Attempted Quad Theft!
#51
10-12-1999, 10:46 PM
#52
10-12-1999, 11:28 PM
DreamofPolaris, I believe voltage, not current, produces electric shock.
A stock prod, for example, yields very low amperage from a few D-cells; however, its high voltage (transformed from a few volts) persuades reluctant cows to change their direction very quickly.
Similarly, a Taser, a non-lethal "stun-gun," delivers very low amperage from its batteries whose voltage is transformed to a high level. Yet this high-voltage, low-current device can immobilize a determined assailant. A similar device is used sometimes to control misbehaving defendants in courtrooms.
Further, the spark from a spark plug on your ATV or your automobile, while high voltage, is very low amperage, but it'll sure enough shock you. I won't go into the solid-state ignitions of today, but the points-and-coil of yesteryear involved 12 volts at low current (through about 16 gauge wire) into the coil's primary circuit, interrupted by the points into pulsating DC, transformed to high (thousands) of volts by the coil's secondary winding (jillions of turns of thin, thin, thin wire, incapable of carrying high amperage), into a spark that will fire a plug or give you a good shock.
Now, if you're talking ELECTROCUTION, instead of SHOCKING, you've got a point. But high voltage, low-amperage "juice" can shock you.
As to it being legal to shoot someone in Texas IN DEFENSE OF PROPERTY ONLY, ask your mother, the lawyer, about this again. I would think one must perceive some physical threat to legally use deadly force. Anyway, are you comfortable carrying out the death sentence on someone for attempting to steal your quad when no self defense is involved? When my ATV was stolen (twice), I was angry, sure; but not to the point I was willing to kill someone.
Nevertheless, please share a few words from the Texas statute authorizing taking a life for theft of property.
Tree Farmer
A stock prod, for example, yields very low amperage from a few D-cells; however, its high voltage (transformed from a few volts) persuades reluctant cows to change their direction very quickly.
Similarly, a Taser, a non-lethal "stun-gun," delivers very low amperage from its batteries whose voltage is transformed to a high level. Yet this high-voltage, low-current device can immobilize a determined assailant. A similar device is used sometimes to control misbehaving defendants in courtrooms.
Further, the spark from a spark plug on your ATV or your automobile, while high voltage, is very low amperage, but it'll sure enough shock you. I won't go into the solid-state ignitions of today, but the points-and-coil of yesteryear involved 12 volts at low current (through about 16 gauge wire) into the coil's primary circuit, interrupted by the points into pulsating DC, transformed to high (thousands) of volts by the coil's secondary winding (jillions of turns of thin, thin, thin wire, incapable of carrying high amperage), into a spark that will fire a plug or give you a good shock.
Now, if you're talking ELECTROCUTION, instead of SHOCKING, you've got a point. But high voltage, low-amperage "juice" can shock you.
As to it being legal to shoot someone in Texas IN DEFENSE OF PROPERTY ONLY, ask your mother, the lawyer, about this again. I would think one must perceive some physical threat to legally use deadly force. Anyway, are you comfortable carrying out the death sentence on someone for attempting to steal your quad when no self defense is involved? When my ATV was stolen (twice), I was angry, sure; but not to the point I was willing to kill someone.
Nevertheless, please share a few words from the Texas statute authorizing taking a life for theft of property.
Tree Farmer
#53
10-13-1999, 09:57 AM
I knew someone would tell me I'm wrong so I came up with a simple answer.
First of all, voltage can't shock you because it doesn't move. I too have been shocked by ignition systems, and it hurts! But, that takes thousands of volts at a low amperage. Voltage is merely a force that causes current to flow. Since a human is an insulator, it takes quite a bit of voltage to get current to flow through our bodies. But what hurts is the current, the strength of the shock. You are correct however, the reason that stun-guns are non-lethal is because they are such low amperage. It takes at least 100 mA to kill someone.
As far as the laws in Texas, don't you watch TV? There was a man in Texas who pulled a high-powered rifle from his cabinet and shot a tow-truck driver in the back of his head because he was trying to re-po his truck. When the case went to court, no charges were filed because in the state of Texas, he committed no crime. No threat to life, just taking a truck that he hadn't payed for. Brutal? Maybe. But that's the law for you!
------------------
Want a Magnum or Sportsman 500!!!
First of all, voltage can't shock you because it doesn't move. I too have been shocked by ignition systems, and it hurts! But, that takes thousands of volts at a low amperage. Voltage is merely a force that causes current to flow. Since a human is an insulator, it takes quite a bit of voltage to get current to flow through our bodies. But what hurts is the current, the strength of the shock. You are correct however, the reason that stun-guns are non-lethal is because they are such low amperage. It takes at least 100 mA to kill someone.
As far as the laws in Texas, don't you watch TV? There was a man in Texas who pulled a high-powered rifle from his cabinet and shot a tow-truck driver in the back of his head because he was trying to re-po his truck. When the case went to court, no charges were filed because in the state of Texas, he committed no crime. No threat to life, just taking a truck that he hadn't payed for. Brutal? Maybe. But that's the law for you!
------------------
Want a Magnum or Sportsman 500!!!
#54
10-13-1999, 10:26 AM
Thanks for your comments, DreamofPolaris.
I thought electrical power flow involved BOTH voltage, analogous to pressure; and current, analogous to volume; in a fluid flow analogy.
Also, I thought a human was a conductor of varying resistance, instead of an "insulator" as you state. I think I'll play this one as a conductor, staying away from those wires, mislabeled though they may be (i.e., "DANGER! HIGH VOLTAGE!").
Where are you studying electronics?
Tree Farmer
[This message has been edited by Tree Farmer (edited 10-13-1999).]
I thought electrical power flow involved BOTH voltage, analogous to pressure; and current, analogous to volume; in a fluid flow analogy.
Also, I thought a human was a conductor of varying resistance, instead of an "insulator" as you state. I think I'll play this one as a conductor, staying away from those wires, mislabeled though they may be (i.e., "DANGER! HIGH VOLTAGE!").
Where are you studying electronics?
Tree Farmer
[This message has been edited by Tree Farmer (edited 10-13-1999).]
#55
10-13-1999, 03:23 PM
Each of you should check your state laws regarding self-defense. In Texas it is legal to use deadly force to protect your personal property. The information below came from the Texas Penal Code Chapter 9 "Selected Deadly Force Statues"
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
9.41.Protection of one's own property.
(a) A person is lawful possession of land or tangible, moveable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
9.42.Deadly force to protect property.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary;
(a) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime: or
(b) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime form escaping with to property;
To all the would be thieves- stealing an ATV in Texas (is it worth your LIFE?)
[This message has been edited by TXwarrior (edited 10-14-1999).]
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
9.41.Protection of one's own property.
(a) A person is lawful possession of land or tangible, moveable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.
9.42.Deadly force to protect property.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary;
(a) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime: or
(b) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime form escaping with to property;
To all the would be thieves- stealing an ATV in Texas (is it worth your LIFE?)
[This message has been edited by TXwarrior (edited 10-14-1999).]
#56
10-13-1999, 04:28 PM
#57
10-16-1999, 12:54 AM
#58
10-16-1999, 12:59 AM
#60
10-19-1999, 05:26 AM
DreamofPolaris, no one said you were wrong about Texas' deadly force laws protecting property; I merely said I thought some threat must be involved, asking for a citation. You referred me to a TV show, TXwarrior provided the actual statute.
The Texas law places a high value on property rights. While some interpretation is required, e.g., deadly force may be used "when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary; . . . ," looks like deadly force may be used in defense of property in Texas, to a layman like me.
Still, while I own property in Texas, I cannot imagine taking a human life over theft alone, when no threat of death or serious injury to the innocent is present.
Best wishes in your electronic studies, and I hope you get your Polaris (and helmet!) soon.
Tree Farmer
[This message has been edited by Tree Farmer (edited 10-19-1999).]
The Texas law places a high value on property rights. While some interpretation is required, e.g., deadly force may be used "when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary; . . . ," looks like deadly force may be used in defense of property in Texas, to a layman like me.
Still, while I own property in Texas, I cannot imagine taking a human life over theft alone, when no threat of death or serious injury to the innocent is present.
Best wishes in your electronic studies, and I hope you get your Polaris (and helmet!) soon.
Tree Farmer
[This message has been edited by Tree Farmer (edited 10-19-1999).]