Biden Advises Shooting Shotgun Through Door - Virginia Beach man charged for doing exactly that

[hack89]

Vice President Joe Biden told Field & Stream magazine in an interview published Monday, "[if] you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door."

Coincidentally, a 22-year-old man in Virginia Beach, Va., was charged Monday with reckless handling of a firearm after doing just that a couple days earlier.

According to Delaware attorneys contacted by U.S. News, in Biden's home state it is only legal to use deadly force if there is reason to fear imminent loss of life. Shooting a gun in the air could result in felony reckless endangering and aggravated menacing charges, in addition to misdemeanor charges, the lawyers said.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door

[holdencaufield]

1. I'm thinking the VPOTUS is not very familiar ...

... with either firearms or the law.

Which makes me question the wisdom of making him the President's go-to-guy on the subject of gun control.

[Lurks Often]

2. It would be extremely unwise to take self defense advice from the Vice President.

Warning shots are invariably illegal and restricting yourself to a 2 shot weapon is a mistake that could be fatal for the person who does.

[darkangel218]

3. +1

[beemer27]

4. RE: Joe's advice

I like Joe and think he is a good man. He is even doing a pretty good job as VP. BUT, when it comes to firearms, he should maybe ask a few REAL experts for some facts be fore he shoots himself in the foot. (Pun intended) Every time Joe is on TV I know that he is worth watching. He always makes sense, but sometimes his choice of words leave something to be desired.

[darkangel218]

5. When i first saw the subject of your OP

I thought it was from The Onion. I can't believe Biden said what he said. Any gun owner knows you don't shoot through the doors blindly ..

wow

[Oneka]

6. Perhaps a pardon in the offing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172111896

"
At the time, Wilkinson told police that he heard a noise outside his home and grabbed his pistol. He fired two rounds after he saw someone trying to open the door. The person turned out to be his granddaughter"

Maybe if he had used a shotgun, everything would have turned out fine.

[darkangel218]

7. Its funny how very few people are replying to this OP.

........

[Eleanors38]

8. 2 earlier threads were engendered by Biden's advocacy if shotguns for home defense

Wide-spread irony may have interfered with some folks' communication devices.

[ChazII]

15. Perhaps they are paying more

attention to the newly retired pope that to our v.p. Good observation.

[jimmy the one]

9. warning shots can be legal

lurks often, juxtaposed: ... and restricting yourself to a 2 shot weapon is a mistake that could be fatal for the person who does.

This is just specious & stupid. Don't you belong on a rightwing gun board?

Lurks Often: Warning shots are invariably illegal and

You don't know what you're talking about, this is ridiculously wrong, is this a new law somewhere?; warning shots are legal when a bona fide threat. How come then, accd'g to you, gun guru gary kleck included 'warning shots' as being bona fide 'defensive gun uses' in his dgu study (albeit his results were debunked by more reputable studies):

(interview w Kleck): SCHULMAN: Let's talk about how the guns were actually used in order to accomplish the defense. How many people, for example, had to merely show the gun, as opposed to how many had to fire a warning shot, as to how many actually had to attempt to shoot or shoot their attacker?
KLECK: We got all of the details about everything that people could have done with a gun from as mild an action as merely verbally referring to the gun on up to actually shooting somebody.
SCHULMAN: Could you give me the percentages?
KLECK: You have to keep in mind that it's quite possible for people to have done more than one of these things since they could obviously both verbally refer to the gun and point it at somebody or even shoot it.
KLECK: 54% of the defensive gun uses involved somebody verbally referring to the gun. 47%involved the gun being pointed at the criminal. 22% involved the gun being fired. 14% involved the gun being fired at somebody, meaning it wasn't just a warning shot; the defender was trying to shoot the criminal. Whether they succeeded or not is another matter but they were trying to shoot a criminal. And then in 8% they actually did wound or kill the offender.
----------------------

darkangel218.. I can't believe Biden said what he said. Any gun owner knows you don't shoot through the doors blindly

And you can cite joe biden saying that anyone should shoot thru a door blindly? .. you post just another ridiculous remark based on spite evidently, rather than truth since in context he was speaking of intruders & self defense... if there were a bona fide threat yes people can shoot thru a door.

in context, what biden said: .. is that as long as you have a weapon sufficient to be able to provide your self-defense. I did one of these town-hall meetings on the Internet and one guy said, “Well, what happens when the end days come? What happens when there’s the earthquake? I live in California, and I have to protect myself.” I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming.

Another fallacy dark angel makes, 'any gun owner knows you don't shoot throught the doors blindly', yet just last week a father killed or wounded his daughter or son shooting thru a door blindly, & this happens regularly. So in other words, it's dark angel who is being ridiculous here, not joe biden.

[hack89]

10. And they can be illegal depending on local law.

that's my only point.

[jimmy the one]

11. precludes fake warning shots

hack: And they {warning shots}can be illegal depending on local law. that's my only point.

So you double post as 'lurks often'? Lurkso said 'invariably illegal'.
Of course a 'fake warning shot' is illegal, or can be, but just to harp on the way a law has to be worded is a rightwing tactic for decades.

your (hacks) link: According to Delaware attorneys .. in Biden's home state it is only legal to use deadly force if there is reason to fear imminent loss of life. Shooting a gun in the air could result in felony reckless endangering and aggravated menacing charges, in addition to misdemeanor charges, the lawyers said.

YES, shooting a gun into the air FOR NO REASON could &/or should result in felony or misdemeanor charges. But this does not equate to contending that warning shots are illegal, sheesh. If one shoots into the air or ground or anywhere & then tries to cover his butt by saying he was afraid for his life & fired a warning shot at phantom attackers as a pretext, he needs to have some basis or justification &/or proof for doing so.
Otherwise, if there were no such law, any shootings could be 'justified' by gunnuts contending they were firing off warning shots. All night long.
I used to live near DC line, generally heard 20 - 100 gunshots fired nightly per week in warmer weather.

Lurks Often Warning shots are invariably illegal and restricting yourself to a 2 shot weapon is a mistake that could be fatal for the person who does.

Specious nonsense.

[hack89]

12. No - real warning shots can be illegal

the concept is simple - if you are not in such danger that you need to resort to deadly force then you have no need to shoot at all. In other words deadly force is the only justifiable reason to pull the trigger.

[Jenoch]

16. What exactly is a 'fake warning shot'?

Is that where the gun owner holds up a broomstick and says 'bang'?

[spin]

14. This lady got 20 years for firing a warning shot. ...

CBS NEWS/ May 12, 2012, 10:32 AM
Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots

(CBS News) JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.

CBS Affiliate WETV reports that Circuit Court Judge James Daniel handed down the sentence Friday.

Under Florida's mandatory minimum sentencing requirements Alexander could receive a lesser sentence, even though she has never been in trouble with the law before. Judge Daniel said the law did not allow for extenuating or mitigating circumstances to reduce the sentence below the 20-year minimum.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

[Jenoch]

17. I bet she would not have been convicted if she had fired a fake warning shot.

[jimmy the one]

18. a travesty of justice doesn't prove it or disprove it

may 2012: JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

That's pretty awful, awfully steep punishment for what she did, I agree. Here is why tho, & even with the 'why' it's too much; but a travesty of justice does not prove that warning shots are illegal per se:

She said her husband had read cell phone text messages that she had written to her ex-husband, got angry and tried to strangle her. She said she escaped and ran to the garage, intending to drive away. But, she said, she forgot her keys, so she picked up her gun and went back into the house. She said her husband threatened to kill her, so she fired one shot. "I believe when he threatened to kill me, that's what he was absolutely going to do," she said. "That's what he intended to do. Had I not discharged my weapon at that point, I would not be here."
But a previous judge in the case rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety.. {which then made the 'warning shot(s)' illegal, pfffft I agree, sick reasoning, she should not've been charged even.} A jury convicted Alexander in March and Judge denied her request for a new trial in April.
Marissa was convicted by a jury of 6 on 3 counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon with no intent to harm. Marissa Alexander did not have a criminal record before this incident.

I wonder if they were white jurors. Marissa is black.

oct 2012: From Marissa to Everyone Hello Everyone, I want to thank each and every one of you for writing me, praying for me or even thinking of me in your heart and are continuing to do so. For the most part, I’m hanging in there, as well as one could in this environment. Prison is definitely NOT what’s happening. It’s dreadful here, but hey, it’s suppose to be, it is after all captivity. My good days out weigh my bad days only because God is my source of strength. Please know that you all inspire me thru your communication and please know that the prayers that you offer up on my behalf are being answered. I’m so very blessed to have some of the most extraordinary people and organizations who are committed to supporting and encouraging me in every way.
I will continue to believe in our justice system. I choose to do so because I have complete trust in God, and we are still a nation that has this fundamental belief embedded in our core, displayed in our courtrooms and written on our money, and more hopefully in our hearts.
Truly I couldn’t begin to express to you how much I appreciate your wonderful letters of encouragement. Please know that I do not take your time and kindness for granted. Your heart-felt concern I am most grateful for. With all sincerity & respect, Marissa Alexander http://www.justiceformarissa.blogspot.com/

[gejohnston]

19. not the jurors, Florida's 10-20-life law

that is why the 20 years. Of course the DA can waive that, but Angela Corey wasn't about to do that. She has a reputation of over charging cases and less than steller ethics. Alan Dershowitz called her out on the way she is handling the Zimmerman case she supposely threatened to sue Hardvard, Dershowitz's employer.
http://www.change.org/petitions/justice-for-kenitra-casper-remove-angela-corey-from-office

[ManiacJoe]

20. Was it really a warning shot?

From what I remember, the shot in question was at head level into the door frame where her husband was standing.

[CokeMachine]

21. Good Dog!!

Make a point already!! Is there a chance you're from Canada. Your word salads remind me of someone -- just can't figure it out yet. Please get to the point without your junior high debate lectures. We can all read the previous posts without your help.

Take Care

[dairydog91]

13. Advice from the Pistorius School of Self-Defense?

[OGKush]

22. Maybe we shouldn't take advice about how to use our gun from the VP

And should listen more to the local laws.