Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mlo

You are incorrect. Deadly force may be used in a very broad sense, at least in sane jurisdictions. There is no way the intentions of another can be telepathically determined; all we can go off of is a persons actions and the context of these actions. Some unknown invader IN YOUR DWELLING, IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT, is well beyond any reasonable person’s boundary of being a treat.


73 posted on 02/13/2015 9:20:47 AM PST by fwdude (The last time the GOP ran an "extremist," Reagan won 44 states.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: fwdude
"You are incorrect. Deadly force may be used in a very broad sense, at least in sane jurisdictions. There is no way the intentions of another can be telepathically determined; all we can go off of is a persons actions and the context of these actions. Some unknown invader IN YOUR DWELLING, IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT, is well beyond any reasonable person’s boundary of being a treat."

Go back and read what I wrote again. I was specifically addressing self-defense, not any situation in which force can be used. The claim I responded to was your life doesn't have to be threatened to *defend yourself with deadly force*. There may be other situations in which force is authorized, but if the claim is self-defense then yes, your life does have to be threatened.

114 posted on 02/13/2015 9:59:18 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson