Get off my property

[scooter_the_shooter]

And that is why you should not be allowed to have a gun.....

But thank god I live in the USA where people from Indonesia can't tell me what to do. (why is it when ever you flame you put this stupid smiley face there?)



How does shooting a shotgun legally not breaking any laws....not attacking brandishing etc threatening....how is it wrong?


If I am seen by some one when hunting or target shooting, should they be alarmed and say I should not have a gun.






The hippies have there right to be annoying and so does this guy!

[bmolsson]

But thank god I live in the USA where people from Indonesia can't tell me what to do. (why is it when ever you flame you put this stupid smiley face there?)

I never flame, I am just spreading love and compassion to the people that needs it.

How does shooting a shotgun legally not breaking any laws....not attacking brandishing etc threatening....how is it wrong?

Take a shit on your front lawn isn't against the law either, but in a civilized society we don't do it anyway.......

If I am seen by some one when hunting or target shooting, should they be alarmed and say I should not have a gun.

If you where hunting the neighbours dog, yes......

The hippies have there right to be annoying and so does this guy!

Actually I don't think so. I can't see any reason for allowing demonstrations. It's a rather medieval way to make your opinion published and it most of the time ends up in violence and vandalism.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Take a shit on your front lawn isn't against the law either, but in a civilized society we don't do it anyway.......

There is a law against it in the USA You could be arrested for disturbing the peace and indecent exposure.

[bmolsson]

There is a law against it in the USA You could be arrested for disturbing the peace and indecent exposure.

So taking a shit is disturbing the peace, but shooting a shot gun is not ? Weird country you live in...

[Divinus Arma]

wherever the wind takes it

Holy hell! It really did take off!

[Albino Gorilla]

So taking a shit is disturbing the peace, but shooting a shot gun is not ? Weird country you live in...

It uh varies from state to state.

[Ironside]

Question

Can I legally shoot at people (not on them) with a sniper rifle after taking a few beers if I miss them intentionally, is shooting from my property, and hunt with it so I'm using it for practice for the hunting season?

Would you defend this guys rights too? If no, what's the difference?

[Bartix]

She completely changed her story after she got in bed with Miky Moore.

I don't want to think about that

[Ironside]

This man shot into the air. Not at people. That's a silly comparison.

But if I don't aim at anything, only air that happens to be relavily close to a person? And is a good shot.
Yes it's a extreme example, but I haven't really added something AFAIK, just pushed it to the extremes.

[Marshal Murat]

If he was practicing, he was practicing.

If he shot his shotgun, on his property, than he was not breaking a law.

So either way, it DOESN'T MATTER now does it?

The sniper thing.
He probably would go to jail because he intentionally shot nearby or in the general area of people with a sniper rifle, and will be prosecuted for public endangerment.

If he shot up in the air, it would fly over wouldn't it? Or if not, the bullet would land far away, and nobody would care because their all hiding.

[Redleg]

Assuming he was firing bird shot, the pellets were harmless if shot into the air. And last I checked, firing a gun in the air did not constitute violence by any stretch of the imagination, or the law.

Firing weapons near a crowd - even in the air shows reckless disregard for your fellow human beings. Its irresponsible and idiotic. Serves no purpose other then an attempt to scare other people. Therefor its not a non-violent demonstration.

Why should he have to do that? Clearly the Sherrif agreed with him, and thus the law was on his side the whole time.

Not necessarily - you will be surprised how many laws a sherriff will allow you to break if he likes you or agrees with you. Doesn't make your action lawful - it just means the sherriff has a lot of discretion in regards to how he enforces the law. One must remember in Texas the sherriff is an elected official.

He did not take a shotgun to the demonstration. The demonstration came to his shotgun.

Don't think so - it seems he had to go to the edge of his property did he not - taking the shotgun with him.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Firing weapons near a crowd - even in the air shows reckless disregard for your fellow human beings. Its irresponsible and idiotic.

Hey I did it all the time during marksmenship demonstrations

Its pretty much up to the local statutes I would thing and remember this is Texas not California or New York. Also isnt this ranch or farm country? I would think their pretty used to people firing guns off on their own property. An m-80 probably would have scared the protestors as much but may have gotten him in more trouble but I dont know the fireworks laws down there.

The worst part of this is how some of these far leftwing people are using this woman to advance their own agenda.

[Crazed Rabbit]

He should get a bunch of skunk scent and spray it on his property line. That'd keep the protestors away. Or, he could make a small catapult and get some water balloons full of the stuff...I've said too much.

Crazed Rabbit

[Redleg]

Hey I did it all the time during marksmenship demonstrations

Its pretty much up to the local statutes I would thing and remember this is Texas not California or New York. Also isnt this ranch or farm country? I would think their pretty used to people firing guns off on their own property. An m-80 probably would have scared the protestors as much but may have gotten him in more trouble but I dont know the fireworks laws down there.

The part of the Texas Firearm Law that applies i this instance.

c. It is unlawful to discharge a firearm in a public place or
on or across a public road.

Now depending how close he was to the road or the public place - then he just might of committed a violation of the law.

The worst part of this is how some of these far leftwing people are using this woman to advance their own agenda.

And in that they are wrong. If you think this woman is doing it for a noble cause - well that is fine, But, when an individual has professional handlers well it shows something about her agenda.

[Red Harvest]

I wonder what sort of reaction the fellow might get if he decided to "excercise" his property and gun rights as the Presidential motorcade passed by? Cold slab, anyone?

Say what you want, but this is clearly wrong/stupid, and going out to your property line with a gun to in effect pick a fight will get your a$$ in big trouble, even in Texas. Hearing, but not seeing the gunshot, someone could make the assumption he was a threat and draw their own weapon ordering him to drop his, in which case you have a standoff with firearms. It is Texas afterall, and licensed concealed carry is common. This wasn't some sort of innocent act. Texas is quite tolerant of legitimate self defense, property defense, and firearms use. This is not an example of that.

Him getting a pass from local law enforcement in a small town in Texas...yeah, that's a real shocker.

[KafirChobee]

The part of the Texas Firearm Law that applies i this instance.

c. It is unlawful to discharge a firearm in a public place or
on or across a public road.

Now depending how close he was to the road or the public place - then he just might of committed a violation of the law.




And in that they are wrong. If you think this woman is doing it for a noble cause - well that is fine, But, when an individual has professional handlers well it shows something about her agenda.

Absolutely agreed with everything you said, Red. Right up to the last statement. I agree, that she maybe being used now for the agenda of others, but it didn't start out that way. She was simply a distressed Mother that wanted to ask her President a question about her dead boy. Had Bush met her demand early on, this would be over - and remember he has refused to talk to anyone that's son or daughter died that doesnot fully agree with his agenda. Are a growing number of "gold star" Moms (and Dads) that have questions about the war - that Bush43 gleefully ignores.

Also, if the rancher lived in Florida, he could have said he felt threatened by the protestors and shot them all - Jeb just signed that into law. So now it is legal for one neighbor to kill another if he can show that he felt threatened. Cute, huh?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Also, if the rancher lived in Florida, he could have said he felt threatened by the protestors and shot them all - Jeb just signed that into law

Wouldnt they have to be on his property? Otherwise you could shoot any kid that looked like a gangster anywhere , anytime.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I wonder what sort of reaction the fellow might get if he decided to "excercise" his property and gun rights as the Presidential motorcade passed by? Cold slab, anyone?

Say what you want, but this is clearly wrong/stupid, and going out to your property line with a gun to in effect pick a fight will get your a$$ in big trouble, even in Texas. Hearing, but not seeing the gunshot, someone could make the assumption he was a threat and draw their own weapon ordering him to drop his, in which case you have a standoff with firearms. It is Texas afterall, and licensed concealed carry is common. This wasn't some sort of innocent act. Texas is quite tolerant of legitimate self defense, property defense, and firearms use. This is not an example of that.

Him getting a pass from local law enforcement in a small town in Texas...yeah, that's a real shocker.

where is the trouble?
i havnt seen any charges pressed

if he was acting within his rights then there is no problem here

some people seem to be arguing that even though he did it, seemed to have the legal right to do it where he was (on his property in texas) and has incurred no legal trouble from the action that he broke the law. he did not fire his weapon "across a public road" but rather across FROM a public road on his own property

if the protestors have been there for months and are affecting his ability to excercise his rights as a property owning citizen THAT would be an injustice

if firing his gun on his own property when a protest was not going on is ok and firing his gun when a protest IS going on is not - then months of a public protest that impedes his free excercise of his rights is not acceptable

i agree that this came close to breaking the law - but it did not break the law - the sherriff said so on national television - he isnt some endless authority figure - he answers to someone

and hasnt incured any wrath so far

i dont know - what does a lawyer think about this?

[Redleg]

Absolutely agreed with everything you said, Red. Right up to the last statement. I agree, that she maybe being used now for the agenda of others, but it didn't start out that way. She was simply a distressed Mother that wanted to ask her President a question about her dead boy. Had Bush met her demand early on, this would be over - and remember he has refused to talk to anyone that's son or daughter died that doesnot fully agree with his agenda. Are a growing number of "gold star" Moms (and Dads) that have questions about the war - that Bush43 gleefully ignores.

Also, if the rancher lived in Florida, he could have said he felt threatened by the protestors and shot them all - Jeb just signed that into law. So now it is legal for one neighbor to kill another if he can show that he felt threatened. Cute, huh?

Like I said Kafir - if it is a noble cause because of her son - why the professional handlers? She could of camped out at the front gate and gotten a lot more support from people like me - if she did it on her own as a mother.

However she did not show up in Crawford as a distress mother seeking answers - she showed up as a distressed mother with professional handlers looking to make a political statement.

There is more - but that gets into the politics of everything she has stated and done in the last several months. Explain the professional handlers away if you can - but having them speaks volumnes to me about her motives - that its not just about wanting answers about why her son died.

A son who volunteer for duty, re-up, and from all accounts volunteered to leave his assigned post to go on a mission to rescue some of his fellow soldiers. She more then entitled to question the President about the war - its the right that was futher guarnteed (SP) by her son - but I have the same equal right to question her motives when I see the information and evidence of other agenda's by her own actions.

[Redleg]

It looks like some citizens in the area have more common sense then the knucklehead who tried the shotgun approach

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/16/pea....ap/index.html

The petition with more than 60 signatures was submitted to the McLennan County commission, asking the board to expand a no-parking zone that now bans cars within a few hundred feet of the ranch. If the ordinance passes, demonstrators probably would have to stay in Crawford, which is 7 miles away.

[KafirChobee]

Wouldnt they have to be on his property? Otherwise you could shoot any kid that looked like a gangster anywhere , anytime.

Nope, it's pretty much any time one feels threatened. Of course it hasn't been challenged, yet. So, I doubt it will stay in affect for very long. It was just one of those feel good laws Jeb likes.

[Spetulhu]

Assuming he was firing bird shot, the pellets were harmless if shot into the air. And last I checked, firing a gun in the air did not constitute violence by any stretch of the imagination, or the law.

Really? You wouldn't think that it could be a threat of violence, brandishing a gun and firing it?

[Red Harvest]

some people seem to be arguing that even though he did it, seemed to have the legal right to do it where he was (on his property in texas) and has incurred no legal trouble from the action that he broke the law. he did not fire his weapon "across a public road" but rather across FROM a public road on his own property

Do you think that would hold up had the President's motorcade been passing by and he decided to "protest by discharging a firearm?" He lives next to him you know... This doesn't pass the "smell test." Doesn't really matter what the political orientation of the protesters were does it? Last I checked, citizens were supposed to have the same fundamental rights and protections.

if the protestors have been there for months and are affecting his ability to excercise his rights as a property owning citizen THAT would be an injustice

if firing his gun on his own property when a protest was not going on is ok and firing his gun when a protest IS going on is not - then months of a public protest that impedes his free excercise of his rights is not acceptable

That's all well and good, only it doesn't apply:
1. "starting their second week of demonstrations"
2. How was re really being restricted from using his property? Could he have been shooting from the other side of it? How big is this property? If it is an acre, then maybe.
3. If he was being prevented from preparing for dove season, what sort of targeting shooting was he doing? Firing straight up in the air at nothing...and having a few beers first while watching a crowd. Yeah, this guy shouldn't be given a hunting license either. Idiots like that give the rest of us bad names.
4. Did he attempt to resolve any problems through local law enforcement or even a discussion with the organizers? Something like, "I'm going to be doing some target shooting, don't be alarmed. Just thought you would want to know." That's what most of us out in the sticks do if we have a sensitive neighbor.

i agree that this came close to breaking the law - but it did not break the law - the sherriff said so on national television - he isnt some endless authority figure - he answers to someone

Sheriff's are elected. So he answers to the GOP electorate of his county (Democrat's need not apply.) His political views are unlikely to represent any of those present at the scene other than shotgun Bubba.

As it is up to law enforcement's discretion, it depends more on the location and politics than on the legality or illegality of the act.

[Redleg]

Sheriff's are elected. So he answers to the GOP electorate of his county (Democrat's need not apply.) His political views are unlikely to represent any of those present at the scene other than shotgun Bubba.

Party politics usually have very little to do with rural county elections - so the shot at the GOP is just another attempt at demonizing the opposition. In such counties as the one Crawford is in - the Sherrif must attempt to appease all the law abiding people and maintain law and order or they do not get re-elected.

As it is up to law enforcement's discretion, it depends more on the location and politics than on the legality or illegality of the act.

Its always up to the law enforcement's discretion - regardles of the politicial afflication of the law enformement representive.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Really? You wouldn't think that it could be a threat of violence, brandishing a gun and firing it?

Them seeing a gun is not brandishing..He is not threatening them or pointing it at them....It is pointing in the air where it is harmless!!!!!!

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Hippies always impose themselves on people who actually have jobs and lives.

What do you all think of Sheehan? Anybody have the balls to give their real opinion.

Sheehan is a traitor. She has no right to impede on the president or his neighbors as she does. This is Amerika. Love it, or get the hell out.

[Adrian II]

Sheehan is a traitor. She has no right to impede on the president or his neighbors as she does. This is Amerika. Love it, or get the hell out.

Fortunately it is not. I keep learning from this thread though. For instance that the word 'agenda' seems to have become short-hand for 'different ideas than the President' in your country. The President has no agenda. Not do the woman's family members who lick his boots in ways that would please Adolf Hitler. It is the woman who has an agenda => is a traitor => is not American.

I was thinking, Kaiser: wouldn't you agree the deceased son was a traitor as well? I mean, with him dying for the country over there in Iraq and having the wrong Mom back home and all?

[Red Harvest]

Sheehan is a traitor. She has no right to impede on the president or his neighbors as she does. This is Amerika. Love it, or get the hell out.

While I might not agree with where she is going with this, I think she's paid the price for some respect, including from Mr. Arrogant himself, the President. If she breaks the law (like Dubya's neighbor) then she should be subject to prosecution.

This is America, not "Amerika" and those that want to deny peaceful protest are the ones that should get the hell out. It is not treason to oppose a war, especially when you've lost your child to a misrepresented, mismanaged mess. There are treasonous ways of opposing a war, simply protesting is not one of them.

Perhaps the neighbors should complain about how much Bush is on vacation? Afterall, protestors are only there when he is.

[BDC]

I thought the whole point of America was that you could protest about whatever you wanted, and that just made you a better American! You can't call someone un-American for protesting, that's what being American is about, freedom of speech and all that.

[Red Harvest]

I thought the whole point of America was that you could protest about whatever you wanted, and that just made you a better American! You can't call someone un-American for protesting, that's what being American is about, freedom of speech and all that.

Apparently that changed after the 2000 "election." According to some you may only protest if Dubya agrees with you.