“Certainly people have a right to defend themselves in their home but they do not have a right to make it a free-fire zone, and the chief, or his spokesperson, should never put that in the minds of people. We must operate not on the basis of fear but on the basis of understanding and how we as a community can come together to stop the violence.” – Ron Scott of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, quoted in Homeowners using deadly force against intruders: Has it gone too far? [via myfoxdetroit.com]
Home Quote of the Day Quote of the Day: Detroit Free Fire Zone Edition
“Homeowners using deadly force against intruders: Has it gone too far?”
Not far enough I’m thinking.
My feeling on Detroit is that this was a “war” waiting to happen, especially considering the failures of the PD to stop a lot of these murders. And I still side with the Chief: they can’t help them fast enough and it’s easier for everyone to just arm themselves and have the cop bag and tag. It’s what will happen anyway by the time the cops arrive in many situation anyway, but it’s better it’s the assailant lying on ground then the homeowners or their children.
Detroit has been a free-fire zone for decades. It is always in the final four as to murder count in the nation. The only difference now is a police chief who has verbally empowered the homeowners to fight back when the problem comes to them. If anything, that tilts the balance a little bit back in favor of the typical citizen.
Violent and dangerous people do not give two sh*ts about how you and your “community come together” or whatever BS you think is going to work.
Sociopath: Antisocial personality disorder in which a person has a long‑term pattern of manipulating, exploiting, or violating the rights of others.
Sociopaths don’t care about you and your community, you’re cattle to them.
so…. what is the definition of someone that is “social with a personality disorder in which a person has a long‑term pattern of manipulating, exploiting, or violating the rights of others.” because apparently nearly every politician and coalition leader fits that definition.
High level politicians (and business executives, for that matter) do tend to score significantly higher on the Hare psychopathy checklist than the average person, even though they typically fall short of the scores of true psychopaths.
And this comes as a “Revelation” why?
Actually, criminals LOVE it when “the community comes together” because it means: 1) That they aren’t at home and their valuables are unprotected, 2) That they’re all gathered together into one big target, and/or 3) That they get to lead the “good people of the community” in a lynch mob against someone unpopular.
I don’t know Ron Scott from Adam, and I don’t know his real motivations here, but from my read of that statement as presented, it sure looks to me like he is upset that thugs are not getting away with their thuggery.
Has self defense from low-life thugs gone too far? You’ve got to be kidding me even asking that question.
Here’s tip, Mr. Scott: No. So long as there is one single a-hole willing to hurt another human being for their own greed, profit, joy or impulse, self defense has not gone far enough.
The folks you are ‘defending’ by making this statement should live in abject fear that the next person they try to victimize, at home or anywhere else, will kill them. That’s the price they pay for being thugs.
Motivation is simple. Self-defense is self reliance. Detroit has a long history of the people needing to be dependent on the government. This is a huge step away from that.
People like Mr. Scott here seem to view gangsters and criminals as wayward children who can still be saved through love. In most cases, they’re already gone by now. It’s too late for that.
Maybe he should focus instead on making sure that the black family unit stays intact, so that another generation of thugs isn’t being born and bred as we speak.
Maybe it’s cutting into his fencing, um, I mean pawn business’ profits.
Detroit is the result of decades of black Democrat/BlackPanther/communist rule. This is the template Obama wants nationwide.
You’re not very bright, are you?
rather than insult him (Piers Morgan much?) why don’t you address the parts of his statement with which you take issue.
You obviously know nothing about the history of Detroit, and I am the stupid one? Nice troll.
Maybe you should
COVER YOUR CHILDRENS EYES
Any ghetto based organization with the name “Coalition to Stop Police Brutality” is a gang led front. In most big cities run by Democrats (that would be pretty much all of them) the gangs are an integral part of the machine. Their function is to keep the African-American population on the plantation. If the people start fighting back the gangs will lose power and so will the machines. Therefore it is natural for “community organizers” to oppose citizen armed self defense.
Aren’t you going to miss Matlock?
Read the article linked to in the post, if you haven’t. It’s mind-boggling. It describes several of the people who got shot as “suspected intruders.” How is someone a suspected intruder? They’re either supposed to be on the property or not.
It’s a technicality that goes back to the whole “presumed innocent until proven guilty”. People are considered “suspects” until a jury finds otherwise.
Maybe they should be called “post-mortem suspects” instead.
Technically speaking, anyone is an intruder guilty of trespass if they enter your dwelling without your knowledge or invitation (breaking and entering). Moreover, if you verbally order them to leave your property and they don’t comply, they are also guilty of trespass unless they leave the premises immediately.
Granted, you still can’t go off shooting anyone that appears in your home unannounced — well you can, but you’re going to have a heck of a time claiming self defense unless you were in imminent danger.
You could invite a guest into your home and they are lawfully allowed to be there so long as you allow it. But if you order them to leave because they are taking some sort of unlawful action or doing some activity you don’t want on your property — and they don’t comply — they are then guilty of trespass and thus an intruder until they leave.
It’s all about your and their actions and what order it all went down. For example, you can’t invite someone into your home only to shout “get out of my house” and start shooting.
“Technically speaking, anyone is an intruder guilty of trespass if they enter your dwelling without your knowledge or invitation (breaking and entering).”
I don’t think you are correct. There’s a difference between trespass and burglary.
Trespass is being there, on the property. Burglary is being there (in a building) with intent to commit another crime (such as larceny or a violent crime, etc).
For example, I once arrested a guy for being in a woman’s tool shed…for BURGLARY, not for trespass.
“Granted, you still can’t go off shooting anyone that appears in your home unannounced — well you can, but you’re going to have a heck of a time claiming self defense unless you were in imminent danger.”
Again, I don’t think this is right.
With the so-called castle doctrine laws and some other things, it is often held that the very fact of someone being IN your home uninvited is on its face intent to do harm….especially at night….especially if they used forcible entry, etc.
So, generally the claim self defense in a home invasion exists due to the presumption of intent to do harm. That does not mean some over zealous prosecutor will not go after you; but heck, that could happen pretty much any time with DGU.
More of this “if you just care enough about the (addict/abuser/homicidal maniac) you can change him” nonsense. Everybody’s is a “good boy” and was just about to turn their life around and blah blah blah blah.
So true. My favorite lie-of-the-day is when it’s the grieving mom proclaiming her dead thug “was really a good kid, but just got mixed up and running with a bad crowd.”
Uh, sweetie, your kid *IS* the bad crowd.
Reminds me of a TV show I saw decades ago. A cop caught a young burglar, (21 or so) coming out the back door of a shop in the wee hours of the morning. the guy had a gun raised ready to fire. The cop told him to drop the gun, and hesitated for a moment. the burglar did not drop the gun, so the cop shot and killed him.
Later, all of the burglars friends and relatives said he should not have shot him, that he was really a nice kid. So the cop started feeling guilty about shooting the hapless lad. He really felt bad about it. Then, a week later, the ballistic lab told him that he was really lucky, that upon examination of the gun the burglar had pointed at him, they found that the hammer was down, and the cartridge in the chamber had a indented primer, and was defective!
ignore Ron Scott. He is a community organizer/agitator. Any police shooting is a bad one to him, even if the little angel is on video firing an uzi at the po-po.
Try to fit in all you want, the racists here will never fully accept you.
Way to contribute to the discourse.
@ jughead: In the same spirit as your post, I will note that I have seldom seen a more fitting screen name.
I will second that opinion.
The lead sentence of the MyFoxDetroit.com article:
DETROIT (WJBK) – In recent months more Detroit homeowners have taken matters into their own hands, shooting suspected intruders on-site and, in some cases, killing them.
Ummmm… where else would they shoot them? OFF-SITE??
Oy…. and these are JOURNALISTS, whose stock-and-trade is the English language (grammar and spelling).
And why would they be ‘suspected’ intruders if they were shot ‘on site’?
It might make sense to club him, drag him out back and shoot him there. Having some thug bleed out in your living room makes an awful mess.
I suspect that they meant “on sight”.
Due to the current standards and state of both public education and journalism, I suspect it could be either one.
What do they propose homeowners use instead of deadly force…harsh language?
Hugs and empathy.
The same unicorn flatulence they think solves every other problem.
this one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxHhBx1FtLQ
It all fine and dandy to “want” everyone to be warm and fuzzy to each other, but Detroit is long past everyone “coming together”. Police are undermanned, and pretty much inneffective now anyways, so what other choice is there? Arm yourself, be vigilant, and defend your home and family.
The sad thing is, real Detroit is shittier than the Detroit in the original Robocop movie.
Real Detroit makes Robocop Detroit look like a Potemkin Village.
Hey, I want everyone to be good to each other. I think most people do, to be honest. Unfortunately, the difference between me and the bleeding-heart types is that I realize it ain’t gonna happen. I (and most of the rest of our crowd) realize that some people are not going to behave, for one reason or another. That’s why we need our arms–to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm, whoever they may be.
Then there’s this:
Ron Scott of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality believes in self defense but says these “vigilantees” have gone too far.
There’s only ONE “e” in the plural form of vigilante! OY!
The red squiggly line under the word your typing is usually a dead give away.
sometimes–unless they are both real words, as in “your” and “you’re”…. (Sorry, couldn’t help it) (says the guy who’s too lazy to type “through” and “though”, aka “thru” and “tho”)…
Our reporters here in Michigan often can’t spell or use correct grammar. It is especially evident in online reports, and there is a pattern.
Clearly he must have been referring to those who got themselves vigilanted.
Would that make the ones who vigilanted them be “vigilantors” ??
If the intruders don’t want to get shot, don’t intrude. The homeowners aren’t going to the bad guys flop and executing them.
The bad guys are coming to the homeowners and demanding to be shot. I call it assisted suicide. Homeowners are doing a service for society.
Kind of reminds me of a quote from the discworld books. The streets of Ankh-Morpork are quite dangerous and it’s quite easy to commit suicide there. Asking for shorts in a dwarf bar is committing suicide, asking a troll if he has rocks in his head is suicide, calling yourself Vincent the invulnerable is suicide (and inaccurate) it’s very easy to commit suicide in Ankh-Morpork if you’re not careful. other sources of suicide include http://wiki.lspace.org/mediawiki/index.php/Suicide
Pretty much this ^. Talk about a preventable problem, if you don’t break into other peoples houses your odds of being shot by the homeowner in a home invasion drop significantly.
What the heck is wrong with someone who is concerned about burglars being shot by home owners? These lowlifes should be sued for the cost of ammo, repairs to the residence and for the emotional suffering they’ve inflicted on the person who had to endure their break in and subsequent shooting.
Maybe my head isn’t wired right but I just can’t find an ounce of empathy for someone who breaks into other peoples homes. The only good thieves are dead thieves.
“Certainly people have a right to defend themselves in their home BUT they do not have a right to make it a free-fire zone, and the chief, or his spokesperson, should never put that in the minds of people. We must operate not on the basis of fear but on the basis of udnerstanding and how we as a community can come together to stop the violence,” he says.
I can’t help but be amused at those “progressives” who CLAIM they “believe” in our Rights and then reject it with a “but __________.”
So, let’s see if I follow this line of reason…. There’s a bad guy who’s broken through my front door and is threatening the safety of my family. I have a “right” to defend us, but I don’t have a “right” to freely fire. Instead of being FEARFUL, I should operate on the basis of UNDERSTANDING and rely on the COMMUNITY to save my family at that VERY MOMENT. Uh-huh!
(Also notice the typo in “understanding.” Do they not proof read this? Hell, even the spell check should have highlighted the word for the “journalist.”)
” We must operate not on the basis of fear but on the basis of understanding and how we as a community can come together to stop the violence.”
It sounds like the citizens of Detroit HAVE come together with the police chief and rediscovered a solution to crime which has proven effective for centuries.
I live in a nice suburb, hopefully the self defense shootings don’t scare the “suspects” off the streets of the “D” and push them North.
I feel for the people required to pull the trigger in self defense and have to live with the after effects.
“Certainly people have a right to defend themselves in their home but they do not have a right to make it a free-fire zone . . . . Translation: “We don’t want the perps getting shot . . . ”
It’s not the homeowners making their homes into a free-fire zones, Mr. Scott, it’s the lawbreakers.
Your house is a free fire zone. You are presumed innocent until it is proven who you shot and why is suspect. If the door is kicked in at zero dark thirty then it’s pretty obvious.
You come into my house uninvited I will kill you. I don’t care if your armed or not, and if I go to jail so be it. And if I ever lived in a disarmed slave state (when hell froze over) I would still obtain a firearm and defend my castle against any scum. People need to get the message. You enter another mans house uninvited you will die….Period!
Settle down, Francis.
Obviously, if there are so many shot intruders, there are so many home invasions. So the real question is, have the home invaders gone too far?
Yep, another one of our community leaders says that homeowners who defend themselves are “vigilantes,” and blasts the Detroit police chief for letting people think they have the right to use deadly force in defense of themselves in their own homes.
In other news, this Detroit woman didn’t use deadly force to defend herself:
Woman found shot in her Detroit home, stuffed in closet
Yes, but that was because those fine young men strayed off the right path because they weren’t given any opportunity. Or whatever.
Working towards a non-violent society and being armed are contradictory only if you make them be so.
Why not focus on the causes that make people want to be armed, instead of decrying the fact that they’re choosing to be so for quite good reasons?
I agree. We as a society must strive to kill all the violent people, then all will be peaceful. And, yes, that is a tough and dirty job we’d all rather have someone else do (which is why police departments were invented in the first place), but still, sometimes, circumstances give the job to one of us.
Hey, those would be intruders have lots of rights. And they can ask for help from the community any time they want. But once they’ve broken into my house, that’s all forfeit.
I got a great idea for you, coalition: convince your poor friends, the would be intruders, that they can still turn their lives around and be pillars of the community and not get shot, all they have to do is try not to rob people.
Otherwise, get together with your local police and INSIST that they lock up all the miscreants for their own protection!
There is something to this; I wonder how many of the shot home invaders had warrants, were on parole or probation, or had extensive criminal backgrounds? Without investigating at all I’m going to guess a majority fall into one of those three categories. An argument really could be made (and make more sense than whining that they were shot in the first place) that the system has failed them. Clearly they are unable to utilize a decision making process that doesn’t result in death from defensive shooting by another and thus need to be in custody for their own protection.
The corollary is obvious but I’ll state it: If these people were of such a bent that it was likely they would create a situation in which a reasonable person felt it necessary to use lethal force on them then the public should not have to interact with these individuals. This latter is a legitimate public safety concern while the former puts emphasis on the same point Ron Scott was trying to make, which is absurd. However the outcome is the same, clearly the people being shot while attempting home invasions need to be in prison. Forcing the citizenry to shoot them isn’t the best outcome for anyone involved.
” how we as a community can come together to stop the violence.”
Anytime the word “community” is used run fast far, far away.
When has community aka committee, ever solved anything?
Want a total Cluster f**k? , just let the community “stop” the violence
Yip, how’s that been working out for ya!
Community Organizer? Like B. Hussain Obama? It’s a helluva’ career path. Maybe you can be vice president…or dog catcher. I look forward to more “vigilante” shooting s on the south side of Chicago.
Executive summary: “Blah blah blah blah blah, we want your guns taken away”
Whining that using firearms in self defense against home invasions is too violent is like whining that back-burning to suppress wildfires is too fiery.
When they keep coming, you keep shooting. When they stop coming, you can stop shooting. Defensive gun uses are a RESPONSE to a prior failure. Of what? A school, parent, peer, neighborhood, police force, attorney, legal system, good decision making, or some combination of those things.
Bad guys gettting shot is NOT A PROBLEM, it is a SOLUTION OF LAST RESORT. Death too harsh? Don’t kick in my door, gun in hand and expect a cheerful hello, thief, rapist, or killer. I just pray it’s not a foolish no-knock warrant on the wrong house.
When black people empower themselves and fight back against the animals who have mentally enslaved them for years and their enabling parasite “community organizers”, people like Scott get scared. Decent people should never be afraid to defend themselves. Fear is peddled by a few to cower the many. Detroit needs more defensive minded folk to bring it back from the brink.
“When black people empower themselves and fight back against the animals who have mentally enslaved them for years and their enabling parasite “community organizers”, people like Scott get scared.”
“Community Organizer.” Sounds like something the piggies in Animal Farm would call themselves. Anything for a little bit of power, I suppose.
On the other hand, I’m going to give this “community organizer” a tiny bit of credulity. I honestly think a lot of these self-styled crusaders are part of the dysfunctional fabric of these neighborhoods; too close to the people they are trying to save. But instead of saviors, they become enablers for the very dysfunctional people they are trying to save from the streets.
I would suggest Mr. Scott take a big step back from his situation and go talk to the victims of these thugs, including the people who were forced to do awful things to save themselves. When he is done listening, he should go and have that much-needed talk to those poor souls who are intent on self-destructing with a fresh perspective on what is really going on in the neighborhood.
Well if you don’t want to get shot, don’t attempt to take others belongings by force. People will eventually respond to said force with force. I think part of his issue is generally the left hates the concept of private property and he thinks we should just share it with the “disadvantaged souls”. Just another example of the all property is the states mentality.
This is very simple to breakdown.
Ron Scott’s Soultions = Criminals not in fear of the public
The People of Detroit Who Carry On There Person and Have Guns
In the Home = Criminals in fear of the public.
I think it’s just that simple.
Another half-assed anti-gun community organizer? I think that the Democrats have found their next Presidential candidate.
Why don’t they find a geopolitically-challenged Mayor of a town of 1,500 people in Alaska which is known for rampant meth use and sexual assault? You betcha!
Why don’t you try to separate Saturday Night Live myth from reality before you comment?
What a lovely world he lives.. Coming together.. Understanding… holding hands.. in the land of unicorns… and rainbows.. and this idiot… blowing bubbles with kittens in them
These “vigilantes” have “gone too far?” Should we let them rape, beat and rob us just a little bit before we shoot them? I don’t understand what he’s recommending. If someone has come into your home uninvited, are you supposed to call the coalition for guidance? Where do these people come from? It honestly boggles the mind.
I wouldn’t mind seeing one of these “free fire zones” I keep hearing discussed…
Ammo and range fees ain’t cheap, I could used some free firing.
Word. If I could do all my shooting in the living room, I’d go through a lot of ammo.
Note to Mr. Scott: The home invaders will stop dying when the home invaders decide the risk is too great, the price is too high, and stop invading homes.
But Mr. Scott should feel free to save some poor boy’s life by posting a sign in his yard proclaiming that he welcomes home invaders and will serve tea while being robbed and beaten, while watching his wife and children raped and murdered.
He might actually do that–as long as the invaders promised to go rob and rape and murder the economically better-off guy down the street, and then burn his house down and sell his teenaged daughter to a pimp too. That’s kind of the rank-and-file liberal’s idea of “fairness”.
From the continued crime rate in Detroit, hasn’t gone nearly far enough. We need about a thousand self defense shootings a month for a year to clear the place out*.
* Detroit has well over ten thousand unsolved murders, I’m just extrapolating.
If you break into someones home you could get shot – whats not to “understand” about that?
I thought that was the “understanding”
There’s a simple solution… stop breaking into people’s houses.
This is my idea of a proper Community Organizer in Detroit
NO. Next question, please …
Average police response time in Detroit 58 minutes. Gun in hand way way better than cop on the phone.
For newest information you have to go to see internet and on web I
found this site as a most excellent website for newest updates.
As you are shopping for your travel golf bag, you will need to compare the amenities that you need as opposed
to what you want. Reserving scaled flights is one of the best ways to go, and believe
when I say this: it really works, and getting to know other airports may be a
bit exhausting but that is also a part of your traveling adventure.
However, most insurers will happily add extreme or winter sports coverage to your policy for an extra fee.
This post is worth everyone’s attention. How can I find out more?
Hi there, all the time i used to check web site posts here early in the break of day, because i like to
gain knowledge of more and more.
Cаn үou tell us mor about thіs? I’d want to find օut ome additional