FL Sheriff to Homeowners: Shoot Looters Until They Look ‘Like Grated Cheese’

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • indykid

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 27, 2008
    11,881
    113
    Westfield
    Hard to believe that when I was growing up in New York City, I remember seeing signs in business windows that said "Looters Will Be Shot". Sad that they now that they are forced to open their doors to looters and allow them to take what they want.

    Good for at least the one county in Florida!
     

    Doug

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    69   0   0
    Sep 5, 2008
    6,550
    149
    Indianapolis
    Hard to believe that when I was growing up in New York City, I remember seeing signs in business windows that said "Looters Will Be Shot". Sad that they now that they are forced to open their doors to looters and allow them to take what they want.

    Good for at least the one county in Florida!
    But they can call 311 and request a social worker and they are allowed to tell the looters theft and assault are "not okay."
     

    Amishman44

    Master
    Rating - 98%
    49   1   0
    Dec 30, 2009
    3,724
    113
    Woodburn
    I'm not so convinced that telling homeowners to 'shoot them 'til they look like graded cheese' is the right way to say things, from a legal perspective, but reminding people of their right to defend themselves against aggressive individuals and letting criminals know that they could be shot for illegally entering another individual's home, would be within his right and responsibility to state!
    That being said...speaking the criminal's language or, rather, speaking in a such a manner that the criminals can understand it, is the best way to do it!
     

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    104,713
    149
    Southside Indy
    I'm not so convinced that telling homeowners to 'shoot them 'til they look like graded cheese' is the right way to say things, from a legal perspective, but reminding people of their right to defend themselves against aggressive individuals and letting criminals know that they could be shot for illegally entering another individual's home, would be within his right and responsibility to state!
    That being said...speaking the criminal's language or, rather, speaking in a such a manner that the criminals can understand it, is the best way to do it!
    I remember back in the 70's, I went with my dad on a fishing trip up to Canada, leaving my mom and older sister at home. While we were gone, some weirdo started making phone calls to them and it really scared them, so they called the sheriff's department. A deputy came to the house and asked them if they had a gun. The only gun in the house was dad's old double barrel 12 gauge. He told them that if they felt threatened or if someone tried to break in, to get into a bedroom with the gun, and if anyone opened the bedroom door, to "blow the hell out of them". The next day, Mom had our next door neighbor show her how to load the gun.
     

    ditcherman

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Dec 18, 2018
    7,829
    113
    In the country, hopefully.
    Home invasion or not, if you continue firing after the threat is stopped, you can be charged. You can also be subject to lawsuits from the family. Bravado by some uniformed politician will give you little help in court.

    No, I am not opposing legitimate self-defense or castle doctrine.
    If I have a 1.7 first shot and .18 splits and he takes 4.5 seconds to fall to the ground, is my mag dump defensible?
     

    Amishman44

    Master
    Rating - 98%
    49   1   0
    Dec 30, 2009
    3,724
    113
    Woodburn
    Home invasion or not, if you continue firing after the threat is stopped, you can be charged. You can also be subject to lawsuits from the family. Bravado by some uniformed politician will give you little help in court.
    No, I am not opposing legitimate self-defense or castle doctrine.

    Bingo...once the aggressor had been incapacitated, or unable to continue with his attack or has been rendered unable to defend him/herself, one's right to 'self-defense' ends as well. Anything one does to further harm the original aggressor is 'on the offensive' and can be deemed as 'aggressive' which could result in charges being filed? Tough in the moment, but keep your head and stay rational..as much as possible!
     

    Quiet Observer

    Sharpshooter
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2022
    426
    63
    St. John
    Right.
    Indiana law supports the concepts of castle doctrine and stand your ground. But that does not give carte blanche to one who is initially the defender. The term "reasonable" is used repeatedly throughout the statute.
    http://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2021/ic/titles/035#35-41-3

    Reasonable is not what the individual and all his buddies agree that it is - shoot the #@%$^ full of holes, etc. One has to convince a judge and jury that the actions were necessary, based on legal precedent.
     

    380Mike

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 19, 2011
    224
    43
    Very irresponsible of the sheriff. Does he not realized the cost of ammo? A good vital organ shot on the first should persuade the rest to re-evaluate their "shopping" thoughts.
     

    bobzilla

    Mod in training (in my own mind)
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 1, 2010
    9,259
    113
    Brownswhitanon.
    Right.
    Indiana law supports the concepts of castle doctrine and stand your ground. But that does not give carte blanche to one who is initially the defender. The term "reasonable" is used repeatedly throughout the statute.
    http://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2021/ic/titles/035#35-41-3

    Reasonable is not what the individual and all his buddies agree that it is - shoot the #@%$^ full of holes, etc. One has to convince a judge and jury that the actions were necessary, based on legal precedent.
    Life ain't the movies. You shoot until the aggressor can no longer aggress. If that means 15 holes or 2, doesn't matter. Look, you wanna be a fudd, fine. But don't save bullets because you're scared someone might think it's too much. That could get you or worse a loved one killed.
     

    Quiet Observer

    Sharpshooter
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2022
    426
    63
    St. John
    Life ain't the movies. You shoot until the aggressor can no longer aggress. If that means 15 holes or 2, doesn't matter. Look, you wanna be a fudd, fine. But don't save bullets because you're scared someone might think it's too much. That could get you or worse a loved one killed.
    No one has said anything about saving bullets. What has been argued against is going beyond defense of self or others. Each scenario is different. A prudent person evaluates the situation and acts accordingly. That evaluation may take place very rapidly. An incapacitated aggressor may even partially recover and resume the attack. More shots may be required, even a reload. The law uses the term, reasonable. Writers often use the term, prudent. Failure to act rapidly with sufficient force is a disaster. Nor is it beneficial having an empty gun, if 2 other assailants come around the corner.
     

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    23,208
    113
    Ripley County
    Right.
    Indiana law supports the concepts of castle doctrine and stand your ground. But that does not give carte blanche to one who is initially the defender. The term "reasonable" is used repeatedly throughout the statute.
    http://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2021/ic/titles/035#35-41-3

    Reasonable is not what the individual and all his buddies agree that it is - shoot the #@%$^ full of holes, etc. One has to convince a judge and jury that the actions were necessary, based on legal precedent.


    18rds + can be reasonable at times.
     

    CitizenX

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 23, 2012
    228
    43
    Tippecanoe
    Home invasion or not, if you continue firing after the threat is stopped, you can be charged. You can also be subject to lawsuits from the family. Bravado by some uniformed politician will give you little help in court.

    No, I am not opposing legitimate self-defense or castle doctrine.
    That's why you should make the double tap count... and who is to say it didn't take more? Just me and the bad guy and I'm the only one with a story.
     
    Top Bottom