A kink in everyones dink

**mongo** · May 17th, 2010, 10:51 AM

I read a lot of which type of handgun is best and how to carry it properly and what is the best holster, both open and conceled. What good is any firearm if you can not "really" defend your self without going to jail for the rest of your life? At the best you will be sued to death by the bad guy. All the arguing of "handguns and holsters" means nothing if the good and honest people of this commwealth can not defend there life and property without fear of arrest and conviction with the loss of everything that they worked there whole life for.

**rikilii** · May 17th, 2010, 11:02 AM

Yeah, it sucks that we can't shoot whoever we want any time we have even the slightest suspicion that they might mean to harm us, without any consequences.

Seriously though, how would you propose to craft a law that totally eliminates the huge grey area between justifiable defensive shooting and murder, especially when the only witnesses to many supposed defensive shootings are the shooter and the dead guy?

I think you will find there are no easy answers.

**tlgpa** · May 17th, 2010, 11:05 AM

I'd prefer to be alive facing arrest and conviction than dead and cremated into ash.

**newskate9** · May 17th, 2010, 11:08 AM

And although I'm no expert, I think there are many examples out there where a citizen used a gun properly, defended themselves and walked away safe and not to a court house.

Perhaps it is is our paranoia around the issue that, in the end, directs us to make better decisions, get more training, help each other and keep dialogues open. An easy answer to this question would I believe yield just as easily, different answers to the same question - ones we would not like.

**jcabin** · May 17th, 2010, 11:23 AM

I'll sue my dead attackers family before they can sue me, easy win.

**headcase** · May 17th, 2010, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by rikilii

Yeah, it sucks that we can't shoot whoever we want any time we have even the slightest suspicion that they might mean to harm us, without any consequences.

Seriously though, how would you propose to craft a law that totally eliminates the huge grey area between justifiable defensive shooting and murder, especially when the only witnesses to many supposed defensive shootings are the shooter and the dead guy?

I think you will find there are no easy answers.

HB40 goes a long way towards doing just that.

**renegadephoenix** · May 17th, 2010, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by newskate9

And although I'm no expert, I think there are many examples out there where a citizen used a gun properly, defended themselves and walked away safe and not to a court house.

This has happened more times than you can imagine, that is why House Bill 40 needs to pass next weeks vote.

Perhaps it is is our paranoia around the issue that, in the end, directs us to make better decisions, get more training, help each other and keep dialogues open. An easy answer to this question would I believe yield just as easily, different answers to the same question - ones we would not like.

Originally Posted by headcase

HB40 goes a long way towards doing just that.

yes it does, start calling the Judiciary members who are not on board with HB 40 and try to sway their votes.
Post #628 for who is not on board. and the first post for their e-mail.
http://forum.pafoa.org/pennsylvania-...d-page-63.html

**Deanimator** · May 17th, 2010, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by mongo

I read a lot of which type of handgun is best and how to carry it properly and what is the best holster, both open and conceled. What good is any firearm if you can not "really" defend your self without going to jail for the rest of your life? At the best you will be sued to death by the bad guy. All the arguing of "handguns and holsters" means nothing if the good and honest people of this commwealth can not defend there life and property without fear of arrest and conviction with the loss of everything that they worked there whole life for.

Move to Ohio. If it's a good shoot, the perpetrator has no cause of action against you.

Of course you have to ask just how many people involved in good shoots in PA get sued.

"Could happen" and "happens" are horses of a different ballgame.

**rikilii** · May 17th, 2010, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by headcase

HB40 goes a long way towards doing just that.

HB40 can't help anyone decide whether a shooting was justifiable or not. It just shifts the burdens in certain situations.

I know this will be controversial here, but I'll say it anyway. Given the imperfections inherent in any legal system, ours included, shifting the burden in favor of non-liability for putative self defense shootings will surely reduce the chances of being unfairly held responsible for a justifiable shooting. But it will probably also have the side effect of making it easier to get away with unjustified shootings.

**Steve_NEPhila** · May 17th, 2010, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by mongo

I read a lot of which type of handgun is best and how to carry it properly and what is the best holster, both open and conceled. What good is any firearm if you can not "really" defend your self without going to jail for the rest of your life? At the best you will be sued to death by the bad guy. All the arguing of "handguns and holsters" means nothing if the good and honest people of this commwealth can not defend there life and property without fear of arrest and conviction with the loss of everything that they worked there whole life for.

I know that medical examiners used to have a cause of death called "death by misadventure" yet death by litigation has yet to ever happen. Getting sued in civil court exposes one only to monetary expenses, not prison. Your glaringly obvious lack of knowledge both practical and academic have helped form your rant question.

In short, educate yourself on basic law. Know your rights and live a happy life.