Thread: Ahhh, so this is the better life they come here for

swatchick, that figures the cartels and small time meth makers would figure this out once states started taking the sudafed off the market. Problem is, I have chronic sinus problems and sudafed is the only thing that helps, makes it that much harder for me to get it without medical insurance (you have to get a prescription from doctor in OR now for pharmacy to dispense it), and this means a visit over the river to get it, somewhat of a hassle.

Now the criminals have made it that much harder for the honest person to obtain it, and all the while, they are still making the drugs.

Yeah, I am glad the meth related crimes have gone down some. Yet it has not curbed the gang problems here.

Omg that's hideous! It's so easy to look at that and go, "Well, Americans do that too." but then it should be said, "Well, if the borders were sealed and the government was doing their job and enforcing the laws, then that would have been one less little girl to have her life ruined forever!"

I'm not sure how I would feel about getting a gun. It's funny, I'm terrified of guns to the point of having very visceral nightmares about finding one in my bookbag or something like that and having no idea how it got there and knowing if I say anything I would get arrested and stuff and I have to hide it, but then my ten year old son wants to be a sniper when he grows up. . . so go figure on that one

Would anyone know what the basic 'home invasion' self defense laws are in PA by chance? If one does not have a gun, could one use another form of weapon and it be considered the same thing? Like a sword or knife if it comes down to self defence? (ahem it's a real question. I do have a replica sword b/c I am that nerdy and I've always thought of that as a last line of defence should anything happen though it doesn't have a sharp blade, it does have a sharp point )

Originally Posted by ShadowVixenPatriot

Omg that's hideous! It's so easy to look at that and go, "Well, Americans do that too." but then it should be said, "Well, if the borders were sealed and the government was doing their job and enforcing the laws, then that would have been one less little girl to have her life ruined forever!"

I'm not sure how I would feel about getting a gun. It's funny, I'm terrified of guns to the point of having very visceral nightmares about finding one in my bookbag or something like that and having no idea how it got there and knowing if I say anything I would get arrested and stuff and I have to hide it, but then my ten year old son wants to be a sniper when he grows up. . . so go figure on that one

Would anyone know what the basic 'home invasion' self defense laws are in PA by chance? If one does not have a gun, could one use another form of weapon and it be considered the same thing? Like a sword or knife if it comes down to self defence? (ahem it's a real question. I do have a replica sword b/c I am that nerdy and I've always thought of that as a last line of defence should anything happen though it doesn't have a sharp blade, it does have a sharp point )

If you have it hanging in a convenient spot where you can easily grab if someone breaks in you should be okay. It just has to be by where you would most likely be walking by in that scenario preferably in the same area of the door or hallway. Another good weapon is a baseball bat but make sure if you have one near the door have a glove and at least one ball with it as it won't look like you are keeping it there as a weapon. This helps if you had to use it and then the burglar or robber decides to sue you.

Isn't that just outrageous that someone breaks into your home, you feel scared and threatened, and defend yourself and/or family, but you can be sued by that person? God help us all. There is not difference in that, as with an illegal alien corssing our border, with tons of pot no less, getting his backend filled with bullets, and then suing us for his injuries?

Lord where is the actual justice anymore?

Originally Posted by AmericanElizabeth

Isn't that just outrageous that someone breaks into your home, you feel scared and threatened, and defend yourself and/or family, but you can be sued by that person? God help us all. There is not difference in that, as with an illegal alien corssing our border, with tons of pot no less, getting his backend filled with bullets, and then suing us for his injuries?

Lord where is the actual justice anymore?

In Florida we have what is called the castle doctorine which allows you to kill someone in self defense in your home. It also prevents the the person injured or their family to sue you. Other states may not be the same.

A gun would make me nervous, just the thought that it could be taken away from me and used against me. Instead I have a very nice 92 pound dog that loves me. When people ask if he's friendly I tell them he is if I tell him to be. Raise their voice to me or come in my house without permission is another matter. Even his loud bark when strangers approach our home is comforting. Houses in our neighborhood have been robbed - smash and grab mostly - except for the houses with large dogs. The place with two pit bulls can probably leave their door standing open.

Here is CA Law:

Protecting One’s Home
A person may defend his or her home against anyone who attempts to enter in a violent manner intending violence to any person in the home. The amount of force that may be used in resisting such entry is limited to that which would appear necessary to a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances to resist the violent entry. One is not bound to retreat, even though a retreat might safely be made. One may resist force with force, increasing it in proportion to the intruder’s persistence and violence, if the circumstances apparent to the occupant would cause a reasonable person in the same or similar situation to fear for his or her safety.

The occupant may use a firearm when resisting the intruder’s attempt to commit a forcible and lifethreatening crime against anyone in the home provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the intruder intends to commit a forcible and life threatening crime; (b) there is imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the occupant acts under the belief that use of a firearm is necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or great bodily injury. Murder, mayhem, rape, and robbery are examples of forcible and threatening crimes.
Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family or household, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry had occurred. Great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury. (Penal Code § 198.5.)

Defense of Property
The lawful occupant of real property has the right to request a trespasser to leave the premises. If the trespasser does not do so within a reasonable time, the occupant may use force to eject the trespasser.
The amount of force that may be used to eject a trespasser is limited to that which a reasonable person would believe to be necessary under the same or similar circumstances.
Limitations on the Use of Force in Self-Defense
The right of self-defense ceases when there is no further danger from an assailant. Thus, where a person attacked under circumstances initially justifying self-defense renders the attacker incapable of inflicting further injuries, the law of self-defense ceases and no further force may be used.
The right of self-defense is not initially available to a person who assaults another. However, if such person attempts to stop further combat and clearly informs the adversary of his or her desire for peace but the opponent nevertheless continues the fight, the right of self-defense returns and is the same as the right of any other person being assaulted.

Well swatchick, not here in Oregon. People have gone to jail defending their home, and lost much in the process. It is very liberal and does not consider victims hardly ever. If both feet of the criminal are inside of your place, you might be ok in the court.

An example of how things are here. My best friends husband went out in their own driveway, to confront his brother, who had come over in the middle of the night, high on meth. My friends husband had a baseball bat with him, as his brother had been highly unpredictable in the preceding months. He kept telling his brother to just get in his car and leave, but his brother stepped back to th car, leaned down to reach for something. My friends husband felt strongly he was reaching for a weapon. As his brother began to stand up straight, he saw something in his hand and swung to move him back. The bat hit his head and he stumbled.

Police were called, but his high brother took off, injured. So after telling the officer all, the cop told him he was under arrest because he had took action first. No matter that his brothers behavior of late had shown erratic and volatile behavior, and he was making verbal threats, and looked like he was reaching for a weapon, my friends husband was arrested right in his own driveway. Since they could not find his brother to get his side, he was held for almost a week.

That's Multnomah county (in Oregon) in a nutshell.