Car jacker bill
Drivers could immediately respond with deadly force to a forced attempt to enter their cars under a bill passed unanimously by the Senate on Thursday.
15 Responses to “Car jacker bill”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
March 31st, 2006 at 10:43 am
Great news! Now the only problem, as usual, is getting such a bill through one of Jimmy Naifeh’s committees where they “shoot down” any bill congruent to the RIGHT of armed self-defense wording of Article I, Section 26 of the State Declaration of Rights.
March 31st, 2006 at 10:48 am
Great. It used to be that, to get off for a hairtrigger killing, you had to shoot them on your porch and drag the body inside the house. Now you can go on motorized safari, shoot anyone anywhere, and just drag the body into your car. (Does it count against you if the police find the “carjacker”gutted and tied across the hood?)
March 31st, 2006 at 10:50 am
Kevin, that would be illegal in either case.
March 31st, 2006 at 11:49 am
No problem, Kev, you’ll still be free to be an unarmed victim for carjackers. And Like SayUncle says, your supposed examples are and should remain illegal. But otherwise, criminals who engage in violent attacks (like car-jackings) should be placed in fear of armed citizens defending themselves with LEGAL deadly force.
March 31st, 2006 at 11:52 am
Allowing law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from carjackers? Why is that even being debated?[/rhetorical question]
March 31st, 2006 at 12:24 pm
Good question, Bruce! But there is debate only because there are always those, especially among the elites of officialdom, who want to impose unarmed pacifism on the rest of us– ultimately enforced by the hired guns of government from which they enjoy armed protection.
March 31st, 2006 at 1:59 pm
Ron, SayUncle, I whole-heartedly agree. The State Constitution shouldn’t even be an issue as the U.S. Constitution already, without limit, declares our right to bear arms.
March 31st, 2006 at 2:36 pm
[…] In more interesting news, Say Uncle brings us news of a bill working its way through the state of Tennessee’s legislators that would allow car-jacking victims to defend themselves with lethal force. I really don’t need a law saying that I can, but its nice to know that I’m protected if such a situation ever arises. […]
March 31st, 2006 at 3:52 pm
You can still..umm…blow the carjackers head off if you are defending your life/fear for your life cant you? I can honestly say that the only way someone would force me to give them my car would be with a weapon pointed at me vs just beating on my car window…thus..I would be justified in using deadly force.
March 31st, 2006 at 3:56 pm
by the way…just noticed that there is another Justin who comments here…FYI-I’m the “old school” ex-elephant rants Justin….gonna start using JustinB as my comment name.
March 31st, 2006 at 6:18 pm
The new “castle” law in Florida specifies that deadly force can be used in defense for whatever element the victim is within at the time of the invasion. So this area has been well-discussed.
The Florida law was written by an NRA lawyer chick and it is damn well written. As soon as it passes it’s first “anti-lawsuit”, it will be introduced nation-wide.
Some details:
– It isn’t restricted to victim’s home; you could be visiting a friend at their home, you could be in a tent in your back yard – or in a tent in a public park. If a perp violently invades the space, you can use lethal force to protect the occupants.
– It isn’t restricted to your car; you could be on a motorcycle – or on a bicycle (yes, that’s specfically called-out in the footnotes). If a perp violently attempts to remove you from the vehicle, you are not obligated to retreat – you may respond with deadly force if you feel threatened.
– WRT home invasion, the perp does not have to specfically threaten or target you – by violently invading the dwelling, the perp has triggered a clause in this law that alleviates the occupants of the duty to retreat and allows deadly force in protection of property.
– Also wrt home invasion, the perp does not have to still be within the perimiter of the shelter. If the victim observes a violent entry and believes the perp with either return or is retrieving a weapon, the victim (e.g. home owner) may use deadly force for protection.
– For vehicles – as with the shelter – you do not have to be the owner or driver.
The Florida law is a *great* law and I look forward to it spreading. 🙂
Justin: I added the “_” to my name when commenting at Scalzi’s Whatever blog. There was another Jon and we had differing opinions. So fare, I haven’t seen anyone else use such a prefix. (It stems from programming in C, where _ routines are “pre-processors”. In a funny way, it makes me “The First Jon”. I like that.) 🙂
March 31st, 2006 at 7:30 pm
I have an issue with being able to get to my carry piece in a sitting in a car position. I will have to find another way to carry in the car. This has always been an issue for me. I remember a while back a man here in Memphis got out of his car and as the jackers drove off he shot them in the head. He said he was afraid they would turn around and run over him. He got off scott free. This seems to make the point even clearer, don’t mess with other folks, you never know what kind of spot you might end up in.
March 31st, 2006 at 10:04 pm
t3rrible,
Carry cross draw with your weapon on your left or under your left arm if your right-handed.
April 1st, 2006 at 12:15 am
t3rrible, i always keep my handgun under my front left leg. Readily accessible and doesn’t poke me when I drive.
April 1st, 2006 at 4:02 am
You know what really gets me excited about the whole castle law thing? It’s not in the 2nd amendment, and people still vote for it! Damn!