If you think the hysteria surrounding the shooting in Florida will not affect you, consider this:
In Wisconsin, a homeowner defends himself and his family from some inebriated person on his enclosed front porch at 1 a.m. The only reason I emphasize that it was enclosed is that it means that this person entered an enclosed structure that is part of this home. The homeowner confronts the person and instead of complying, the person approaches the homeowner. The homeowner fires a single shot from a handgun, killing the intruder.
Two things you will notice about this case:
1. Apparently, what constitutes a "child" or "kid" has now increased to 20 years-old.
2. Skin color means you are completely innocent regardless of the circumstances.
The protesters are already out in force and I'm sure this homeowner will face threats against him for protecting his family. Comparisons are being made to the Trayvon Martin shooting only because of the color of the individual's skin.
You will also notice the agenda of the media, here. Yet again, they are questioning self-defense laws when they are not even the issue. The laws governing self defense would still apply here regardless of Wisconsin's castle law. This man was the only thing standing between an intruder who had entered a structure in his home and his wife and children. What decision do you make in that situation? You only have one chance to get it right as the person approaches you in the dark.
According to the Brady Bunch, a 'child' is up to age 24... And the rest of the story? Yep, dead on the money (pardon the pun)... When you have an entitled class, who get away with most of their stuff due to political environment, this kind of behavior becomes the norm...
ReplyDeleteGood point, NFO. I think the coddling keeps young people irresponsible longer.
DeleteYep. doesn't matter if your drunk or not. Come into my house and the same thing would have resulted.
ReplyDeleteEveryone is going to try to jump on the Trayvon band wagon.
Posted
Thanks, Rich. I've heard that "but they were drunk" stuff before. Well, the homeowner doesn't keep a breathalyzer handy to see if the intruder is being stupid or violent.
DeleteThey are looking for more excuses, to bring on more gun control. And to do away with the laws, like the castle law, and others. It really frosts my a**. And, now gives something else for the "King" in the white house to join in.
ReplyDeleteYou're right, Flier. They're really pushing on the Castle Laws. It's almost like they've been waiting for something to try and push back on them. Never let a crisis go to waste and all that.
DeleteThis is so stupid. It is not the responsibility of the homeowner to figure out if the guy breaking in is drunk or not. In many cases by the time you decide he isn't, your the one shot.
ReplyDeleteDead on, Agirl. The burden shouldn't be on you in your own home to decide if someone is a threat. The burden should be on someone to not intrude into your home.
Delete