Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mugged on Capitol Hill. Moved to VA

LOL, was a victim of a home break-in and mugging in Fairfax. Have lived in DC for 22 years and never been the victim of any crime.

Yeah, OK Pinocchio

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

DP. I'm not going to wait around to see if the person breaking into my home is going to attack me or my family first. I'm also going to assume that they have a weapon and I'm going to protect myself and my family accordingly. If you want to try to reason with the person to voluntarily leave your house, best of luck. Besides, you are legally within your rights to act in self-defense under such circumstances. PP's experience simply highlights how incompetent law enforcement is in this city.

You're free to do anything you want to defend yourself, but you will reap the consequences if you overstep your legal bounds.

And no, you are not necessarily legally within your rights to act in self defense under such circumstances. We have very little info about PP's circumstances, but the actual law in DC is:

You are entitled to claim self-defense:

(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and

(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.

You may use the amount of force which, at the time of the incident, you actually and reasonably believe is necessary to protect yourself (or a third person) from imminent bodily harm. This may extend to the use of deadly force if you actually and reasonably believe you are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which you can save yourself only by using deadly force against your assailant.

Even if the other person is the aggressor and you are justified in using force in self defense, you may not use any greater force than you actually and reasonably believe is necessary under the circumstances to prevent the harm you reasonably believe is intended or to save your life or avoid serious bodily harm.

Someone simply entering your home without your permission does NOT entitle you to self defense under DC law.

everyone- disregard this fool. You are fully within your rights to be safe in your own home. If there's ever any doubt just toss one of your kitchen knives by the body (also press their prints on it) before you call the cops.

Not that I believe the PPP's story. Even in DC you're not getting charged for killing a crackhead who entered your kitchen.

Anonymous wrote:Mugged on Capitol Hill. Moved to VA

LOL, was a victim of a home break-in and mugging in Fairfax. Have lived in DC for 22 years and never been the victim of any crime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

Balderdash. The victim may get only one chance. Once someone “wanders” into a dwelling they know they have no business entering, there is no reason to expect them to react anything but violently to a challenge.

I can guarantee you that when you have an intruder at 2am like I did, you simply don’t have the ability to determine whether you are at risk of great bodily injury or not. You just freak out — which is why every state should have castle law.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

Balderdash. The victim may get only one chance. Once someone “wanders” into a dwelling they know they have no business entering, there is no reason to expect them to react anything but violently to a challenge.

I can guarantee you that when you have an intruder at 2am like I did, you simply don’t have the ability to determine whether you are at risk of great bodily injury or not. You just freak out — which is why every state should have castle law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

DP. I'm not going to wait around to see if the person breaking into my home is going to attack me or my family first. I'm also going to assume that they have a weapon and I'm going to protect myself and my family accordingly. If you want to try to reason with the person to voluntarily leave your house, best of luck. Besides, you are legally within your rights to act in self-defense under such circumstances. PP's experience simply highlights how incompetent law enforcement is in this city.

You're free to do anything you want to defend yourself, but you will reap the consequences if you overstep your legal bounds.

And no, you are not necessarily legally within your rights to act in self defense under such circumstances. We have very little info about PP's circumstances, but the actual law in DC is:

You are entitled to claim self-defense:

(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and

(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.

You may use the amount of force which, at the time of the incident, you actually and reasonably believe is necessary to protect yourself (or a third person) from imminent bodily harm. This may extend to the use of deadly force if you actually and reasonably believe you are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which you can save yourself only by using deadly force against your assailant.

Even if the other person is the aggressor and you are justified in using force in self defense, you may not use any greater force than you actually and reasonably believe is necessary under the circumstances to prevent the harm you reasonably believe is intended or to save your life or avoid serious bodily harm.

Someone simply entering your home without your permission does NOT entitle you to self defense under DC law.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. But when the same person fails to retreat at the sight of an scared resident with a baseball bat, it certainly is reasonable to infer that the intruder was not merely coming in to remind someone that they left the door unlocked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

Balderdash. The victim may get only one chance. Once someone “wanders” into a dwelling they know they have no business entering, there is no reason to expect them to react anything but violently to a challenge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a guy who people have tried to mug on 3 different occasions over the last 25 years and all 3 times he has given the mugger/muggers the beat down. He is not particularly large or physically intimidating but is obviously very well trained in self defense. He has always noted that had any of his would be assailants been armed he would have complied with their requests. Since they were not, and, in at least the instance I observed, one of the attackers hit him, he let them have it. Not sure why I posted this here but it popped into my head when I saw the thread title.

Guns are so prevalent these days I'm not sure any criminals go to the effort of strong arm robbery.

You don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about. Street guns are expensive, may or may not come with ammunition, are significantly harder than you might think to conceal and (even in DC) can result in prosecution, including federal prosecution for possession by a felon.

Street robberies tend to be relatively impulsive, and the perpetrators rely on what they perceive to be their physical advantages, such as larger size and weight and greater strength. They not infrequently rely on strength of numbers as well. They also use weapons of opportunity (“hit in the head with a brick” is not just an expression.

Depending on how low any given street criminal has fallen economically or otherwise, a key reason they are unlikely to have a gun is that they pretty much don’t have anything except the clothes in their back, the rest having gone to the drug dealer, been stolen from them, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not in DC but my car was high jacked in Crystal City and driven into DC where it crashed into three cars and knocked one kid off the scooter It was basically totaled when I found it near Lincoln Park. The Arlington said they could not even write a report about it for insurance. The DC police never responded to call to look at the car. I had the car towed to the deal in Tyson's Corner who said it was totaled and the engine was blown because the kids drove it with the break on. Cost to replace the car was $52,000. Insurance paid for $30,000 -- the blue book value.

After that I stopped contributing to any charity that helped kids in DC, including a large annual contribution to Children's Hospital. They can rot for all I care.

Almost all of the kids in DC did not steal your car.

Nah, just lots of other people's cars. Our street in an alleged good neighborhood in NW had so much crime recently that we have been told by the police not to bother reporting it. We'll move as soon as last kid finishes private school. We work in Arlington so DC won't be necessary. My DH had an attempted carjack in DC but he slammed the door on the kid's hand and that stopped him from driving so that my DH could open the door and pull him out.

Are you seriously trying to argue that most kids that live in DC are criminals?

I did not use the word “almost all of the kids” and I did not use the term “most kids.” I recounted experience with someone who high jacked my car in Arlington and drove it into DC and the crime in our NW DC neighborhood along with my DH having an attempted high Jack. There are a large number of kids who live in DC and commit crime. Look at DC crime reports and crime reports from surrounding jurisdictions. Not sure if they are all kids but many crimes are committed by DC residents.

You wrote "after that, I stopped contributing to any charity that helped kids in DC They can rot for all I care"
Sort of implies that you believe all or most are criminals does it not?

Sounds like you are inferring what you want to force your narrative and fly high your woke banner.

I am a moderate conservative and far from being woke.
I can though recognize the ugliness and your thinly veiled racism in your "they can rot for all I care" quote.

No the assumption of the moderate conservative who alleges "thinly veiled racism" as opposed to the overt racism of one who considers the race of the perpetrators of crime.

Nice try. Read the exchange if you will .
Please stay fucused.
At no time did I bring up race.
You have.
Winner, winner, chicjken dinner

Anonymous wrote:I know a guy who people have tried to mug on 3 different occasions over the last 25 years and all 3 times he has given the mugger/muggers the beat down. He is not particularly large or physically intimidating but is obviously very well trained in self defense. He has always noted that had any of his would be assailants been armed he would have complied with their requests. Since they were not, and, in at least the instance I observed, one of the attackers hit him, he let them have it. Not sure why I posted this here but it popped into my head when I saw the thread title.

Guns are so prevalent these days I'm not sure any criminals go to the effort of strong arm robbery.

My house was broken into. My bike was stolen from the yard on a different occasion. And I was pick pocketed downtown.

Brick thrown through our front rowhouse window.

Car broken into and items stolen.

2 bikes stolen from locked storage area in back of our house.

Anonymous wrote:For any longtime resident the answer will be yes. Also many close calls.

I lived there for 8 years in NE, only a crime of opportunity our last day living in the house...left the garage door up (no actual garage) and some old suitcases we got for moving were stolen and the car rifled through. We did witness a car being stolen when it was left running (also a crime of opportunity).

I know a guy who people have tried to mug on 3 different occasions over the last 25 years and all 3 times he has given the mugger/muggers the beat down. He is not particularly large or physically intimidating but is obviously very well trained in self defense. He has always noted that had any of his would be assailants been armed he would have complied with their requests. Since they were not, and, in at least the instance I observed, one of the attackers hit him, he let them have it. Not sure why I posted this here but it popped into my head when I saw the thread title.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Break in of my English basement earlier this year in Shaw by one of the tent city dwellers . I went into to survival mode and hit the perp with a baseball bat and one of the times I got him in the face that sent him unconscious he fractured multiple bones in his face. The police charged me, the victim, with a felony and it wasn’t until I hired a lawyer that the prosecutors dropped the charges.

I'd like to know more about this. I have a hard time believing the city charged you for something like that.

Yeah, $10 says the "tent city dweller" wandered in through a door PP left open and PP whacked him in the face with a bat with no warning.

Obviously nobody should be entering homes that aren't theirs, but unless PP was attacked themselves without provocation, attacking them with a deadly weapon was not warranted. Make a nonviolent effort to get them out of your house, call the police, and let them handle it. Want to play vigilante, better be ready to accept the felony consequences.

DP. I'm not going to wait around to see if the person breaking into my home is going to attack me or my family first. I'm also going to assume that they have a weapon and I'm going to protect myself and my family accordingly. If you want to try to reason with the person to voluntarily leave your house, best of luck. Besides, you are legally within your rights to act in self-defense under such circumstances. PP's experience simply highlights how incompetent law enforcement is in this city.

You're free to do anything you want to defend yourself, but you will reap the consequences if you overstep your legal bounds.

And no, you are not necessarily legally within your rights to act in self defense under such circumstances. We have very little info about PP's circumstances, but the actual law in DC is:

You are entitled to claim self-defense:

(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and

(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.

You may use the amount of force which, at the time of the incident, you actually and reasonably believe is necessary to protect yourself (or a third person) from imminent bodily harm. This may extend to the use of deadly force if you actually and reasonably believe you are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm from which you can save yourself only by using deadly force against your assailant.

Even if the other person is the aggressor and you are justified in using force in self defense, you may not use any greater force than you actually and reasonably believe is necessary under the circumstances to prevent the harm you reasonably believe is intended or to save your life or avoid serious bodily harm.

Someone simply entering your home without your permission does NOT entitle you to self defense under DC law.