I suggest that you study the papers linked in Post 45 very carefully.
I suggest you reread what I wrote very closely.
I suggest that you study the papers linked in Post 45 very carefully.
I suggest you reread what I wrote very closely.
feel : to be aware of by instinct or inference b: believe , think <say what you really feel>intransitive verb
To Creature and OldMarksman: call me crazy but aren't you kind of saying the same thing. I think the operative words are feel or believe
Don't forget to throw into the mix that your "feeling" still must rise to a reasonable belief in most states. My daughter had a feeling there was somebody fighting with a dog on her deck last night, but there was nothing to raise that feeling to a reasonable belief.You have contended "If you FEEL that your life is being threatened, then you are within your rights to draw your weapon. And if you feel threatened enough, you are justified in shooting."
Creature said:Yep...he just hasnt figured that out yet.
feel : to be aware of by instinct or inference b: believe , think <say what you really feel>intransitive verb
Don't forget to throw into the mix that your "feeling" still must rise to a reasonable belief in most states.
You should not assume that you understand a criminal statute by
merely reading it. Courts determine the meaning of criminal statutes, and they sometimes do so with bizarre results. If a criminal statute is too
confusing, or if it conflicts with higher laws, such as the Constitution, the
courts may decide that the statute is ineffective, partially unenforceable or
wholly unenforceable. The legal principles used by the courts to interpret
the meaning of criminal statutes have evolved over centuries, and scholars argue endlessly over how the laws should be interpreted. In other words, you should not assume that you understand the meaning of a criminal law by simply reading a statute and attaching your own meaning or dictionary definitions to it.
You are walking through a shopping mall with your spouse, child or date, and three young males, wearing gang "colors," are walking toward you. As the three young males walk past you, one of them bumps your shoulder. He immediately turns, flashes a gang sign, "flips you the bird," and starts yelling at you. He uses more profanity than you have ever heard before, and he directs it at you and your spouse, child or date. You ignore him and start to walk away, but he and the other two young males follow. Now, You ignore him and start to walk away, but he and the other two, young, males follow. Now, they are all yelling at you and cursing you. They walk circles around you as you walk down the mall. They dare you to "step outside," and they graphically describe how they are going to "cut" you and your spouse, child or date. No one comes forward to help, and there are no security personnel or police in view. You are carrying a loaded pistol under your jacket. One of the young males approaches within two inches of your face and screams that he is going to kill you. KEEP YOUR COOL! If you pull your gun and shoot, you will not be justified. Until you are threatened with imminent death or serious physical injury, you cannot use deadly force. Do not display your gun - that is aggravated assault. Do not tell the youths that you are armed - that gives away a tactical advantage (surprise) and may cause the situation to escalate. Even if one of the youths shoves you, keep your cool and your balance! Rather than letting the anger build, start planning "what if." Plan what you will do if one of the youths pulls a knife, if one pulls a gun, if more than one pulls knives or guns, if one produces a club, etc. ... Maximize your distance from the youths. ... Even if one of the youths shoves you, keep your cool and your balance! Rather than letting the anger build, start planning "what if." Plan what you will do if one of the youths pulls a knife, if one pulls a gun, if more than one pulls knives or guns, if one produces a club, etc. Think it through and look for tactical advantage. What escape routes are available? What cover is available? Which of the youths is closest? Keep a clear view of all three youths! Maximize your distance from the youths. ... Can you use deadly force without hitting someone else; if so, how do you need to improve your position; if not, can you move into a position where use of deadly force and risk of harm to bystanders is minimized? In short, think, plan and stay cool, but remember that mere words never justify the use of deadly force.
You're missing that it all depends on who is actually doing the threatening. You would be drawing your weapon because you are feeling threatened with imminent bodily harm or death.
I love it! So, basically, unless I'm wrong (which is always a big possibility), what a law says may or may not have anything to do with what the law means. That just makes me laugh. What in the world is the point of even having written laws? Basically, a bunch of lawyers (lawmakers) have gotten together (when they make and interpret laws) and simply provided themselves some job security (by requiring citizens to consult a lawyer about each and every single law that they wish to understand). If that were not enough, consultations must be made periodically, since the meaning of each and every single law is subject to change at any time. This sounds like a scheme to me. It is our responsibility to follow the law anyway, I'm just saying that the system frustrates, and sometimes infuriates, me.OldMarksman said:You should not assume that you understand a criminal statute by
merely reading it. Courts determine the meaning of criminal statutes, and they sometimes do so with bizarre results. If a criminal statute is too
confusing, or if it conflicts with higher laws, such as the Constitution, the
courts may decide that the statute is ineffective, partially unenforceable or
wholly unenforceable. The legal principles used by the courts to interpret
the meaning of criminal statutes have evolved over centuries, and scholars argue endlessly over how the laws should be interpreted. In other words, you should not assume that you understand the meaning of a criminal law by simply reading a statute and attaching your own meaning or dictionary definitions to it.
So, basically, unless I'm wrong (which is always a big possibility), what a law says may or may not have anything to do with what the law means.
What in the world is the point of even having written laws?
If that were not enough, consultations must be made periodically, since the meaning of each and every single law is subject to change at any time.
I would say that the presence of multiple individuals, when threatening you at the proper level and in the proper manner, would allow you to respond with the use of a firearm.