10-10-2009, 07:57 AM
Aloha Dirk,
I too believe I have the right to defend my home and family and I will do so as and when needed. I don't think anyone will argue with that.
There are a variety of opinions though regarding the use of lethal force as a cure all for all situations. You may of course maintain a position that having a gun as a first option provides you the security you feel you need and are entitled to. Far as I know the State of Hawaii allows gun ownership. I believe you are entitled to defend against lethal force with lethal force. It is determining just when that moment occurs that is difficult.
There are obvious perils in applying lethal force. It is a judgment call that Police officers undergo thorough training to address. We depend on our Police Department to make that judgment in the sober exercise of their duty. Even then they are subject to scrutiny. It is serious business.
Personally I prefer an environment where gun possession is a controlled issue. I would like to see much heavier penalties for criminals in the possession and use of guns. A two year sentence for murder is intolerable.
I also agree that pepper sprays should be a practical defensive option for everyone. On that I agree.
In Hawaii you have access to firearms. No one says you do not. There are limits and we can all be grateful that our criminal class, so far, does not include those terribly violent gangs prevalent on the mainland. I read that in Chicago there are 100,000 armed gang members. What a horror.
As for Force's comment that "I shouldn't be on the hotplate for defending my home and person" - well you will be subject to the same scrutiny that our Police Officers are if lethal force is your choice.
I mentioned earlier that I have experienced three home invasion robberies (not in Hawaii). One involved a thief with a .38 (Virginia). I was not armed and gave up my wallet. One involved three individuals with knives (Connecticut). I ended up disarming them using a 2' steel level. The third instance involved a gang of five masked intruders armed with shotguns (Virginia again). I had a .45 auto (they didn't know). I thought that discretion was the better part of valor and suffered the robbery without personal injury.
Being a liberal (which I consider myself to be) does not make me a marshmallow or soft on crime. I kind of consider my point of view to be Pro-Life. I am content to let a jury decide a thief's fate.
Many circumstances and many reactions and decisions to make. Blissfully I have never had any such experience here and appreciate the comparatively low number of armed robberies hereabout.
I try not to let my mainland experiences influence my thinking here. Hawaii is a different environment. A safer one for the most part. A thief is not to be assumed to be an assassin in my book. But that's my look at the issue. You are all entitled to your own.
I too believe I have the right to defend my home and family and I will do so as and when needed. I don't think anyone will argue with that.
There are a variety of opinions though regarding the use of lethal force as a cure all for all situations. You may of course maintain a position that having a gun as a first option provides you the security you feel you need and are entitled to. Far as I know the State of Hawaii allows gun ownership. I believe you are entitled to defend against lethal force with lethal force. It is determining just when that moment occurs that is difficult.
There are obvious perils in applying lethal force. It is a judgment call that Police officers undergo thorough training to address. We depend on our Police Department to make that judgment in the sober exercise of their duty. Even then they are subject to scrutiny. It is serious business.
Personally I prefer an environment where gun possession is a controlled issue. I would like to see much heavier penalties for criminals in the possession and use of guns. A two year sentence for murder is intolerable.
I also agree that pepper sprays should be a practical defensive option for everyone. On that I agree.
In Hawaii you have access to firearms. No one says you do not. There are limits and we can all be grateful that our criminal class, so far, does not include those terribly violent gangs prevalent on the mainland. I read that in Chicago there are 100,000 armed gang members. What a horror.
As for Force's comment that "I shouldn't be on the hotplate for defending my home and person" - well you will be subject to the same scrutiny that our Police Officers are if lethal force is your choice.
I mentioned earlier that I have experienced three home invasion robberies (not in Hawaii). One involved a thief with a .38 (Virginia). I was not armed and gave up my wallet. One involved three individuals with knives (Connecticut). I ended up disarming them using a 2' steel level. The third instance involved a gang of five masked intruders armed with shotguns (Virginia again). I had a .45 auto (they didn't know). I thought that discretion was the better part of valor and suffered the robbery without personal injury.
Being a liberal (which I consider myself to be) does not make me a marshmallow or soft on crime. I kind of consider my point of view to be Pro-Life. I am content to let a jury decide a thief's fate.
Many circumstances and many reactions and decisions to make. Blissfully I have never had any such experience here and appreciate the comparatively low number of armed robberies hereabout.
I try not to let my mainland experiences influence my thinking here. Hawaii is a different environment. A safer one for the most part. A thief is not to be assumed to be an assassin in my book. But that's my look at the issue. You are all entitled to your own.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Punaweb moderator