xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6300 Jul 8, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
For the past ten years I've held the exact same license as both of those fine fellows.
What I'm telling you, after having looked over the manual, is that what is written in the manual is not a complete and accurate statement of the law under 2307.60 that bars recovery in tort by perps or their legal representatives/families under certain circumstances. The manual touches on SB184 on page 21 under the heading "Castle Doctrine, but doesn't provide aby statutory references. Take a look see.
My guess is that that information was left out of the manual for two specific reasons, but that would only be speculation upon my part.
First, 2307.60 doesn't only apply to people with CCW licenses...it applies under any circumstance where someone acts in self defense, defense of others, or in defending their home.
Second, the CCW manual was written for a specific purpose and for a specific audience, and I'm sure that the authors had some concerns about the possibility that some of those folks might misconstrue that information as providing them carte blanche to use their weapons more aggressively than the SB 184 permits.
If you think I'm mistaken, write to the AG's office and ask them to explain the protections provided against tort recovery under 2307.60, and the limitations involving innocent bystanders.
Read the statute. Its fairly straightforward.
woof
Duke, they didn't omit anything in the manual. They straight out printed just the opposite of what you said. Besides the manual, your instructor is trained to teach these classes and answer questions not covered in the manual. Not that they are acting as legal council, but they educated in the topics of the manual much more thoroughly.

The Castle Doctrine is different because when it comes to having a weapon, your car is considered your castle. It's sort of your temporary home. The Castle Doctrine does provide civil suit protection, so if you shoot somebody who tries to harm you in your car, you are protected from liability through the Castle Doctrine. If you step out of your car and shoot somebody, you are not. I know it's crazy, but that's what this manual and the teachers of these classes say. It was also explained to us that the reason the Castle Doctrine was used was so they could slip in that protection for the licensee. A

Again, we cannot afford liability protection to our officers yet alone armed citizens:

Mom sues Cleveland police officers after son's death following Taser incident

Posted: 07/06/2011
By: Tina Kaufmann, newsnet5.com

CLEVELAND - A lawsuit has been filed by a mother who said her son was shocked with a Taser by Cleveland police earlier this year and later died from the events of the evening.

The incident happened on New Year's Eve 2010. Rodney Brown Sr., 40, was driving on E. 113th Street when Cleveland police stopped him for driving without headlights.

Reportedly, Brown was ordered by authorities to get out of his car and proceed to the back. Brown then questioned why he was pulled over and that's when it reportedly all began.

Brown is suing police officers Michael Chapman and Belal Ilain, plus others not named in the wrongful death lawsuit. Shirley Brown is requesting a jury trial and that she be awarded all compensatory and punitive damages, attorney fees and other costs incurred.

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/c...
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6301 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be a very weak argument unless Zimmerman had a police scanner on him to determine how long it would take the police to get there. Police could arrive before you hang up with dispatch because as you are talking, they are typing and another person (not the one talking on the phone) dispatches the officers. Those officers could be right around the corner or have to come from the other side of the city.
Martin's family would have a tough time with suing the housing complex. For one, they didn't financially support the neighborhood watch, and secondly, they cannot tell people when they can carry a gun. Even in Ohio, I as a landlord cannot forbid any of my tenants from having a gun in their apartment or on the grounds. If you click on that CCW link I gave to Duke, I believe it's written in there somewhere. Therefore, an apartment complex cannot disarm anybody or prevent them from forming a block watch. But even still, block watches are not violent in any way with most situations. Block watches are usually conducted by your councilman or perhaps the chief of your police department or some other figure on the upper part of the ladder. They explain what legalities you have in participating in a block watch. They explain what you should and should not do.
The only thing Zimmerman did wrong (not legally) is run after Martin after he took off. That's it. Had he not done that, I'm sure he wouldn't have even been arrested, not that I think he should have been arrested anyway.
Still afraid of the facts, aren't you? What about Martin's injuries? What about him being high?

Maybe if you keep ignoring it, people will forget that you don't know what you are talking about.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6302 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Duke, they didn't omit anything in the manual. They straight out printed just the opposite of what you said. Besides the manual, your instructor is trained to teach these classes and answer questions not covered in the manual. Not that they are acting as legal council, but they educated in the topics of the manual much more thoroughly.
The Castle Doctrine is different because when it comes to having a weapon, your car is considered your castle. It's sort of your temporary home. The Castle Doctrine does provide civil suit protection, so if you shoot somebody who tries to harm you in your car, you are protected from liability through the Castle Doctrine. If you step out of your car and shoot somebody, you are not. I know it's crazy, but that's what this manual and the teachers of these classes say. It was also explained to us that the reason the Castle Doctrine was used was so they could slip in that protection for the licensee. A
Again, we cannot afford liability protection to our officers yet alone armed citizens:
Mom sues Cleveland police officers after son's death following Taser incident
Posted: 07/06/2011
By: Tina Kaufmann, newsnet5.com
CLEVELAND - A lawsuit has been filed by a mother who said her son was shocked with a Taser by Cleveland police earlier this year and later died from the events of the evening.
The incident happened on New Year's Eve 2010. Rodney Brown Sr., 40, was driving on E. 113th Street when Cleveland police stopped him for driving without headlights.
Reportedly, Brown was ordered by authorities to get out of his car and proceed to the back. Brown then questioned why he was pulled over and that's when it reportedly all began.
Brown is suing police officers Michael Chapman and Belal Ilain, plus others not named in the wrongful death lawsuit. Shirley Brown is requesting a jury trial and that she be awarded all compensatory and punitive damages, attorney fees and other costs incurred.
Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/c...
Good idea. Rely on a manual and some gun nut shooting instructor for legal advice. What the hell do statutes have to do with the law? Brilliant.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6304 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Still afraid of the facts, aren't you? What about Martin's injuries? What about him being high?
Maybe if you keep ignoring it, people will forget that you don't know what you are talking about.
Like talking to a brick wall:

By NBC News and msnbc.com

Florida teenager Trayvon Martin died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from “intermediate range,” according to an autopsy report reviewed Wednesday by NBC News.
The official report, prepared by the medical examiner in Volusia County, Fla., also found that the 17-year-old Martin had one other fresh injury – a small abrasion, no more than a quarter-inch in size – on his left ring finger below the knuckle.

Separately, a medical report on Martin’s alleged killer, 28-year-old George Zimmerman, prepared by his personal physician the day after Martin’s shooting in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26, found that the Neighborhood Watch volunteer suffered a likely broken nose, swelling, two black eyes and cuts to the scalp. That report, first reported Tuesday by ABC News, also was reviewed by NBC News.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/16/...

Trayvon Martin had marijuana in system the night he was gunned down

RICH SCHAPIRO
Thursday, May 17, 2012

Trayvon Martin had marijuana in his system the night he was gunned down in a Florida condo complex, according to a medical report released Thursday.

Martin’s autopsy report shows he had traces of THC, the active ingredient in pot, in his blood and urine.

The medical file was among a trove of evidence — including hundreds of pages of interviews and photos — released Thursday.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-17/ne...
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6305 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Good idea. Rely on a manual and some gun nut shooting instructor for legal advice. What the hell do statutes have to do with the law? Brilliant.
Statues are the laws. Geeze. Brilliant.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#6308 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>

The Castle Doctrine is different because when it comes to having a weapon, your car is considered your castle. It's sort of your temporary home. The Castle Doctrine does provide civil suit protection, so if you shoot somebody who tries to harm you in your car, you are protected from liability through the Castle Doctrine. If you step out of your car and shoot somebody, you are not. I know it's crazy, but that's what this manual and the teachers of these classes say. It was also explained to us that the reason the Castle Doctrine was used was so they could slip in that protection for the licensee.
The protection offered under 2307.60 to someone acting in legitimate self defense, or of another applies whether you're in your own home, in your car, or in public, and whether you have a CCW or not is irrelevant, so long as the victim's conduct was not intentionally tortious.

To be clear, you could potentially be sued, and it might cost a lot of money to defend the claim, but in the end, the perp is barred from recovery in tort under the circumstances specified in 2307.60.

Read the statute:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2307.60

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#6309 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Statues are the laws. Geeze. Brilliant.
I believe that Che was being sarcastic.

woof
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6310 Jul 8, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe that Che was being sarcastic.
woof
Now don't you go sticking up for him ;-D
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6311 Jul 8, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
The protection offered under 2307.60 to someone acting in legitimate self defense, or of another applies whether you're in your own home, in your car, or in public, and whether you have a CCW or not is irrelevant, so long as the victim's conduct was not intentionally tortious.
To be clear, you could potentially be sued, and it might cost a lot of money to defend the claim, but in the end, the perp is barred from recovery in tort under the circumstances specified in 2307.60.
Read the statute:
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2307.60
woof
I didn't say that they would win, I just said they can sue. That's why I provided you that article of the Cleveland police officers being sued. It can happen and as you stated, it's just a royal pain in the azz. The probability of success increases when different races are involved. I shoot a black attacker where I live, it goes to court with a nearly all black jury or a judge who wants to keep winning elections in a black district, I can lose my pants right or wrong. This is why I say they should get rid of that ability to sue in the first place. If it's justified, it should protect you from liability. Hell, even OJ was sued after he won his double murder trial.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#6312 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Now don't you go sticking up for him ;-D
Why not...its pretty clear that you missed that.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6313 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Like talking to a brick wall:
By NBC News and msnbc.com
Florida teenager Trayvon Martin died from a single gunshot wound to the chest fired from “intermediate range,” according to an autopsy report reviewed Wednesday by NBC News.
The official report, prepared by the medical examiner in Volusia County, Fla., also found that the 17-year-old Martin had one other fresh injury – a small abrasion, no more than a quarter-inch in size – on his left ring finger below the knuckle.
Separately, a medical report on Martin’s alleged killer, 28-year-old George Zimmerman, prepared by his personal physician the day after Martin’s shooting in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26, found that the Neighborhood Watch volunteer suffered a likely broken nose, swelling, two black eyes and cuts to the scalp. That report, first reported Tuesday by ABC News, also was reviewed by NBC News.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/16/...
Trayvon Martin had marijuana in system the night he was gunned down
RICH SCHAPIRO
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Trayvon Martin had marijuana in his system the night he was gunned down in a Florida condo complex, according to a medical report released Thursday.
Martin’s autopsy report shows he had traces of THC, the active ingredient in pot, in his blood and urine.
The medical file was among a trove of evidence — including hundreds of pages of interviews and photos — released Thursday.
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-17/ne...
Like I said before and you still ignore:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Toxicology said he had trace amounts. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of forensic toxicology knows that trace amounts of THC tell us ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about whether the person was high. Your ignorance about this doesn't help your credibility as a "breath sound on 911 tape" expert.
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Martin's other injury was an abrasion on his 4th left finger. Not what you would expect on someone who was beating someone else. You also seem to forget the gunshot wound in the center of his chest from a gun less than 30 inches away.
<quoted text>
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6314 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Statues are the laws. Geeze. Brilliant.
You are about as sharp as a bowling ball, aren't you?

Since: Apr 12

Hilliard, OH

#6315 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said before and you still ignore:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Toxicology said he had trace amounts. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of forensic toxicology knows that trace amounts of THC tell us ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about whether the person was high. Your ignorance about this doesn't help your credibility as a "breath sound on 911 tape" expert.
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Martin's other injury was an abrasion on his 4th left finger. Not what you would expect on someone who was beating someone else. You also seem to forget the gunshot wound in the center of his chest from a gun less than 30 inches away.
<quoted text>
Generally, when someone is being beaten to a pulp they are less than 30 inches away from the one doing the beating.
Please, never sit on a jury.
Duke for Mayor

Uniontown, OH

#6316 Jul 8, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say that they would win, I just said they can sue. That's why I provided you that article of the Cleveland police officers being sued. It can happen and as you stated, it's just a royal pain in the azz. The probability of success increases when different races are involved. I shoot a black attacker where I live, it goes to court with a nearly all black jury or a judge who wants to keep winning elections in a black district, I can lose my pants right or wrong. This is why I say they should get rid of that ability to sue in the first place. If it's justified, it should protect you from liability. Hell, even OJ was sued after he won his double murder trial.
You don't understand...recovery is barred under the law under specified circumstances. Its out of the Judge's hands and no amount of politics can change that.

The OJ analogy and the police incident analogy aren't relevant...entirely different sets of facts...and applicable law.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6317 Jul 8, 2012
Kramers Attorney wrote:
<quoted text>Generally, when someone is being beaten to a pulp they are less than 30 inches away from the one doing the beating.
Please, never sit on a jury.
You aren't familiar with the context, bozo. Pipe down.

Since: Apr 12

Hilliard, OH

#6318 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You aren't familiar with the context, bozo. Pipe down.
Caught once again, Che pulls the context card.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#6319 Jul 8, 2012
Kramers Attorney wrote:
<quoted text>Caught once again, Che pulls the context card.
Caught being right. You are lost as usual.

Since: Apr 12

Hilliard, OH

#6320 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Caught being right. You are lost as usual.
Lame, lame, lame.
You're slipping.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6323 Jul 8, 2012
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Why not...its pretty clear that you missed that.
woof
Oh, I see. Kind of like when John Kerry told college students that if they didn't stay in school, they could end up in a place like Iraq??? A flubbed joke that nobody got. I getcha.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#6324 Jul 8, 2012
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said before and you still ignore:
<quoted text>
Wrong. Toxicology said he had trace amounts. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of forensic toxicology knows that trace amounts of THC tell us ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about whether the person was high. Your ignorance about this doesn't help your credibility as a "breath sound on 911 tape" expert.
<quoted text>
Wrong again. Martin's other injury was an abrasion on his 4th left finger. Not what you would expect on someone who was beating someone else. You also seem to forget the gunshot wound in the center of his chest from a gun less than 30 inches away.
<quoted text>
My Lord are you dense. An abrasion on the finger IS an indication that you were striking somebody or something. If I am about to attack you, I don't aim for your stupid finger. I aim for the centerline of the body.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jackson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
About Dustyn Tolliver????? 1 hr Boceaphus 2
In need of electric stove for famliy 3 hr really 3
Does anybody know anything about Paul Gillenwat... 3 hr really 6
brent "poon dog" jones (Feb '13) 5 hr just saying 80
where to sell pallets? 7 hr pallet maker 15
kale orender 8 hr orender89 7
jessica shong (Dec '10) 22 hr ??? 25
More from around the web

Jackson People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]