Buying a Gun from Somebody

I understand.

I think your pretty safe, but I don't know the specific laws are.

My point was that, I don't care what the laws are if my family might be in danger.

I think you were better answered by Fatty.

 

in a case like that, i think the punishment exceeds the crime, anyone can use reasonable, equal force to protect himself against a tort.

as for the fact that he/she was tresspassing and stealing, the law states that killing is not a reasonable defense to protect your property.

if he was armed and threatened lethal force, only then would the shots be justified. I won't get into "pre-emptive" attacks.

 

That's an interesting point too nyquil, but I think we all better just drop this before it turns into a D&D slobber knocker.

 

ok, did some research, and I contract my previous statement on tort law as it is different if this is defined as a burlary, this is only under the condition that Oski's hypothetical occurs at night.


http://tkdtutor.com/07Defense/Laws.htm

Defense of home. To the law, your home is your castle. It is your place of last retreat. You are not required to retreat from a threat in your home. When defending your home against a burglary, authorities rarely question the use of force¾ even deadly force. Burglary is legally defined as:

the breaking and entering,
without consent,
of the dwelling house of another,
while it is occupied,
at night,
with the intent to commit any felony or larceny therein.
If you believe a burglar is serious physical threat to you or your family, the law allows you to use whatever force you feel is necessary to neutralize the threat. However, here again, one must be careful since not all intruders are burglars. Someone may be intoxicated and enter the wrong apartment. A firefighter may be trying to break-in to warn you of a fire in your home. Wildly shooting at anyone who trespasses onto your property is not reasonable self-defense. If the mistaken use force is reasonable under the circumstance and no one is seriously injured. the law will generally excuse the action. However, remember that the victim may still pursue you in civil court.

The use of force is justifiable only if the actor first requests the intruder to desist from his interference with the property, unless the actor reasonably believes that:

Such request would be useless,
It would be dangerous to the actor or another person to make the request, or
Substantial harm will be done to the physical condition of the property which is sought to be protected before the request can effectively be made.
The use of deadly force is not justifiable in the defense of premises unless the actor reasonably believes that:
The person against whom the force is used is attempting to dispossess the actor of his/her dwelling otherwise than under a claim of right to its possession; or
The person against whom the force is used is attempting to commit or consummate arson, burglary, robbery or other criminal theft or property destruction; except that
Deadly force does not become justifiable under A or B unless:
The person against whom it is used has used or threatened deadly force against, or in the presence of, the actor or
The use of force other than deadly force to prevent the commission or consummation of the crime would expose the actor, or another in his/her presence, to substantial danger of serious bodily harm.
These are defenses to criminal charges which will be brought against you if you defended yourself. Even if the prosecutor or police decide not to bring criminal charges against you or if you are successful in proving that you were protecting yourself as permitted under certain provisions of the criminal code, the attacker if injured still may attempt to bring a civil suit to recover for any medical expenses or injuries incurred.

 

I once heard about someone attempting to break into someones house, falling on a knife INSIDE the house and sueing the homeowner. After reading that article this wouldn't seem to make sense so maybe it isn't true, does this make any sense to anyone else?

Pugs

 

The Law in Texas:

You shoot an intruder - on your property (doesn't have to be in the dwelling) - at night, you're okay.

Just make sure it's an intruder and not your estranged wife/former business partner you invited over to talk things out/the meter guy/the mailman, etc.

No problem buying a gun from a private party here, but if all you want is a shotgun, you are better off going to Academy and paying 200 bucks for a 28in barrel remington 870. It's the jack of all trades shotgun, very reliable, and perfect length for dove, duck, & geese. The very fact that it's a shotgun makes it good for home defense.

 

Go get a Beretta White Wing...run you about $1000. You'll get an affordable shotgun by the best shotgun maker in the world.

 

Do they have Academy in Arkansas?

(I won't use the "joke" part of my question. )

 

That sounds like one of those stories that get spread around to paint all trial lawyers as scum. Can't find it on Snopes though.

 

anyone can sue, are you saying that he also won the case? there are cases where a kid would trespass and drown in a neighbors pool (the owner was negligent in not locking their fence), but im sure the case with a burgler is quite different.

 

Lil Pun, I won't pretend to be an expert, because I'm not, but isn't a 12 gauge a bit of overkill for rabbits and dove? I would think a 20 gauge would be adequate. My Ithaca 20g pump is about 50 years old and works just fine. I'm not sure I'd run out and buy a new shotgun. But try and get one from someone you trust and have them break it down and look it over like you're buying the Crown Jewels. Good luck!

 

A less experienced shooter might want a 12 gauge for dove or quail.

 

I recommend BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE