In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

CCW/Castile Doctrine/Stand Your Ground..

HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
Decent gun-owners across America are cheering these various acts of state/Federal governments across the U.S.

Promoting them as a great sign of advancing Second Amendment/ Personal Rights..a sign that governments/ the public 'finally get it'...
I have wondered why, actually, this is happening. Governments of all stripes has no interest in increasing citizens powers.

I believe in our eagernous to 'advance our cause'..we have shot ourselves in the heart.
We have allowed them to pass laws telling us how, when, and where we can carry a gun...we have codified into law that until we get permission...we cannot exercise a Right..indeed that EVERYTHING may be illegal..until passed into law.

We have advanced the cause of the Anti-Gunners and the New World Order types....someday, in a Court of Law...the Prosecution will point at the Defense and thunder.." Did you not embrace the Doctrine that the Government Gives....and Now WE take away.."

We have abdicated our Rights..willingly, eagerly,and ignorantly. We have weakened ourselves..and our Rights...EVERY TIME we dealt ..and deal...with the Beast.
Sleep well...Ignorance is bliss.

Comments

  • gunphreakgunphreak Member Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Look at this in a different position:

    This isn't about firearms, highball. And it isn't about a license or permission, either. It is a roll-back in law, which once stated it will prosecute you for self defense, where now, there is no justification for doing so. It disables others from civil action against you for doing the right thing. It also sends out a clear-cut message to criminals that you will be hunted, and there is nothing you can do in retaliation.

    Castle Doctrine law is a step forward for us, yes, but in legalese, it will be the acts of the Bady Campaign to Encourage Violence to try to get around this law, as a means to entrap others in a net caused by following the law, and it will require that judges do the right thing.

    Or it could mean, once a few of these go through the wrong way, that we, the people get out our ropes and take care of the problems, ourselves.

    The day of the rope.... is coming!
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,845 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Highball, as you know, I agree with you 100% about trading a "right" for a "privilege" when it comes to CCW laws. We are shooting ourselves in the foot. (so to speak) This trade-off WILL come back to haunt us in the future. The only state that has CCW right, is Vermont.

    I'm not sure I would include the recent proliferation of Castle Doctrine laws in this scenario. When writing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, it was "common sense" that one would be able to protect ones self and family, without fear of prosecution/litigation. There was no need to put it in writing, hence it was not addressed at that time. (At least I don't remember a specific clause relating to this, if I'm wrong, I'm sure someone can correct me)

    Jump ahead in time to the "sue happy" world we live in today. Where a law "allowing" us to protect ourselves, without fear, CAN be to our advantage. We are not trading off, or giving up, any rights with these laws, that I am aware of. Since "common sense" is DEAD in the world we currently live in, the Castle Doctrine laws being passed today, might not be such a bad thing.

    If "they" decide to rescind the Castle Doctrine laws, it's back to square one. We didn't loose any previously held "rights" UNLIKE the CCW laws being passed, where just the PASSAGE of said laws is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
  • sig232sig232 Member Posts: 8,018
    edited November -1
    I agree with Highball too, its very frustrating to see the US being pushed down the road to the socialist views of Europe. In England one has very little rights to protect ones self. In fact if you do protect yourself and the criminal is injured you are likely to be jailed and sued. What has happened over there! that is the reverse of "Common Sense".

    I see that thinking all over the place in the US today. I guess it comes from the maturing of the legal profession, I can't seem to understand the thinking. If that is progress in a maturing society I am glad I am over 60 and won't be around to see what happens 50 years down the road.

    But, that all said the summary by "Pickenup" is the correct one, in my opinion, we have to push back with all our might. The "castle doctrine" is one major pushback to the nutcases that protect criminal rights. We need to educate our own lawyers and get the movement going in the opposite direction. IMHO
  • kyplumberkyplumber Member Posts: 11,111
    edited November -1
  • mrseatlemrseatle Member Posts: 15,806
    edited November -1
    Why is it called the Castile Doctrine? CCW makes No Sense, and I have felt this way since AD 1998.

    People that count on CCP for a source of revenue will not like this.
    Government is also dependant on the extra tax base.
    And all the people I know with them would miss lording it over others.
  • gunphreakgunphreak Member Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Castle Doctrine is named after the common belief that "a man's home is his castle". The same concept is carried into all things, not just the man's home, but anywhere else a person is supposed to be.

    Look at it, this way. A JBT group breaks into your house at night, and you and your family manage to kill every single one of them, there is no legal recourse for them, but you can sue the hell out of the estates of the men who intruded your home, as well as the gov't. You will probably be more successful suing the intruders under common law, but you never know, a good enough attorney may help this out extremely.

    A good way to defund the ATF might be to have a judge strip all authority and justification for their being.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    quote:Look at it, this way. A JBT group breaks into your house at night, and you and your family manage to kill every single one of them, there is no legal recourse for them, but you can sue the hell out of the estates of the men who intruded your home, as well as the gov't
    [:D] While I sure would like this outcome...I think you will find the Kings' Men are exempt from any law forbidding breaking and entering...

    My problem with these laws is a simple one. They are making EVERYTHING illegal..unless it is written into a law. This is a VERY dangerous drift in a nation...particulerly a nation as spied upon as we are, with computer/camera/phone survailence becoming epidemic....
  • WoundedWolfWoundedWolf Member Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:They are making EVERYTHING illegal..unless it is written into a law.

    Thus enforcing the belief that the government GRANTS us our rights, as most "Americans" believe today.

    In previous generations, there was no need to label something like the "Castle Doctrine", let alone define it in law. It was obvious and accepted that if your life or property (or another's life or property) was being threatened then you were fully justified to use force as proctection, including lethal force. In fact, if you were a man, any lapse of action in that situation would have branded you as a coward. Today we are simply a nation full of cowards.

    -Wolf
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Wolf;
    Precisely. I fully understand the desire to clearly delineate what can and cannot be done by the citizen. However...every time another law is passed...the Beast herds us into an ever smaller corral...

    A nation of cowards. I do not include the 3% I talk about often in those curse words...those of us here in this forum with the balls to discuss these matters honestly....
  • Rack OpsRack Ops Member Posts: 18,597 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Highball: I completly understand and agree with what you are saying. The practical side of me, however, is glad that the poor SOB who has to take the life of a criminal in his own home won't have to worry about criminal or civil penalties
  • gunphreakgunphreak Member Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:My problem with these laws is a simple one. They are making EVERYTHING illegal..unless it is written into a law. This is a VERY dangerous drift in a nation...particulerly a nation as spied upon as we are, with computer/camera/phone survailence becoming epidemic....

    This is the absolute truth.

    quote:While I sure would like this outcome...I think you will find the Kings' Men are exempt from any law forbidding breaking and entering...


    I disagree. Lawyers smelling blood would be all over you, wanting a crack at this kind of coffer. At the very least, should you be right and the lawyer were not successful, how many people do you think would get the message about this kind of favoritism?
  • gunphreakgunphreak Member Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Thus enforcing the belief that the government GRANTS us our rights, as most "Americans" believe today.


    Actually, the "Castle Doctrine" does not grant you anything, it merely categorizes things the gov't will no longer allow in its court rooms, and no longer enforce. This is different from granting privileges.
Sign In or Register to comment.