Posted on 06/08/2015 4:16:30 AM PDT by don-o
Justification for Using Deadly Force Can Be Lost
“Even though a person is justified in threatening or using force or deadly force against another in self defense or defense of others or property as described in the statute, if in doing so he also recklessly injures or kills an innocent third person, the justification for deadly force is unavailable.”
“A person acts recklessly when he is aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk with respect to the circumstances surrounding his conduct or the results of his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation of the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise, viewed from the person’s standpoint under all the circumstances existing at the time.”
http://www.self-defender.net/law3.htm
Inquiring minds want to know if the Grand Jury will be fully apprised of this section of the law?
Just adding my support to both of your statements.
Many “conservatives” have a severe case of cognitive dissonance when it comes to cops. Unions are bad; unless they are cop unions. The government can’t do anything right; except the cops who are the physical manifestation of government.
Is THAT the only thing you can come up with?
Birds of a feather, ring a bell for ya? How about “lie down with dogs, get up with fleas”?
How many of your poor little 115 (only ID’d by Liberty’s good friends, the AP) were carrying a weapon? How many of your 115, that were armed had a CHL?
Really? It's the West. Everyone is 'carrying a weapon'.
Trolls are slow in waking this morning.
That is partially true and often is good sense, but when you are carrying without the required CHL and are at or involved, even peripherally, in a shooting incident, you are very likely to be charged.
Texas does allow concealed carry without CHL, but not on your person and primarily OK in your car or in a hotel room. Probably similar if not more lenient than Montana.
Whether or not all agree on CHL, at least in Texas it is a good tool to filter out those that really should not be armed, for the public’s safety (such as Twin Peaks).
I got to thinking about that weapons number... 300 ‘weapons’, 170 guys...
Right now I have (on my person) a penknife, a locking folding knife, and a multi-tool... I don’t think that is uncommon...
You don’t uses a wallet chain, I assume.
You are assuming 'weapons' are firearms. No doubt there were some... but I think that yours is an over-broad assumption. As I said directly above, I am 'carrying' three 'weapons' on me at this very minute.
Texas does allow concealed carry without CHL, but not on your person and primarily OK in your car or in a hotel room. Probably similar if not more lenient than Montana.
Open carry is legal here in MT. CCW (concealed) requires a permit (even for knives longer than 5 1/2"), although not always, as winter coats and etc are allowed for.
Whether or not all agree on CHL, at least in Texas it is a good tool to filter out those that really should not be armed, for the public’s safety (such as Twin Peaks).
Of course, I disagree entirely. What makes a weapon is intent, not possession. But then, I believe in the Constitution, the DOI, and stuff like that.
LOL!... naw... But a lot of Bikers do...
Rally fizziled ...
“Several bikers Sunday morning expressed concern for those still in jail.”
“Curious how the media handles numbers.”
Yes. First it was 500 bikers at the rally. Then 1000!
Viewing the videos and photos ... maybe 150?
Article says “Several bikers Sunday morning expressed concern for those still in jail.”
I see the boot licking troll woke up...
Nice!
As soon as the new barrels have been 'broken in'...Were those arms been sequestered pending ballistics testing and the outcome of the investigation?
Site off-line
The site is currently not available due to technical problems. Please try again later. Thank you for your understanding.
Hmmmm, Joe. Ya spooked ‘em.
As soon as the new barrels have been ‘broken in’...Were those arms been sequestered pending ballistics testing and the outcome of the investigation?
*****************************************************************************************************
Perhaps the local Waco authorities gave the on-scene sniper rifles to the BATF for “safekeeping”. :^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.