Quote:
Originally Posted by EricOKC
I'll answer that directly rather than allow conjecture.
Given the same situation as Steve, my response would be exactly the same. The moment I saw weapons, and realized we were targeted, the gun would be out and ready. If they saw it and continued coming, things would get noisy.
Considering the circumstances as given, there would be no other choice. Considering the laws as written, I would have nothing to fear in the way of prosecution. I would be 100% in the right legally, ethically and morally.
I still fail to see where you have an issue with my position. A person should be responsible for his actions, a gun IS merely a tool (if you don't think it is, what on earth would you call it? A weapon is still a tool.) and yes, some people simply do need killing - and the four in question in Steve's situation most certainly DID need killing.
|
Well this is where it comes unstuck. Steve didn’t think all four needed killing. In fact he states “The main intent in using deadly force is not to kill a person, but to stop them...”
So it again supports my argument that within a sample of just four gun owners there is no consensus on exactly how a situation should be handled and what level of situation needs handling with lethal force.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
If my wife or son or friend put themselves in a position where someone felt compelled to shoot them, I'd question not only the actions of the shooter, byt also of my loved one...
|
But if they were dealt with harshly by mistake could you still be so dismissive? Of course not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
It's not ridiculous at all...
|
You have no idea of what circumstance are prevailing. By that statement you assume every confrontation is a lethal one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Why?
|
Because assailants with knives do not always have guns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
You have this nifty little habit of "iffing" something into the ground. Well, what if the assailant wanted to rape his girlfriend and then cut her throat?
|
And you have a nifty habit of thinking everything will manifest itself in the most violent of outcomes. There are infinite circumstances and possible outcomes depending on what the threat is and how the threat is dealt with. Sometimes innocent people will get hurt or killed but they may still end up that way whether they are armed or not. The good guy with the gun doesn’t always win. It guarantees nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Vary from what?
|
From what level of threat they perceive from a given encounter and from what level of reaction they deem justified. So you have millions of armed people running around making ad hoc decisions based on their own perceptions of what is a threat and how lethally they need to deal with it. Could be anything from being cut off in the traffic to being surrounded by 20 drug fucked gang bangers. Not my idea of civilisation. And I don’t want to rely on others deciding what level of threat I present to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
You'll face an impossible task convincing anyone who's ever used a gun to defend themselves of that...
|
No argument there but that is irrelevant to the discussion.