Fired-At-Suspected-Intruder-In-Anne-Arundel-County

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

They were NOT supposed to have any firearms!!! Wasn't that the plan, Martin???

Good for them!

*** The US Government can plead the 5th amendment against We the People in the People's House? What??? ***

 

[l730dc]

Right! You cant take the law into your own hands! Call 911 and let the professionals take care of it

 

[TTMD]

That intruder would have been MUCH safer, and would be better of economically, if that rascally home owner wouldn't have had a gun!

 

[mxrider]

Was just reading about this on FB. Good on the homeowner!

 

[l730dc]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/26/man-charged-in-deaths-anchorage-couple-sexual-assault-2-year-old-in-their-care/

Just seen this on another thread.. does anyone see the differences in the outcomes of these

 

[Mattjtowne]

You can't compare... your government doesn't want you to protect your family.

It makes too much sense to have home protection!!


And of course your 2nd amendment.


Only Obama, O'Malley and the other azz's families can have armed protection.

 

[LexTalionis926]

Too bad he didn't hit the suspect. I listened to this whole thing unfold on the scanner the other night and I will admit I was a little bummed that he didn't wound the intruder lol.

 

[Yeti Poacher]

Too bad he didn't hit the suspect. I listened to this whole thing unfold on the scanner the other night and I will admit I was a little bummed that he didn't wound the intruder lol.

Only if the suspect was armed and/or threatening him. The home owner would get in trouble otherwise right?

I would argue that a stranger who broke into my home is a threat in and of itself but some fools would disagree...

If someone calmly walks into your house, unplugs your 46" LED TV and walks out would you get in trouble for shooting them?

 

[paulstitz]

Only if the suspect was armed and/or threatening him. The home owner would get in trouble otherwise right?

I would argue that a stranger who broke into my home is a threat in and of itself but some fools would disagree...

If someone calmly walks into your house, unplugs your 46" LED TV and walks out would you get in trouble for shooting them?

If they have WALKED OUT? YES, trouble.

 

[mward]

Only if the suspect was armed and/or threatening him. The home owner would get in trouble otherwise right?

I would argue that a stranger who broke into my home is a threat in and of itself but some fools would disagree...

If someone calmly walks into your house, unplugs your 46" LED TV and walks out would you get in trouble for shooting them?

Legally? Probably not, depending on circumstances. Civilly? Probably.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Legally? Probably not, depending on circumstances. Civilly? Probably.

You HAVE to be kidding? No way!

Ok, so you are saying that the State of MD puts more value in property than a life when it comes to needing a G&S reason to carry/use a firearm outside of the home, but values a life more than property when it comes to carry/use a firearm inside the home? What??? Now I am really confused.

I don't care what the intention is if someone enters my home and I am not waiting to find out either. As far as I am concerned, they mean harm.

Geez, this state really is trying to create a bunch of victims.

*** Raises taxes 40 times, lets inmates run the prisons... and now wants to be President of the United States??? Hilarious!! ***

 

[Mr H]

Ok, so you are saying that the State of MD puts more value in property than a life when it comes to needing a G&S reason to carry/use a firearm outside of the home, but values a life more than property when it comes to carry/use a firearm inside the home? What??? Now I am really confused.

Honestly??? That sounds about par for the course.

I don't care what the intention is if someone enters my home and I am not waiting to find out either. As far as I am concerned, they mean harm.

I tell my wife, should she have the need, that she IS in absolute fear for her life, until she hears click.

Geez, this state really is trying to create a bunch of victims.

zackly

 

[Mdeng]

Only if the suspect was armed and/or threatening him. The home owner would get in trouble otherwise right?

I would argue that a stranger who broke into my home is a threat in and of itself but some fools would disagree...

If someone calmly walks into your house, unplugs your 46" LED TV and walks out would you get in trouble for shooting them?

Legally? Probably not, depending on circumstances. Civilly? Probably.

You HAVE to be kidding? No way!

Ok, so you are saying that the State of MD puts more value in property than a life when it comes to needing a G&S reason to carry/use a firearm outside of the home, but values a life more than property when it comes to carry/use a firearm inside the home? What??? Now I am really confused.

I don't care what the intention is if someone enters my home and I am not waiting to find out either. As far as I am concerned, they mean harm.

Geez, this state really is trying to create a bunch of victims.

*** Raises taxes 40 times, lets inmates run the prisons... and now wants to be President of the United States??? Hilarious!! ***

Shallnotinfringe you have it right the others are suffering from Maryland battered gun owners syndrome. They should seek treatment.

If you doubt your legal ability to defend yourself in your own home you should read up on the Maryland Castle laws including the proabition from civil suit if the person hurt was committing a crime at the time of the injury.

 

[obsolete]

A trailer with an alarm system. Nothing unusual there.

 

[TLL]

A trailer with an alarm system. Nothing unusual there.

Not unusual at all.

Tapatalk is crashing crap

 

[Yeti Poacher]

If you doubt your legal ability to defend yourself in your own home you should read up on the Maryland Castle laws including the proabition from civil suit if the person hurt was committing a crime at the time of the injury.

It's not defense of self I am concerned with it is defense of property.

I trade my time for money (I have a job). This money is used to buy objects which enhance my life and make it more enjoyable.

Stealing my property is in effect stealing a part of my life.

Using lethal force to defend property under non life-threatening situations would be excessive but even if you used non lethal force to stop someone stealing your property I fear that you could get in trouble in this state...

 

[Docster]

You HAVE to be kidding? No way!

Ok, so you are saying that the State of MD puts more value in property than a life when it comes to needing a G&S reason to carry/use a firearm outside of the home, but values a life more than property when it comes to carry/use a firearm inside the home? What??? Now I am really confused.

I don't care what the intention is if someone enters my home and I am not waiting to find out either. As far as I am concerned, they mean harm.

Geez, this state really is trying to create a bunch of victims.

*** Raises taxes 40 times, lets inmates run the prisons... and now wants to be President of the United States??? Hilarious!! ***

Really? Where have YOU been? Doesn't matter what you think. Maryland law is not favorable to the homeowner, especially compared with Castle Doctrine states like PA and Ohio. In Maryland, there has to be an immediate and imminent threat to you; no threat, no need to defend. There is no defense legally for the use of lethal force to protect property. So, if the bad guys are walking away from you with your TV AFTER assaulting you/you're family, there is no current threat and the use of lethal force is unjustified. If they've broken into your house and are not coming at you in a threatening manner or verbalize that they aren't going to hurt anyone, then the use of lethal force is not justified.

In the Castle Doctrine states, it is implied that anyone who enters your house without your permission is there to do you harm, so you have the right to defend yourself and do not have to prove immediate threat. The intrusion itself is considered the threat. NOT here in Maryland however.

 

[notme0255]

Really? Where have YOU been? Doesn't matter what you think. Maryland law is not favorable to the homeowner, especially compared with Castle Doctrine states like PA and Ohio. In Maryland, there has to be an immediate and imminent threat to you; no threat, no need to defend. There is no defense legally for the use of lethal force to protect property. So, if the bad guys are walking away from you with your TV AFTER assaulting you/you're family, there is no current threat and the use of lethal force is unjustified. If they've broken into your house and are not coming at you in a threatening manner or verbalize that they aren't going to hurt anyone, then the use of lethal force is not justified.

In the Castle Doctrine states, it is implied that anyone who enters your house without your permission is there to do you harm, so you have the right to defend yourself and do not have to prove immediate threat. The intrusion itself is considered the threat. NOT here in Maryland however.

So as long as they're found (shot) with my Ginsu kitchen knife in their hand, all is OK.

 

[Yeti Poacher]

In the Castle Doctrine states, it is implied that anyone who enters your house without your permission is there to do you harm, so you have the right to defend yourself and do not have to prove immediate threat. The intrusion itself is considered the threat. NOT here in Maryland however.

So MD castle doctrine is watered down. Doesn't surprise me at all.

So as long as they're found (shot) with my Ginsu kitchen knife in their hand, all is OK.

So bad We shouldn't have to ponder such things.