Shooting update that the LSU players were involved in
- Thread starter charlie12
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
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!
Member Benefits:
So no gun, no approaching you so no fear of great bodily harm. Just a burglary, as mentioned in the original post, and you watching him from your yard. On the surface, I would say you are not legally allowed to use deadly force. Force, yes. But not deadly force. Unless he were breaking into an occupied home or car. Justifiable Homicide doesn't require the one using the deadly force to be the one inside the home or car.
And unless your yard was included in your dwelling. Then being in your yard might mean you were in your dwelling.
Agree with all that 100%. Is your dwelling an extension of your home? I ask in jest because a dwelling is a dwelling. Nothing more nothing less. I feel a lot of people don’t grasp all these principles to this level. Circling back around again, it is why I question the extension phase because I feel it doesn’t do a good job at all of articulating specific meaning. At worst, it can confuse some people on something very important. Are we ready to start saying your yard is an extension of your home based on the non-specific definition of the word dwelling? You allude to that being a possibility for someone to say, but I’m thinking we are only bouncing off the periphery here in hypothetical land.
No, I'm not entering a hypothetical land here. It's a serious question. In the context of the law, what is the definition of a dwelling? Is dwelling defined in the Revised Statutes? Have the courts provided a definition? Would it surprise you to learn (if you didn't already know) that there is a statute providing a definition for dwelling that does include the yard? It also includes an outhouse but I haven't seen a lot of those recently.
Posted by Saw: Somehow I just can’t turn away from this dumpster fire. 10 years I’ve read this site and managed to not get suckered in...
Sir, the Federal Safe Passage Act doesn’t have anything to do with my home. So by your own logic it invalidates any use of the phase *extension of your home* as it relates to my gun in my car.
Moving on, YOUR interpretation of the extension phase is that it relates to use of force. Fine with me, because that is further proves the point that saying *car is an extension of home* is silly at best and crazy beyond imagination use of a colloquial platitude at worst. Definitely doesn’t have anything to do with my house. Why anyone would want to use that phase to discuss in correct and explicit terms anything as important as deadly force and weapons possession is beyond me. Arguing otherwise is almost as silly as me taking the time to type this.
I wish you all well because at least it seems we are all the *good guys*.
Please read the statement, and the comments preceding that which was talking about planes, and balloons before you resort to being an imbecile. The very first words are most other methods of travel. because some of us actually do travel by means of general aviation, and light airplanes.
Sir, the Federal Safe Passage Act doesn’t have anything to do with my home. So by your own logic it invalidates any use of the phase *extension of your home* as it relates to my gun in my car.
Moving on, YOUR interpretation of the extension phase is that it relates to use of force. Fine with me, because that is further proves the point that saying *car is an extension of home* is silly at best and crazy beyond imagination use of a colloquial platitude at worst. Definitely doesn’t have anything to do with my house. Why anyone would want to use that phase to discuss in correct and explicit terms anything as important as deadly force and weapons possession is beyond me. Arguing otherwise is almost as silly as me taking the time to type this.
I wish you all well because at least it seems we are all the *good guys*.
Please read the statement, and the comments preceding that which was talking about planes, and balloons before you resort to being an imbecile. The very first words are most other methods of travel. because some of us actually do travel by means of general aviation, and light airplanes.
Last edited:
I have looked for the dwelling definition before dating back to the Landry case but never found it. I haven’t been made aware of any case law regarding it in a use of force situation either. It actually does surprise me that a yard is included in a specific definition. I suspect we are close to violent agreement on our personal thoughts on what the law would allow for these situations. Same goes for when you can legally have a firearm. I hope none of this fiction ever happens, but I hope the first LEO on the scene has your understanding understanding of all this.
As I said, it's defined but it's not in Title 14, it's in Title 40. The closest I could find in Title 14 was in the definition of home invasion. "Home invasion is the unauthorized entering of any inhabited dwelling, or other structure belonging to another and used in whole or in part as a home or place of abode by a person, where a person is present, with the intent to use force or violence upon the person of another or to vandalize, deface, or damage the property of another." A dwelling can encompass more than the home portion but is looks like it has to be part of the structure of the home portion. I've always seen that as something like an attached garage. 40:580 starts the section for slum clearance. For that section, swelling is defined (580.1) as "any building or structure, or part thereof, used and occupied for human habitation or intended to be so used, and includes any yard, garden, outhouses, and appurtenances belonging thereto or usually enjoyed therewith." I don't see much of a convenience to define it that way in that section. They could have just as easily used "dwelling or the property on which that dwelling sits" to apply the laws to the building and the land. Motor vehicle isn't defined in Title 14 either. But at least the laws reference its being defined in Title 32.
I think the bulk of our disagreement is in the use of the phrase in question.
Concur. Interesting that others somehow miss this and think there was ever a disagreement on possession of a gun in a car. I’ll have to look it up, but me thinks that actually does not make me the imbecile. I guess that is for Mr Troedoff to decide. Keep it classy San Diego.
I only made that statement, because you completely took a whole paragraph I wrote out of context, and called it I believe a dumpster fire. The context of my post was in reply to another statement made on here about other modes of travel not an automobile.
At any rate, I do not have any problem with the verbiage used as it is, in reference to a firearm. Which for all intents and purposes according to Louisiana law is given the same consideration as your home.Your right to have a firearm in your vehicle is constitutionally protected in Louisiana, it is not so in many other states.
Last edited:
The dumpster fire comment was meant to be about this whole thread, arguing on the Internet, and this dead horse argument going back a decade on this site. Sorry you took personal offense.
I have no problem with you or anyone else that isn’t the Chief Of Police of NOLA not having a problem with the phrase. I would hope by now you probably don’t have a problem with me having issue with it either. That paragraph is a mouthful. I think I’ve previously articulated my point clearly enough. You acknowledged that in your first post here.
I don’t think anyone has ever even hinted at anyone not being able to have their firearms in their mode of conveyance in Louisiana. People were throwing jabs at the phase extension of your home. They were poking fun at how silly you could take it. Likely because they believe your home, car, ballon, aircraft, and yard are all different in some of your rights. Your rights are very similar if not almost exactly the same for legally carrying a gun in Louisiana...until some place doesn’t allow weapons that your conveyance goes (i.e. federal facilities).
Not sure of the reference of the Federal Safe Passage Act and how it applies if you are speaking about the safe passage provision of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986. If you just mean interstate travel with your gun...OK. Doesn’t have much to do with use of force (ref your post #68).
I have no problem with you or anyone else that isn’t the Chief Of Police of NOLA not having a problem with the phrase. I would hope by now you probably don’t have a problem with me having issue with it either. That paragraph is a mouthful. I think I’ve previously articulated my point clearly enough. You acknowledged that in your first post here.
I don’t think anyone has ever even hinted at anyone not being able to have their firearms in their mode of conveyance in Louisiana. People were throwing jabs at the phase extension of your home. They were poking fun at how silly you could take it. Likely because they believe your home, car, ballon, aircraft, and yard are all different in some of your rights. Your rights are very similar if not almost exactly the same for legally carrying a gun in Louisiana...until some place doesn’t allow weapons that your conveyance goes (i.e. federal facilities).
Not sure of the reference of the Federal Safe Passage Act and how it applies if you are speaking about the safe passage provision of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986. If you just mean interstate travel with your gun...OK. Doesn’t have much to do with use of force (ref your post #68).
The safe passage act is in reference to interstate travel, but can also cover some intrastate travel as well. As regional airports in most instances fall under federal law. I have no problems with anyone. I read that recently after the fact, and thought I was specific enough to not get that caught up in the midst of the other parts of this thread. I guess that is what I get for trying to provide a serious response to someones troll question. I am a pilot, so some of that troll question didn't seem so out of place until I read it in context.
Copy all. Check the safe passage provision of the law I referenced if it is the same as you are speaking of. The law I was referring to deals with transporting unloaded firearms. Fortunately not too many people getting jacked on the ramp at the FBO though. Fly safe.
One for the ages, huh?
Members online
- Dredd
- dmh
- pandabear
- rgudan
- Tonyaav
- DaMaj
- Micahbarcelona
- firesafety3
- davidd
- Mr_dees
- daxjosh77
- jmd025
- theway109
- twinin
- Daspy
- Dill
- whitesquirrel44
- Bigchillin83
- SwampyDog
- BIGBORE44
- warpig47
- Saintsfan1977
- Str8beast100
- gino70085
- CantThinkPastGo
- kengel2
- Big H
- southerner985
- lilshaunsdad
- success
- bayoubuddy
- pullstart
- nolawis
- N4sir
- Brballistics
- CJB1911
- hotbiggun
- miscverb
- ewebb10
- Zoshoots112189
- Speedtrucker
- mongore
- Akajun
- cbecnel
- kpm
- Kylelawrence318
- Loaded1911
- Denisbl0
- jwalker814
- dwhaley929
