firearms

[Seraphim]

<P>

<B><FONT size=1>A <FONT color=#333333>demand for agreement, implying the other party should proceed as told, whether they agree to terms or not.</FONT></FONT></B><BR><BR>

<BR><BR>lol - hadn't meant it quite that strongly. My Italian is non-existent. It's an important concept to understand, though, in the legal system.&nbsp; I can only remember one shooting [here]&nbsp;we've had where the shooter was not arrested. He acted strictly and meticulously according to the law. No one even considered arresting him.</P><BR>All the others I can think of failed, in some aspect, to meet their legal expectations, often because they did not know what they were.&nbsp; The biggest question they fail to answer properly is: "Could you have gotten away from the situation safely?" If, at some point in time upon recognizing the danger, a person could have walked or run away safely, they have the legal obligation to do so. <BR><BR>And when it comes to one's legal responsibilities, 'agreeing to the terms or not' doesn't even come into play.<BR><BR>I don't want anyone here to get arrested because they simply failed to understand a simple concept, and made a statement that couldn't take back later.<BR><BR><BR><BR>

 

[VanTramp]

On that note, there is a bit of difference between states in the law concerning self defense. Some, you are expected to retreat, others there is no duty to retreat. There was recently a case in Minnesota that really shows how differently states can be.&nbsp;<div><br></div><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><a href="http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/132807258.html" target="_blank">http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/132807258.html</a></div><div><br></div><div>This guy wasn't the original victim of the robbery even. It is extremely important to know the laws of the state you are in. What may get you touted as a hero in one, might have you spending a life sentence in another. This is just one of the issues with living this lifestyle as a legally armed citizen and vandweller. It adds a bit of needed research before going from state to state.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>&nbsp;</div>

 

[wilcofan]

I own several firearms, but I haven't given much thought to what I will carry when traveling. My EDC is generally a snubnose Ruger sp101 in .357 magnum, carried in an IWB holster, or a keltec pf-9 carried in my pocket. It all depends on what I'm wearing. In my house, my go-to gun is Dan Wesson Monson Model 14. I keep it in a map bag that I refer to as my Minitak (middle of the night tactical kit), which has a set of all my keys for home and vehicle, two flashlights, speedloaders and ammo, a roll of quarters, a small first aid kit, a spare asthma inhaler, and a cheap charged prepay cellphone (you can call 911 with it, even if there are no minutes). I would really suggest something like this customized to your own needs to get yourself out of the situation and into someplace safe.<br><br>One interesting point... does the Castle Doctrine apply to your vehicle if you live in it?<br><br>Katie, I know you mentioned you wanted to buy a glock 26. I was of the same mindset until I got mine and realized that it was too big to pocket carry. Aso, you mentioned having a bad experience dropping bullets loading a wheel gun. I highly recommend HKS speedloaders, which allow you to load as quickly and easily as a semi-auto. My preference on the road would probably be a revolver, because of the negative misperceptions law enforcement and the general public have concerning semi-auto weapons.<br>

 

[Seraphim]

<p style="margin: 0px;">

does the Castle Doctrine apply to your vehicle if you live in it?<br><br><br>

</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">That will depend on the state in which you live and the interpretation of the judge you appear before.</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">GENERALLY, in a motor vehicle an officer, for his own safety, may search the passenger compartment of a vehicle for weapons, within reaching distance of passengers.&nbsp; Some states give the officer more authority.</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">In an RV, GENERALLY, the house part of the vehicle, designed for the purpose of habitation, is treated as a residential structure - there is an expectation of privacy, and a requirement to prove - after the fact - there was a legal precedent for an invasion into that privacy: same as in a house.</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">A van in which a person is sleeping enters a gray area. It is titled as a vehicle, not an RV. If it is set up obviously as a living area, with an obvious separation of the living area and the 'cockpit', I'd say you have grounds to argue an expectation of privacy. That only happens in court, after an arrest.</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">Better to KNOW the laws in the area in which you are residing.</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">

</p><table class="nested_invisible_table" border="0" cellSpacing="0" cellPadding="0" width="100%" height="100%"><tbody><tr><td height="100%" vAlign="top" colSpan="4"><span id="post_message_1271171828">My preference on the road would probably be a revolver, because of the negative misperceptions law enforcement and the general public have concerning semi-auto weapons.<br></span> </td></tr><tr><td vAlign="bottom" colSpan="4" align="center"><span style="display: none;" id="loading_1271171828"><b>Loading...</b></span><span style="float: right;"></span></td></tr></tbody></table><p style="margin: 0px;">

</p><p style="margin: 0px;">&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;">I'd say LEOs have no negative misperceptions reference semi-automatic weapons. A weapon is a weapon.&nbsp; More automatic handguns are sold than revolvers these days, because of the advantages. It's assumed most people, if they have a handgun, will have an automatic, not a wheelgun.</p>

 

[wilcofan]

<P>I just meant that most people who don't know anything about guns, hear the word "semi-automatic" and they immediately think "evil gun". Those are the kind of people who may make up a jury of your peers if you have to use your weapon in a defensive situation. Many in the uninformed world view a high capacity magazine weapon as offensive or those who own them as someone looking for trouble, while looking at a lower capacity weapon as defensive. I know it doesn't make any sense, but you'd be amazed by how many people in the general population have no knowledge of firearms.</P>

 

[Seraphim]

<P>You're pretty much right about everything except your use of the term 'probable cause'. The correct term in that situation would be 'articulable suspicion'.&nbsp; If the officer can articulate his reasons to an average, reasonable person, and said reasonable person would agree the officer's actions were reasonable, then the actions are deemed legal. Our whole system is based on the 'reasonable man' concept. Most of the things you've stated I've asserted here in the past.<BR></P>Probable cause is what is needed to make an actual arrest.<br><BR>The main problem is the average citizen doesn't understand his legal responsibilities prior to shooting, and doesn't know how articulate their actions after the event. Shoot too soon and you're up on a homicide charge.<BR>If you can't articulate your actions, you may find yourself going through arrest and trial, even if it's later determine your actions were legal.<BR><BR>Nice post, Big<BR><br>

 

[Seraphim]

Guess my 27 years doesn't stack with your 35, assuming you're refering to criminal prosecution in your term 'for various reasons'. Mine have all been, and generally on a weekly basis. If I don't testify correctly, using the proper legal terminology, cases get tossed and criminals walk. I wouldn't have lasted very long in my profession, were that the case.

The term 'probable cause' gets bandied around improperly quite a bit. It's proper, legal use fits one purpose: to determine if there is sufficient evidence to arrest a particular person for a particular crime. If you're not refering to an arrest, 'probable cause' is not the correct legal terminology.

 

[Seraphim]

...and then there's 'beyond a reasonable doubt': the standard one needs to meet for a conviction in a criminal court. In a civil court, one only needs a 'preponderence' of evidence. I don't use that one much.

To meet the levels of a preponderance, one must only convince a judge or jury to a level of 51% surety: if they believe the plaintiff more than they believe the defendant, that's sufficient. 'Probable cause' requires approximately a 77% surety, where 'beyond a reasonable doubt' coincides with about a 97% surety.

At each level, the standard gets stricter.

 

[Seraphim]

Finally, 'suspicion' is not a "vague term". We've all seen drunks; looked at someone and said, "Man, he's drunk". Since we haven't a blood alcohol reading on the person, he is merely suspected of being intoxicated. I see a guy get out of a car he's just driven. I need a reasonable articulable suspicion to Temporarily and legally stop him from going on his way. "He looked drunk" is technically a reasonable answer, but I have to articulate it in more detail. "He stumbled getting out of the car, he swayed as stood, and had to put his hand on the car to maintain his balance. He weaved as he walked." Are these actions all proof the person is drunk? No, he may be diabetic and suffering an attack. But it's enough to make me suspicious. I walk up to talk to him - his speech is slurred. I ask him if he's diabetic and he says No. I smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage on his breath. He tells me he's had 'two beers' ( its always two). Now I begin moving from articulable suspicion towards probable cause. Now I can legally request he perform field sobriety tests. Modern tests are scientifically designed with a standard of performance. If the suspect fails to meet that standard, there's
(scientifically) a 77% chance he has a higher level of blood alcohol than is legally allowed when operating a motor vehicle, and I have established probable cause, so I can now legally arrest him. Does that automatically make him guilty? No. That's when we get into breathalyzers, urine tests, etc. they provide the clinical information which proves whether the driver actually had a prohibited level of alcohol in his system at the time he was driving the vehicle. The information provided by those tests provide " beyond a reasonable doubt" for the conviction. Or not lol.

Does this clear up the matter of what a suspect, or what 'suspicion' means?

 

[Seraphim]

A lot of things of which I'm ignorant . I'm also long winded.

 

[stude53]

<p style="margin: 0px;"><span class="body"><font size="2">One of my favorite philosophers, Will Rogers Sr. said ...</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px;"><span class="body"><font size="2"></font></span>&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;"><span class="body"><font size="2">"Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects."</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px;"><span class="body"><font size="2"></font></span>&nbsp;</p><p style="margin: 0px;"><span class="body"><font size="2">Bob</font></span></p>

 

[Seraphim]

Yep, Bob...what I was trying say.

 

[johnny_canuck]

Here in the "Great White North" (Canada), we do not have the right to own guns. Handguns are&nbsp;illegal. You are able to get a permit to own a long gun. The only people I know who own guns are farmers and hunters. Sure there are the bad guys. But they tend to kill each other. Here in Ottawa,with a population of about one million, we have 8 murders this year. I travel a lot and camp in areas where there is no&nbsp;cellphone&nbsp;access. Met many folks in the bush country, but never saw anyone who was armed. Never met anyone who was shot or they knew of a friend who was shot. If ever confronted with a&nbsp;thief, hey take my keys and wallet. Not worth dying for.&nbsp;

 

[dragonflyinthesky]

<FONT color=#0000ff><b>Never met anyone who was shot or they knew of a friend who was shot. from Johnny C</b></FONT><br>No gun debate from me johnny, please don't take it that way.&nbsp;Perhaps you have less of a drug problem. Maybe the public schools are allowed to demand respect from kids. Maybe your area has a larger percentage of parents actually raising their kids and teaching them right from wrong and how to control themselves and not come back with a weapon to right a 'dis', thats&nbsp;disrespect that may be from being bumped into or any minor perception. Many of our kids are being raised by the schools, old grandparents, aunts&nbsp;and social workers.<br>I live on the outskirts of a dangerous area with a crumbling social system. This is our infrastructure and I can do nothing about it.&nbsp;<br>My opinion for what its worth. The bad guys have guns and use them. I feel I should take a carry course just to feel safer but the bottom line is, I probably would not draw a gun on someone else.&nbsp; I am between a rock and a hard place. Many people keep dogs for protection, I rely on my old Standard Poodle when I go running.<br>If I was where you are, I wouldn't know what its like to not be aware of my surroundings. My area is worse than some better than others.<br>Don't know where I'm going with this other than, sometimes we just respond to the insanity around us as best we can.<br><b><FONT color=#00ffff size=3>Dragonfly</FONT></b><br>

 

[johnny_canuck]

I never take anything the wrong way. Sure we have social problems. And in the schools to. Zero&nbsp;tolerance&nbsp;in schools on verbal or physical confrontations. Peer conflict resolution training for students. Of course there are the bad apples.&nbsp;<div><br></div><div>I rent a small&nbsp;apartment&nbsp;with my son. He finishes work at 11pm. Takes 3 buses to get home at 12:30am. I just asked him if he has ever seen anything or been approached. Only been asked for a cigarette or change for the bus. Once in a while he may see a police car drive down the road. No transit police on the buses. Occasional transit police sitting in a car at a transit station. He stops at the 24 hour grocery store after work to buy a few things and walks 2 blocks home.</div><div><br></div><div>If any of you have visited Ottawa and have been to our&nbsp;Parliament&nbsp;buildings you will see 3-4 RCMP police cars and 4&nbsp;officers. This is the House of Commons. We have the right to have our lunch on the grounds, play&nbsp;Frisbee&nbsp;or have a demonstration (without a permit). Natives will once in awhile camp out for a week or two because of a land claims dispute. Why not. Years ago there were stray cats wandering around the buildings so a guy decided to build a shelter (with a permit) for them and people would come by with cat food. The guy passed away. So&nbsp;Parliament&nbsp;passed a&nbsp;unanimous&nbsp;vote to allocate funds to keep the "Cat House"<img border="0" align="absmiddle" src="https://vanlivingforum.com/images/boards/smilies/eek.gif">.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div>

 

[johnny_canuck]

OK. Promise not to laugh. I have been thinking about some form of self&nbsp;defense&nbsp;weapon for a long time. Since I can't and do not want a firearm, what to do. Well.. I came across a fully&nbsp;automatic&nbsp;AK47 water gun. That's right a water gun. Why you say. Well think about it. It is legal for one. If would make a would be criminal stop and laugh at you. Then the surprise. This gun fires 4 rounds per&nbsp;second&nbsp;at 30 feet. You can buy extra cartridges. Now here's the good part. Fill it with "Real Lemon" juice. The guy will be&nbsp;incapacitated&nbsp;for quite a while. Or dilute and strain the hottest BBQ sauce known to mankind. Or mix and strain cayenne pepper.&nbsp;<img border="0" align="absmiddle" src="https://vanlivingforum.com/images/boards/smilies/bawl.gif"><div><br></div><div><a href="" target="_blank"></a><br><div><br></div><div><img src="http://craziestgadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/ak-47-automatic-water-gun.jpg"></div></div>

 

[dragonflyinthesky]

<P>The video rocks, did you see it knocking down the plastic cups?</P>

 

[johnny_canuck]

<font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial">Those plastic cups are real bastards. They were ganging up on the guy.</font><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial">OK then, how about a&nbsp;<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-weight: bold; line-height: 33px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">.60 Cal. Gatling Revolver Slingshot.</span></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial"><a href="" target="_blank"></a></font></div><div><br></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial">I would not want to be&nbsp;cell mates&nbsp;with the German guy... he'd probably trade me for cigarettes&nbsp;<img border="0" align="absmiddle" src="https://vanlivingforum.com/images/boards/smilies/redface.gif">.</font></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><span class="" dir="ltr" title=".60 Cal. Gatling Revolver Slingshot" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; font-size: 22px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><br></span></div>

 

[Seraphim]

Blend a peck of habaneros and strain the juice. Why do you think it's called pepper spray. A low pressure water gun, though. Too much pressure could damage the eyes.

Capsicum

 

[lampliter]

I have carried various weapons (both in and out of service) over the past years. I have been through different training programs for these weapons.<br><br>The bottom line is:&nbsp;NO ONE&nbsp;has the right to take a human life. This means that you have the right to defend yours against someone who would try to take it. ONLY after taking all evasive action at your disposal.<br><br>There is a martial art form that "protects" your opponent.&nbsp;Agressive blows are only used after it is determined that the person you are dealing with is incapable of reason or is insane.<br><br>Weapons I have carried:<br>M-14 rifle<br>Smith and Wesson .38 revolver.<br>North American Arms .22 magnum revolver.<br>Mossberg shotgun- JIC.<br>Winchester Featherweight shotgun Model 12.<br>Savage .17 HMR bolt action rifle. Model 93.<br>.30-.30 lever action rifle (I think it was a Winchester)<br><br>When camping in bear country I recommend a Taurus Raging Bull .454 Casul revolver.<br><br>Do not carry any kind of firearm without the proper training.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>