I don't see how anyone could just stand by and watch that happen when they have the means at hand to stop it.
There would have to be something wrong with their mindset, or they're just cowards at heart.
Then I am a coward at heart because I am not going to kill a man, go to jail and thereby leaving my wife and children without income to save a dog. I would certainly use OC on the guy but am not going to put myself in physical or legal risk by either going Mano y Mano with him or shooting him.
No, "the law" is not so clear and precise.
You would still most likely have a court hearing where it would be determined if charges were to be filed.
Please find ONE STATE where lethal force is NOT ALLOWED to be used in the prevention of rape. Any shooting may go to court, that does not mean it is not justified. Under the law you can use the prevention of rape as a legitimate defense for the use of deadly force and it would be up to the jury (if it went that far) to decide if there was situation to a normal person indicated a rape in progress that was being prevented. The jury would have to be instructed that ues of deadly force to prevent a rape is LEGAL.
Shoot a man to prevent a dog being killed and you are in a completely different situation. The jury will almost certainly be instructed that the defense of a dog's life does NOT warrant lethal force. You can argue your case and hope for the jury to ignore the court's instructions on grounds for guilt but the odds are you will be convicted of something if it goes to court. Perhaps not murder but the jury will slap you with one of the lesser charges the prosecution will add on just to send a message.
But hey, let's go a different route...
A guy rapes your wife but the courts don't have enough evidence to bring it to trial.
Would you become a vigilante and taken matters in your own hands?
No. I would hate it but NO. We live in a society of guided by the law. Aside from the basic premise of being a law abiding citizen I still have a wife to care for, I still have children to raise. One needs to put their inner "rambo" ego aside and behave as a responsible adult.
Maybe in your town, but around here I have yet to find anyone "in the middle" about gun control.
So everyone in your area is an NRA member and a solid voter with regards to 2A issues? The would never vote for a less than solid 2A politician becasue of other issues? How do those people feel about fully automatic weapons, do they think everyone should have access to them? What about registration or waiting periods? You may be in a fairly pro gun area but I gaurentee you the majority of the population is somewhere in the middle. Many of those people who consider themselves pro-gun are actually far from hardcore 2A supporters. Not wanting the revocation of the 2A does not make one a solid 2A defender. I gaurentee you people probably considerred Zumbo pro 2A until he made his foot in mouth comments.
At the same time the majority of people in less pro-gun areas are not members of the Brady Bunch.
Most people in this nation really care far more about other issues than the 2A. That is the truth. If you live in that one community where every citizen is a SAF, GOA and NRA member then you are lucky but are in very small company. Fear drives that large middle group of voters. Either fear of being left helpess like the Katrina survivors or fear of some homegrown militia nut with a machine gun, and fetrilizer bomb out to meet out justice as he sees fit. I advise not making us appear as the latter.
Appeasement by any other name still stinks.
Your reasons for appeasement are not bad ones, but you must realize that it's still appeasement to the anti-gun crowd all the same.
What have I given up in "appeasement" to the antis? I advocate against making stupid vigilanty justice comments. I oppose people who state that they are responsible for ridding the world of those they consider demented individiuals. I speak out against those who would take the law into their own hands so that they may kill a man when not allowed by law because they feel he deserved to die.
I did not say you need to give up your guns, high cap mags, HP ammo or anything else. I did not say you should have to pay a gov't fee to own a gun or have to surrender it to the gov't in times of emergency. I have not asked people to give up ONE THING associated with their 2A rights.
I have only asked people not to advocate illegal activity using a firearm as it hurts our cause with the majority of this nations undecided citizens.
I don't see any harm being done by the statements in this thread.
So this one doesn't make us look like lawless vigilantees?
it's about ridding our society of a sick demented bastard
Self appointed gun packing judges, juries and executioners are what we are painted to be and what that statement incorrectly supports.
In fact, I would be willing to bet most Americans would agree that the nut case dog burner needed to be stopped.
Probably but most of them will still convict you based on the instructions given to the jury with regards to the judicious use of lethal force.
Call me what you will, but I refuse to stand by and watch some sicko burn a dog alive. As I said, I probably would not shoot him, but I would attempt to stop him and hold him until the police came.