Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Firearms Forum > Guns
 Costs of Protection >

Costs of Protection

Guns Like firearms themselves, there's a wide variety of opinions on what's the best gun.

Costs of Protection

Old 12-07-2007, 01:14 PM
  #1  
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,329
Default Costs of Protection

This post is an attempt to summarize the three posts that are going right now on protection.

For those of you that would "smoke the fool" or more sensibly "defend the castle", have you considered the costs of your response in such a situation.

I've read/heard/read/heard these tid bits. I've heard that if you are on the right, it will cost you between $10-$15k to defend yourself with no ability to recover expenses. If you are the wrong, upwards of $25k with potential jail time.

Don't go putting words in my mouth. I'm not saying that because of the costs don't arm/protect yourself. I'm just saying that no matter what side of the law you end up on you are going to pay through the nose.

It is also likely that they will confiscate every weapon you own again regardless of the situation. Then if you're on the right you'll need a lawyer to get them back.

Not a good place to be from my perspective.

Tom
statjunk is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 01:15 PM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 900
Default RE: Costs of Protection

It all depends on if the prosecutor decides to prosecute you.
shepdogwv is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 01:45 PM
  #3  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,471
Default RE: Costs of Protection

This post is an attempt to summarize the three posts that are going right now on protection.

For those of you that would "smoke the fool" or more sensibly "defend the castle", have you considered the costs of your response in such a situation.

I've read/heard/read/heard these tid bits. I've heard that if you are on the right, it will cost you between $10-$15k to defend yourself with no ability to recover expenses. If you are the wrong, upwards of $25k with potential jail time.

Don't go putting words in my mouth. I'm not saying that because of the costs don't arm/protect yourself. I'm just saying that no matter what side of the law you end up on you are going to pay through the nose.

It is also likely that they will confiscate every weapon you own again regardless of the situation. Then if you're on the right you'll need a lawyer to get them back.

Not a good place to be from my perspective.

This is a very serious subject and people that are in this situation should defend themselves if they are truly in imminent danger. 15-25 k and probably a lot of legal hassles is well worth it to me if I stay alive.
oldelkhunter is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 03:06 PM
  #4  
Boone & Crockett
 
bigbulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
Default RE: Costs of Protection

It also depends on what state you live in. Fortunately there are more states that will not, and better yet, can not legally prosecute you for defending yourself or even others if you are in immediate danger of being the victim of a forceable fellony (murder, assault, rape, kidnapping, etc...)
bigbulls is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 03:46 PM
  #5  
Fork Horn
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 139
Default RE: Costs of Protection

Screw that. If someone breaks into the house and threatens me or my family, I'll shoot first and ask questions later. If someone tries to prosecute me, take my guns away, and make me pay up a big chuck of money, all for defending my life, all of you will be hearing about me in the news, because that will be a long, drawn-out legal mess.
Buffinator is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 04:00 PM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 242
Default RE: Costs of Protection

ORIGINAL: Buffinator

Screw that. If someone breaks into the house and threatens me or my family, I'll shoot first and ask questions later. If someone tries to prosecute me, take my guns away, and make me pay up a big chuck of money, all for defending my life, all of you will be hearing about me in the news, because that will be a long, drawn-out legal mess.
Same way here!
4 Buck is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 06:23 PM
  #7  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 30
Default RE: Costs of Protection

ORIGINAL: 4 Buck

ORIGINAL: Buffinator

Screw that. If someone breaks into the house and threatens me or my family, I'll shoot first and ask questions later. If someone tries to prosecute me, take my guns away, and make me pay up a big chuck of money, all for defending my life, all of you will be hearing about me in the news, because that will be a long, drawn-out legal mess.
Same way here!
And Here!!!! My Wife, My Kids, and My life !!!!

Okie Redneck is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 08:00 PM
  #8  
Nontypical Buck
 
driftrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Coralville, IA. USA
Posts: 3,802
Default RE: Costs of Protection

I've read/heard/read/heard these tid bits. I've heard that if you are on the right, it will cost you between $10-$15k to defend yourself with no ability to recover expenses. If you are the wrong, upwards of $25k with potential jail time.
How much would you say my two kids are worth? My wife? Me? $15k to save just one of their lives is a bargain. As far as being wrong...don't be. If you shoot someone at night inside your own home, the chances are good that you won't even spend a night in jail. As long as there is no evidence present that strongly refutes your assertion of self-defense, the police will probably not even arrest you in most jurisdictions. They'll take your statement and the statements of any witnesses (the perp is dead, right?), they'll take pictures of the scene and collect any relevant evidence, and write it up as an apparent justifiable homicide. This will go to the local prosecutor who will review the evidence and police reports, and if he too is satisfied that there was no foul play on your part, he'll send it to a judge as a justifiable homicide and once the judge rules as such, you're good to go. You'll probably have to make a single court appearance at said hearing.

Granted, all jurisdictions are different, and the actual process may vary somewhat, but the only way you're going to spend any real time or money defending yourself in court is if the police do find evidence that suggests that your self-defense story is not true. Or if you are one of the really unlucky few who has a real anti-gun crusader of a DA.

Do you remember Hale DeMar? He was the guy from Wilmette, IL (a burb of Chicago) that shot a guy that had broken into his house twice in 24 hours. Remembering that Illinois, and the Chicago area especially, are among the most anti-gun jurisdictions in the U.S., he was NOT charged at all with the shooting itself. The only thing the city of Wilmette tried to get him on was his violation the city's handgun ban, which they eventually dropped after national pressure. He was represented by lawyers paid for by various pro-gun organizations, and the charge was a misdemenor that carried a $750 fine. He fought it as a matter of principle, and eventually won.

The point is that self-defense cases involving firearms happen all the time (about 2.5million times a year according to some studies). Most don't involve shots actually being fired, but those that do are usually handled administratively unless there is a good reason for the police to believe that circumstances were highly questionable. Remember, deadly force laws are necessarily vague because there can be no hard-and-fast rules for when deadly force is lawful or not. It's left to what a "reasonable person" would believe was necessary under what they PERCIEVED the threat to be. Most LEO's will give a law-abiding homeowner the benefit of the doubt.

All black helicopter paranoia aside...if someone enters your home with obvious ill intent, the moment you spend contemplating what a lawyer MIGHT do to you LATER, may give the perp just the time he needs to do what he IS going to do to you NOW. I'll take my chances with the legal system if it means that I'll get to see my kids grow up.

Mike
driftrider is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 09:03 PM
  #9  
Fork Horn
 
mello_collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Columbia SC USA
Posts: 376
Default RE: Costs of Protection

Tried by 12 or carried by 6. Your decision.
mello_collins is offline  
Old 12-07-2007, 10:59 PM
  #10  
Spike
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 59
Default RE: Costs of Protection

Most states allow lethal force for defense, however, most states WILL arrest you for it, and confiscate at minimum, the weapon that was used.
If you use a weapon more powerful than the weapon the person breaking in is threatening you with, most state will convict you. If you do not get a direct frontal shot, stab, most states will convict you.

I have a friend in MI, came home after a graveyard shift, was hit in the head and left for dead. He woke up and heard his wife screaming, he took a knife from the kitchen and found the burgler holding a gun to his wife and raping her... He killed the rapist... He is serving a 25 year sentence for murder, his life was not directly threatened at the time and he stabbed the rapist in the back.

His wife left him after he was convicted.

WA has the most liberal self defense laws that I know of. I have heard OK is even more liberal, but have no personal experience with it.
NightFire is offline  

Quick Reply: Costs of Protection


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.