Looks like to me he's just giving you a little taste of what you may be in for if the time comes where you must testify in your defense. Lots of differences of opinions here, just trying to sort it all out. Looks like the OP did the right thing imo.
-
ODT Gun Show this Saturday! - Click here for info and tickets!
Man on your property
- Thread starter zracin
- Start date
Looks like to me he's just giving you a little taste of what you may be in for if the time comes where you must testify in your defense. Lots of differences of opinions here, just trying to sort it all out. Looks like the OP did the right thing imo.
And then you go to jail. That's just the way it is. Saying the law is wrong simply is not going to do you any good when you are on trial. The court will not care.
I love threads like this. A lot great points being made that most folks dont think about, educational!
Because of your condition you would be completely justified. It is not your responsibility to let the attacker know about your condition and it is clear disparity of force. However, a person without this type of situation can not use deadly force because they don't know the capabilities of another person of seemingly equal physical ability. You KNOW you are at a disadvantage, but all else being equal a person can not assume someone HAS an advantage.
Dude, you really need to read the OP.
Honestly, we can scenario this to death. Whose to say what we would do until we are actualy put in that kind of position. There are so many factors that can sway it one way or the other. It is good to discuss it but to argue about it or criticize another for what he says he would do isn't the best way to discuss it. I really wouldn't consider a debate.
A scenario example: say the person coming at me would not stop coming toward me and on that very day, I lost my job and my girlfriend, and my car was stolen etc etc. I probably would empty a mag into his azz and reload and do it again, then stomp his face off, etc. On the other hand, say I had won the Lottery for $25 million the night before, I would probably go inside and call 911. There are just so many variables and scenarios that could or would or should happen.
With that being said, it would probably be in the thug's best interest not to take any chances at my house, LOL
A scenario example: say the person coming at me would not stop coming toward me and on that very day, I lost my job and my girlfriend, and my car was stolen etc etc. I probably would empty a mag into his azz and reload and do it again, then stomp his face off, etc. On the other hand, say I had won the Lottery for $25 million the night before, I would probably go inside and call 911. There are just so many variables and scenarios that could or would or should happen.
With that being said, it would probably be in the thug's best interest not to take any chances at my house, LOL
Last edited:
These condition do not present the legal justifications needed for use of deadly force. It's that simple. Deal with it......or not. You'll be the one sharing a cell with Bubba when there may not have been a real threat to you.
BTW, fear is not justification. A person's emotional state has nothing to do with it.
Many years ago I found myself in a situation where there was a corrupt cop (not in this country) that may have been given orders to kill me standing next to my restaurant table with his partner. I was scared to death. I was also locked and loaded with a weapon pointing at him under the table. If fear was justification, this guy would have been dead right then. Because I knew fear did NOT constitute justification, I am not already dead or on death row now.
Last edited:
Read it came to my own conclusion just like you did. We just disagree on how to handle it, I hope I never am in a situation where I feel I need to use deadly force. I have avoided all problems I have had thus far. I have repoed, hung out in the wrong parts of town, stopped at shady gas stations in ATL at 3 am and have had problems. I have found that showing you are not afraid and will take action quickly resolves issues, action does not mean pulling a gun. You do what you do, I will take care of me thanks for your input.
Defense from a forcible felony; A person is justified in using threats or force to the degree they reasonably believe it is necessary to stop another person's imminent use of unlawful force. A person is justified in using deadly force which may harm or kill only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury to himself or herself or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony (unless it is regarding defense of habitation, which has it's own requirements below). You are not justified if you were the aggressor or you are/were/on-the-way-to committing a felony. (The state has pre-empted local cities and counties from further restricting this defense.)
- - - Updated - - -
Am I interrupting this wrong or something?
That belief must be reasonable and a jury must believe it. More importantly, what forceable felony was stated in the OP?
