The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will not longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will not longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
If it were up to me, I'd authorize him to use a machine gun to shoot the cockroaches who think they have an excuse to riot and burn.The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will not longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will no longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence for her. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, all efforts lost, future obliterated, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
If it were up to me, I'd authorize him to use a machine gun to shoot the cockroaches who think they have an excuse to riot and burn.
But, that's just me.
The law doesn't allow this, unfortunately.
Are you certain that isn't legal (firearm, not machine gun) in every state? I suppose if there was a cot in the back the owner could claim it also is one of his/her "residence."
Yes he can but his wife would get cancer treatment anyway, and insurance would cover the losses.
You have an incredible knack for making it hard to agree with you even when you're right.
The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will no longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence for her. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, all efforts lost, future obliterated, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
Quote the law that assures everyone has free insurance and free cancer treatment? Neither of those exist whatsoever.
Are you certain that isn't legal (firearm, not machine gun) in every state? I suppose if there was a cot in the back the owner could claim it also is one of his/her "residence."
Oh, it's perfectly legal to have firearms. (no, not machine guns). I'm not sure it's really legal to shoot people in defense of property, however. I suppose if they were standing in the door of their store and a mob of thugs was closing in, they could plead self defense.
But, I'm not sure that they would be found innocent.
If it were up to me, I'd authorize him to use a machine gun to shoot the cockroaches who think they have an excuse to riot and burn.
But, that's just me.
The law doesn't allow this, unfortunately.
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Oh, it's perfectly legal to have firearms. (no, not machine guns). I'm not sure it's really legal to shoot people in defense of property, however. I suppose if they were standing in the door of their store and a mob of thugs was closing in, they could plead self defense.
But, I'm not sure that they would be found innocent.
actually a mob descending onto your store is proper grounds to light them up assuming they have started smashing the windows etc. the disparate numbers alone justify serious firepower.
Mobs attacking a store should be shot down. Its a win win for society and the innocent owners
BTW people are not FOUND INNOCENT
they are presumed innocent until they are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
if the jury fails to find that, their presumption of innocence remains intact
Right of self-defense in Maryland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
According to Wikipedia, it would not be lawful for a person to use deadly force against commercial burglars in Maryland.
Right of self-defense in Maryland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
According to Wikipedia, it would not be lawful for a person to use deadly force against commercial burglars in Maryland.
The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will no longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence for her. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, all efforts lost, future obliterated, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
The police pull out, eliminating all police protection and essentially eliminating the rule of law.
Looters are breaking into a store owner's store. Insurance will not cover the lose. If the owner loses his inventory, he and his family become homeless, bankrupt and completely financially ruined. His wife will no longer be able to continue cancer treatment, for which lose of inventory is a death sentence for her. Daughter will have to drop out of college. The family will be on the street begging for food until food stamps are given and they find a homeless shelter.
Can the store owner use deadly force (such as a firearm) to protect his merchandise? Or he is required to lose everything he has, all efforts lost, future obliterated, watch his wife die, and his child's education ruined?
What do you say?
Killing is never the answer and one life is not above the other.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?