Agreed. The problem for me is once you pull the trigger, its going to be left up to the opinion of others if you were justified. With todays stigma against firearms, it "might" be a difficult ride and it shouldn't be.
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Story time. Lesson learned.
- Thread starter Backin1775
- Start date
Agreed. The problem for me is once you pull the trigger, its going to be left up to the opinion of others if you were justified. With todays stigma against firearms, it "might" be a difficult ride and it shouldn't be.
Despite how I was often misquoted in this thread, Georgia is a really good state when it comes to “defending your home”. As a SME, Instructor, and LEO, I don’t give my personal thoughts on the matter out very often, I simply cite state law and advise folks to stay within the lane.
That is up to you, and will vary from person to person. The code section states:
A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other's imminent use of unlawful force; however, except as provided in Code Section 16-3-23, a person is justified in using force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm 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.
So, if you reasonably believe that using deadly force is required on your part to protect yourself or a third party from death or serious bodily injury, you’re good to go.
Deadly force does not require physical contact, or a set distance. If you reasonably believe that using deadly force is required on your part to protect yourself or a third party from death or serious bodily injury, you’re good to go.
Can we just go ahead and close this thread 
Everyone wants a "bright line".
There just isn't one. The statute speaks in terms of a "reasonable belief", and a "threat" - what is "reasonable" is VERY VERY fact specific, and this is the rock on which this discussion inevitably founders.
I'm old and have two bad knees. I can't run away from a three year old. You get in my face and threaten bodily harm, I will try to advise to consider your life choices, but any beyond that, any overt act or words that threaten bodily harm to me will get you shot.
There is a whole list of factors the courts allow to be used to determine "reasonable" - the relative size of the parties, there age, what implements were used or threatened to be used, where did the confrontation take place, what words were said and the context - did those words create a reasonable fear in one party AT THAT TIME. In other words (see what I did there) language that may create a reasonable fear in a certain context, may not be deemed to create that fear in another context.
There is no "bright line".
Exactly! And all of these factors will be judged by others after the fact using 20/20 hindsight. That's why I say not to judge when to pull the trigger based only on legalities, but rather, on the absolute legitimate need to.
And I agree with both of your post. That said, since there is no line in the sand, what you consider reasonable cause 12 others may not.
If you hesitant wondering if you think you are truly in danger then, you may very well be.
Do you yell GET OUT OFF MY HOUSE? do you call 911 as soon as you hear a noise or do you wait to confirm it isnt a shampoo bottle? Im hoping I dont have to go through this ever but, my basic plan is the bedroom door. They can have the entire house but once the bedroom door is compromised, its game on.
If its a forced entry while im in the living room and Ive no time to get to the bedroom, its instant game on. Hopefully Ive got a weapon near me at that time. Usually 50/50 and I need to improve that.
