This is just proposed not passedEveryone who proposes stuff like this should be permanently barred from office and subject to a criminal investigation.
This is going to kill American citizens tooIt will kill mostly American citizens, as the border crossers will be invited to the ranches. I suspect this was proposed because some GOPer's have some bodies to hide.
This is just proposed not passedRead it.
Where is the problem ?
WTF Texas.
This is going to kill American citizens tooThat is the intention, yes.
Where is the problem ?
This is going to kill American citizens too
So all those "Private Property: Trespassers will be shot" signs are full of crap?
Don't other states already allow this? How is it any different?Castle doctrine only covers dwelling. This law would hypothetically extend it to land.
Castle doctrine only covers dwelling. This law would hypothetically extend it to land.Looking at the stand your ground laws here in SC there's a lot of grey area. Seems like this is just solidifying that kind of thing.
Looking at the stand your ground laws here in SC there's a lot of grey area. Seems like this is just solidifying that kind of thing.Even if the idea of protecting your property within the entire area sounds good, being able to kill someone for just walking on your property is insane if that's what the bill is allowing. It wasn't long ago that we had two shootings because someone accidentally went to the wrong address and crazy gun nuts took it as an opportunity.
That article is trying really hard to make it seem like people just want to be able to murder migrants but, extending your right of protection from just inside your home to all of your property doesn't really seem like that big of a leap. It will of course cause a shitload of headaches over justifiable reaction and probably more deaths but really just seems like basic "muh 2a!" type stuff. On paper it's fine, but that rarely stands up in the real world.
Looking at the stand your ground laws here in SC there's a lot of grey area. Seems like this is just solidifying that kind of thing.No. It's about wanting to murder migrants for trespassing.
That article is trying really hard to make it seem like people just want to be able to murder migrants but, extending your right of protection from just inside your home to all of your property doesn't really seem like that big of a leap. It will of course cause a shitload of headaches over justifiable reaction and probably more deaths but really just seems like basic "muh 2a!" type stuff. On paper it's fine, but that rarely stands up in the real world.
This just gets trigger fingers more twitchy. Ranchers will be more likely to kill their neighbor or family because the barrier for precaution is no more. Good one gop!
Looking at the stand your ground laws here in SC there's a lot of grey area. Seems like this is just solidifying that kind of thing.
Looking at the stand your ground laws here in SC there's a lot of grey area. Seems like this is just solidifying that kind of thing.
That article is trying really hard to make it seem like people just want to be able to murder migrants but, extending your right of protection from just inside your home to all of your property doesn't really seem like that big of a leap. It will of course cause a shitload of headaches over justifiable reaction and probably more deaths but really just seems like basic "muh 2a!" type stuff. On paper it's fine, but that rarely stands up in the real world.
You're really going to advocate for killing someone for merely being on property, even if that property could be an open acre and causing no harm to threat to anybody?No. Which is why I said it generally makes sense on paper as a logical extention of property protection but that doesn't stand up in real life. This law would get complicated real quick if it was passed.