Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Texas A&M Study Says Castle-Doctrine Laws Increase Homicides, Don't Deter Crime [View all]pnwmom
(108,955 posts)134. They didn't burglarize his property; they burglarized the neighbors.
And he went outside, after being told not to, and shot his gun at them after telling 911 he didn't want them to get away.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
135 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Texas A&M Study Says Castle-Doctrine Laws Increase Homicides, Don't Deter Crime [View all]
SecularMotion
Jun 2012
OP
Raul Rodriguez, birthday party shooter, is a perfect example of a man who felt empowered
pnwmom
Jun 2012
#1
There isn't any law in Texas that, on the face of it, justifies the jury's decision.
pnwmom
Jun 2012
#64
You're allowed to shoot burglars of your neighbor's property as long as you stand in your own yard?
pnwmom
Jun 2012
#131
The FBI classification system they are using classifies almost all self defense shootings as murder
Taitertots
Jun 2012
#13
I see how this goes, you find out that self-defense isn't in the data set so...
Taitertots
Jun 2012
#31
The author's have already admitted that the FBI counts self-defense as murder or manslaughter
Taitertots
Jun 2012
#44
I've read your posts, they are the same misrepresentations of fact repeated over and over...
Taitertots
Jun 2012
#53
Actually, the study is about different kinds of laws that make it easier to use lethal force...
DanTex
Jun 2012
#20
Your excerpt says that the principle of "retreat to the wall" has a long history ...
spin
Jun 2012
#74
I don't think it is a question of being opposed to resisting violent crime.
Starboard Tack
Jun 2012
#70
I'll wager that virtually all those philosophically opposed to resisting violent crime
crayfish
Jun 2012
#92
If that's your position, you should be advocating for disarming cops. Their reasons for carrying
crayfish
Jun 2012
#91
Fine. You can employ whatever tools you think will work for you for self defense. Do not dictate
crayfish
Jun 2012
#111
In most shall-issue states an FBI background investigation is required of the applicant.
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2012
#88
Does this pricipal apply also to the Thirteenth and Twenty-sixth Amendments? n/t
PavePusher
Jun 2012
#133
"...if you carry a gun and use it to harm someone who is not carrying a gun, you are a criminal."
PavePusher
Jun 2012
#107
SYG & CD are not designed to deter crime. And it follows logically that homicides increase. So what?
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jun 2012
#17
I think you might need a few more decimal points to identify with your SN
Starboard Tack
Jun 2012
#37
Because you want many citizens to be defenseless against violent criminals.
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2012
#109
Bullshit! I don't want anyone to be defenseless against anything or anyone.
Starboard Tack
Jun 2012
#110
The real-world result of your policies would be armed criminals and helpless citizens.
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2012
#119
Opposing is not denying. It's not my business if people want to act foolishly.
Starboard Tack
Jun 2012
#123
If only we could quiz the "authors" on their opinion of the 2A...then we'd see their true agenda.
ileus
Jun 2012
#43
Unfortunately, studies and empirical evidence are not going to change the minds of the NRA crowd.
DanTex
Jun 2012
#54