Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Shooting on Brookside
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tRidiot" data-source="post: 979656" data-attributes="member: 9374"><p>I feel fairly confident in my ability to convince a jury that the fist of an adult male attacker could be considered deadly enough to be in fear of death or great bodily harm.</p><p></p><p>Plenty of cases out there where trained martial artists or even lucky drunks have felled a person and even killed them with a single punch. That one punch could be enough to incapacitate me (or any person in the right circumstances). I find it unreasonable for the state to expect me to risk that kind of circumstance to protect the life of an aggressor against me, given that I have little or no knowledge of their physical fitness, history of violent behavior, level of training in hand-to-hand combat or attitude toward beating a man to death once incapacitated.</p><p></p><p>I'm not making an argument for blasting away at anyone who threatens you, but a determined attacker, armed or not, is to my belief, a threat to my life, not just my well-being or pride. I have personally seen the aftereffects of people beaten by only fists, and I'd say it's pretty easy to construe great bodily harm, or at least the fear of it.</p><p></p><p>I do understand where you're coming from, but again... I'd rather do just about anything than to hesitate at the wrong instant for fear of legal consequences and end up losing my life. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tRidiot, post: 979656, member: 9374"] I feel fairly confident in my ability to convince a jury that the fist of an adult male attacker could be considered deadly enough to be in fear of death or great bodily harm. Plenty of cases out there where trained martial artists or even lucky drunks have felled a person and even killed them with a single punch. That one punch could be enough to incapacitate me (or any person in the right circumstances). I find it unreasonable for the state to expect me to risk that kind of circumstance to protect the life of an aggressor against me, given that I have little or no knowledge of their physical fitness, history of violent behavior, level of training in hand-to-hand combat or attitude toward beating a man to death once incapacitated. I'm not making an argument for blasting away at anyone who threatens you, but a determined attacker, armed or not, is to my belief, a threat to my life, not just my well-being or pride. I have personally seen the aftereffects of people beaten by only fists, and I'd say it's pretty easy to construe great bodily harm, or at least the fear of it. I do understand where you're coming from, but again... I'd rather do just about anything than to hesitate at the wrong instant for fear of legal consequences and end up losing my life. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
Competition, Tactics & Training
Self Defense & Handgun Carry
Shooting on Brookside
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom