DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus How to destroy a family

No one gave this man permission, he is a convicted child molester and not wanted in my home, well before this incident.

I just posted the Florida statute, read it. In Florida, forcible and illegal entry is all you need.

our discussion took place less than a few months ago. You insisted Ohio had no Castle Doctrine. We discussed the duty to retreat. You also insisted I had mentioned Ohio gun law when I never did any such thing. I just assumed your Geritol had not yet kicked in.

The 2018 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

View Entire Chapter
776.013 Home protection; use or threatened use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person who is in a dwelling or residence in which the person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and use or threaten to use:
(a) Nondeadly force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force; or
(b) Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
(2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(3) The presumption set forth in subsection (2) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened; or
(c) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force is engaged in a criminal activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further a criminal activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27; s. 4, ch. 2014-195; s. 1, ch. 2017-77.


This is a LOT longer than it used to be, but still says the same thing. My proposed action was legal at the time, and still would be today.

I thik you missed the point entirely.

The trash is taken by the waste collection company once a week. At no point in time will you have enough of a body of evidence to indicate how much a person drinks on a daily basis based on less than one week of evidence.

If a person buys a 12 pack a day, which is 84 beers a week, having 8-15 beers in his frige doesn't really tell you anything either. Because buying one 12 pack a day is assuming he never buys more or less than a 12 pack a day.

The joke is that he hates third party observers getting involved, but wants his son, the dude's friend, to bury around in his garbage to examine his drinking habits (Of course, what if the crappy mom likes beer too? Well, Sherlock will figure it out.), and make an unbiased report back to him. This all revolves around Nelson wanting to fulfill the role that his grandfather had done before him, and threaten the "hubby" if he ever beats his wife again. Of course he'll forget to mention the kid, because he never thought of the child.

It does not, because I did not, which if you had read what I posted, you would know that, but you don't, because you didn't.

You also did not read the law, as it states that no feeling of threat is necessary.

How can you see to read by looking thru your navel?

First, do you really think anyone had an actual relationship with nelson to procreate? honestly. Right there is the first red flag of the story.

CHS, I was going to say that if you read the law, you would now how stupid what you just posted sounds, but, unless you have an adult nearby who can handle that for you, never mind.

(a) Nondeadly force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force; or
(b) Deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
(2) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using or threatening to use defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used or threatened was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses or threatens to use defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(3) The presumption set forth in subsection (2) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used or threatened has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person

If you had read the whole thing, there is an obvious question you should be asking, but you are not, so you didn't, did you?

Hint: it is not in the short piece you quoted. You will really like it, until I tell you why not.

Prove I am wrong, for one hundred dollars. The law is what I said, just like many years ago when you all insisted I was wrong then.

Back up your MOUTH with some money, or SHUT IT.

So, Willit, you admit you were lying. At least you are aware, good for you.

I may get those gold stars Eve wanted, after all.

Can we immortalize this thread so everyone knows who is cool with victim blaming, or so we can always know who is down with domestic violence?

This thread is a dumpster fire.

You said computers run on math developed by an arab, or actually, you implied it. They do not, binary math is completely different and unrelated. You are in error.

You take your L, turn it sideways, and pack it.