Discussion of Castle Doctrine on FoxNews.

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JWarren

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
4,632
Location
MS and LA
Dec. 4, 7:04 AM CST-- Steve Ducey just stated that they would have a "Fair and Balanced" Debate of Castle Doctrine after the commercial break.


-- John
 
Fox and Friends This Hour - A Look At Castle Doctrine

This hour on Fox and Friends they are going to discuss "Castle Doctrine" Laws.
 
7:18 AM:


Promo had banner that said "Wild Wild West"

and the Fuzzy-headed guy who is not Steve Ducey stated:

Should you be allowed to shoot an intruder into your home? A new law our there may shock you. We'll discuss what you are allowed to do and what you cannot do. (paraphrased.)


-- John
 
Participants in the debate are:

Nicole Deborde, Criminal Defense Attorney

and

Paul Helmke, Brady Bunch



Paul stated that you DO have a right to defend yourself and we don't need these new laws because we already have the right.

Nicole's position is that the existing laws have too many gray areas.


Paul says that it should be sorted out in the legal system if something happens under existing laws. (translation: bankrupt the shooter)

He calls it a "shoot'em in the back law.


-- John
 
Watching now....the idiot (guess which one) calls it a

"shoot first shoot 'em in the back" law...... used to "shoot your neighbors".

He says you can shoot someone after they leave your house because he touched your car.. LOL

I always wonder where they get these talking bobble heads..... See they go straight to Brady for their take on it but grab some random ex-prosecutor for the other side. Know why? Because Brady and their ilk are the ONLY ones that think these laws are a bad idea that's why. It's making a "debate" where there is 99% agreement.


Last night on Bill O'Reilly Bill told Al Sharpton he would only interview "honest upstanding guys like him" on the topic of racism.

That ended any belief I had in this "fair and balanced" nonsense .......

The MSM will never be our friend in this whole inconvenient Second Amendment stuff.
 
"...it's a shoot 'em in the back as they're leaving thing." :barf: So don't break in and you don't have to leave.

As we tried to bring in legislated Castle to Michigan, we heard the typical "the blood will run in the streets" crap. I'm still waiting to see that. It hasn't happened.

Doc2005
 
Yes, he did. He ended up looking paranoid, as he should have looked.

Doc2005
 
I think the most dangerous notion from Helmke was that the existing laws were fine and that any issue could be sorted out in the legal system under current laws.

That basically means you get treated like a criminal, arrested, get a lawyer, and then spend the unforeseeable future selling your organs in order to pay for lawyers to keep you off death row if an over-zealous or activist DA gets a hold of you.

Yeah... that seems OK.


-- John
 
Last edited:
One other thing I notice is that they only refer to Helmke as "a former attorney" instead of stating what group he's representing.
 
I can sum-up in two words, my concerns for where there is no legislated Castle doctrine:

Mike Nifong :evil:

Doc2005
 
this should be interesting. i wonder if they ever educate themselves before they do these things or do writers take care of everything?
 
Which was a fiasco and covered nothing worth watching: but hopefully juiced some people to look in to the doctrine for them selves.


If you missed it the ant- that they had ended with "So now were going to have people blowing away kids with shotguns for toilet papering trees and killing children at halloween for coming to the door too early."

It was a joke.
 
for being apart of the media, these people sure dont understand the whole concept of the castle doctrine.

i guess now its ok to toilet paper someone's tree?
 
What the Brady's want is to spread that garbage hoping someone actually believes them enough to actually shoot some kid TP'ing their house...They're fervently hoping they can talk some dim-wit into a murder, who will then claim (hopefully on camera) Castle Doctrine as his defense. They're actually salivating in anticipation of an event like that...They'll justify it as sacrificing one for many...
 
Since the Brady dude was in favor of legit self-defense, did anyone ask him why they want to take away all guns, so that you have to defense yourself with a soup spoon?
 
Doc2005: +1,000,000

As for Brady I thought they just wanted basic registration of handguns and that was it (it said on their website therefore I should believe)

Yeah,sure Isn't Helmke the guy who threatened to shoot someone on the Brady blog, Sometimes I honestly wonder if these people know what planet it is.
 
As for Brady I thought they just wanted basic registration of handguns and that was it (it said on their website therefore I should believe)
Click to expand...

This is patently false, as demonstrated by the fact that they support DC's handgun ban.

Brady is all about elimination of guns from private ownership, one step at a time. Their website lies about the final endgame of their movement.

-T
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Castle Doctrine definition
Replies
11
Views
797
AKGuy
A
Bulletski
  • Locked
Deadly force and Castle Doctrine
2 3
Replies
55
Views
3K
alsaqr
alsaqr
KevininPa
  • Locked
Castle Doctrine in Pa
Replies
4
Views
2K
Javelin
J
P
  • Locked
Debating castle doctrine
Replies
11
Views
447
Prince Yamato
P
J
  • Locked
Castle Doctrine help
Replies
9
Views
918
divemedic
D
Back
Top