Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Let's Have a Discussion About Self-Defense

Nice string of remarkably substance free posts from someone with extensive real world experience on the subject. LOL.

I am not easily embarrassed but would be if I considered tyson to be of any consequence or commented on Ayoob w/out having read his drivel, which I am sure you have done.

Goal oriented [commander's intent] planning and training performed by modern era practitioners have rendered much of Clausewitz obsolete. Sun Tzu is more relevant and also fits the context

There are almost as many self defense experts here as there are covid experts.

lol,ptl



mike r

Would luv to get your input on elk hunting and arrests, use of force as a 20 year LEO vet lol

You sure do have a sensitive vagina for a tough old school former cop. Difficulty focusing on the task at hand as well.

We all know what you'd really like is his cock buried deep in your fat old Jew Nersey phaggot ass.

Blackie did you manage to stumble out of your moldy, mouse turd infested single wide to actually hunt this year?

let's see some pics

lol

Never have I seen such masterful use of the quote button. I have no doubts you were similarly masterful in the execution of your law enforcement duties.

Does your tranny girlfriend know you're hitting on other guys at the campfire there "padre" ? LMFAO

Paul you should start a thread on heterosexual bike riders

lol

Looks like the night shift finally showed up.

Make sure you read all the reports I left from this afternoon’s shift.

There’s some good stuff in them about DeFlave, me, Jackmountain and others of course...Oh, and a lot about bacon.

LOL

🦫

This one really fugged up post...

I’d hate to see Ribka’s pop-up ads after doing a google search for “gay biker pics”😳

So much bacon, and no grease?

LOL

ElkTurdBurglar will be along shortly to tell y’all your all wrong.
And how there’s some super secret law only he knows about that makes it legal to murder everyone.

Then he’ll discuss domiciles, burglary, and trespass while playing grab ass in great detail.

After he calls everybody Closet Commie Brown Shirts. 🤪

He’s out researching all of Beaver’s former quotes as we speak. 😜

South Carolina ....


SECTION 16-11-440. Presumption of reasonable fear of imminent peril when using deadly force against another unlawfully entering residence, occupied vehicle or place of business.

(A) A person is presumed to have a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to himself or another person when using deadly force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury to another person if the person:

(1) against whom the deadly force is used is in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcibly entered a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if he removes or is attempting to remove another person against his will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(2) who uses deadly force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring or has occurred.

(B) The presumption provided in subsection (A) does not apply if the person:

(1) against whom the deadly force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle including, but not limited to, an owner, lessee, or titleholder; or

(2) sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship, of the person against whom the deadly force is used; or

(3) who uses deadly force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(4) against whom the deadly force is used is a law enforcement officer who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle in the performance of his official duties, and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using force knows or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter is a law enforcement officer.

(C) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in another place where he has a right to be, including, but not limited to, his place of business, has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or another person or to prevent the commission of a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

(D) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or a violent crime as defined in Section 16-1-60.

(E) A person who by force enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle in violation of an order of protection, restraining order, or condition of bond is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act regardless of whether the person is a resident of the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle including, but not limited to, an owner, lessee, or titleholder.

HISTORY: 2006 Act No. 379, Section 1, eff June 9, 2006.

SECTION 16-11-450. Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil actions; law enforcement officer exception; costs.

(A) A person who uses deadly force as permitted by the provisions of this article or another applicable provision of law is justified in using deadly force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of deadly force, unless the person against whom deadly force was used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his official duties and he identifies himself in accordance with applicable law or the person using deadly force knows or reasonably should have known that the person is a law enforcement officer.

(B) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of deadly force as described in subsection (A), but the agency may not arrest the person for using deadly force unless probable cause exists that the deadly force used was unlawful.

(C) The court shall award reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of a civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (A).

HISTORY: 2006 Act No. 379, Section 1, eff June 9, 2006.

#1 ... true, always avoid stupid places at stupid times with stupid people. It never ends well.
#2 ... always watch your family's back ... as well as your own. Situational awareness is key at all times.
#3 ... it is a magazine or a mag ... not a clip.
#4 ... if you carry a knife as a self-defense tool and you are ever forced-to use it ... you'd better know how to use it. Same holds true for the hot sauce or any other less than lethal tools you may choose to carry. I carry hot sauce and an automatic knife as part of my EDC in addition to my firearm and an extra mag. And I practice deploying all three.
#5 ... USCCA or any of those orrrrrrrrrr .... have a good 2A attorney's card in your wallet, that's good advice. Keep in mind that any of the CWP Insurance outfits will pay most of your legal fees up to a certain point ... otherwise you may be mortgaging your house even if yours was a righteous shoot. It's worth looking-into these ...

• Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network
• CCW Safe
• Firearms Legal Protection
• Second Call Defense
• United States Concealed Carry Association
• U.S. Law Shield

#6 ... i think maybe, perhaps, you meant to type, "'tis better to be judged by twelve than carried by six" ... maybe? Either way, your sentiment is so true friend.

Tennessee self defense statute, how much more convoluted could it be?:

39-11-611. Self-defense.
(a) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) “Business” means a commercial enterprise or establishment owned by a person as all or part of the person's livelihood or is under the owner's control or who is an employee or agent of the owner with responsibility for protecting persons and property and shall include the interior and exterior premises of the business;
(2) “Category I nuclear facility” means a facility that possesses a formula quantity of strategic special nuclear material, as defined and licensed by the United States nuclear regulatory commission, and that must comply with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 73;
(3) “Curtilage” means the area surrounding a dwelling that is necessary, convenient and habitually used for family purposes and for those activities associated with the sanctity of a person's home;
(4) “Deadly force” means the use of force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury;
(5) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, that has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed for or capable of use by people;
(6) “Nuclear power reactor facility” means a reactor designed to produce heat for electric generation, for producing radiation or fissionable materials, or for reactor component testing, and does not include a reactor used for research purposes;
(7) “Nuclear security officer” means a person who meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 73, Appendix B, who is an employee or an employee of a contractor of the owner of a category I nuclear facility or nuclear power reactor facility, and who has been appointed or designated by the owner of a category I nuclear facility or nuclear power reactor facility to provide security for the facility;
(8) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides, either temporarily or permanently, or is visiting as an invited guest, or any dwelling, building or other appurtenance within the curtilage of the residence; and
(9) “Vehicle” means any motorized vehicle that is self-propelled and designed for use on public highways to transport people or property.
(b)
(1) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.
(2) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor and is in a place where the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury, if:
(A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse;
(B) The danger creating the belief of imminent death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and
(C) The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.
(3) For purposes of this subsection (b), a person is not engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor or in a place where the person does not have a right to be if the person is engaged in the activity or in the place due to the person's status as a victim of human trafficking. The person must prove the person's status as a victim of human trafficking by clear and convincing evidence. The person may provide clear and convincing evidence of the person's status as a victim of human trafficking through testimony.
(c) Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury within a residence, business, dwelling or vehicle is presumed to have held a reasonable belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury to self, family, a member of the household or a person visiting as an invited guest, when that force is used against another person, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence, business, dwelling or vehicle, and the person using defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.
(d) The presumption established in subsection (c) shall not apply, if:
(1) The person against whom the force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, business, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder; provided, that the person is not prohibited from entering the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle by an order of protection, injunction for protection from domestic abuse, or a court order of no contact against that person;
(2) The person against whom the force is used is attempting to remove a person or persons who is a child or grandchild of, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used;
(3)
(A) Notwithstanding § 39-17-1322, the person using force is engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor or is using the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity;
(B) For purposes of subdivision (d)(3)(A), a person is not engaged in conduct that would constitute a felony or Class A misdemeanor or using a dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle to further unlawful activity if the person is engaged in the activity or using the dwelling, business, residence, or occupied vehicle due to the person's status as a victim of human trafficking. The person must prove the person's status as a victim of human trafficking by clear and convincing evidence. The person may provide clear and convincing evidence of the person's status as a victim of human trafficking through testimony; or
(4) The person against whom force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106, who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, business, residence, or vehicle in the performance of the officer's official duties, and the officer identified the officer in accordance with any applicable law, or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(e) The threat or use of force against another is not justified:
(1) If the person using force consented to the exact force used or attempted by the other individual;
(2) If the person using force provoked the other individual's use or attempted use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) The person using force abandons the encounter or clearly communicates to the other the intent to do so; and
(B) The other person nevertheless continues or attempts to use unlawful force against the person; or
(3) To resist a halt at a roadblock, arrest, search, or stop and frisk that the person using force knows is being made by a law enforcement officer, unless:
(A) The law enforcement officer uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest, search, stop and frisk, or halt; and
(B) The person using force reasonably believes that the force is immediately necessary to protect against the law enforcement officer's use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.
(f) A nuclear security officer is authorized to use deadly force under the following circumstances:
(1) Deadly force appears reasonably necessary to prevent or impede an act, or attempted act, of radiological sabotage at a category I nuclear facility or nuclear power reactor facility, including, but not limited to, situations where a person is attempting to, or has, unlawfully or forcefully entered a category I nuclear facility or nuclear power reactor facility, and where adversary tactics are employed to attempt an act of radiological sabotage, such as, but not limited to:
(A) Use of firearms or small arms;
(B) Use of explosive devices;
(C) Use of incendiary devices;
(D) Use of vehicle borne improvised explosive devices;
(E) Use of water borne improvised explosive devices;
(F) Breaching of barriers; and
(G) Use of other adversary or terrorist tactics which could be employed to attempt an act of radiological sabotage;
(2) Deadly force appears reasonably necessary to protect the nuclear security officer or another person if the nuclear security officer reasonably believes there is an imminent danger of death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse;
(3) Deadly force appears reasonably necessary to prevent the imminent infliction or threatened infliction of death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse or the sabotage of an occupied facility by explosives;
(4) Deadly force appears reasonably necessary to prevent the theft, sabotage, or unauthorized control of special nuclear material from a nuclear power reactor facility or of a nuclear weapon or nuclear explosive device or special nuclear material from a category I nuclear facility; or
(5) Deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to apprehend or prevent the escape of a person reasonably believed to:
(A) Have committed an offense of the nature specified under this subsection (f); or
(B) Be escaping by use of a weapon or explosive or who otherwise poses an imminent danger of death, serious bodily injury, or grave sexual abuse to nuclear security officers or others unless apprehended without delay.

It is important to understand that government holds a monopoly on force, we are taxed to pay for "protection" that is not really offered.

“Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors.” (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1989)

Warren v. District of Columbia-“well-established rule that official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection.”

Governmental agencies have sovereign and qualified immunity, they can not be prosecuted for NOT protecting you. Go to Wal Mart, get mugged in the parking lot and seek payment from your local Police department to have false teeth put in if yours get knocked out and see how that works out. If your car is stolen from your driveway does the Sheriff write you a check?

This was proved most recently in FL at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, where a federal judge ruled the government agencies " had no constitutional duty to protect students who were not in custody." If you are not in custody of the police, they have no affirmative duty to protect you.

4. If you ever use deadly force in self defense it is going to suck in countless ways. You really do want to avoid it as much as you can. It can be expensive.

beats being dead. What a dumbass