When is it justified to use a gun in self defense?

[BamaAla]

I think you're opening yourself up for more problems.

I've played in basketball games where an accidental bump leads to elbows flying and eventually fists. It's never escalated beyond that and usually by the end we all have a beer. Anyone who introduced a gun in that situation is a murderer in my mind.

I can't speak for Acala, but it seems as if he was talking about an attack rather than some form of mutual combat that we might run into on a playground pick-up game.

 

[BlackTerrel]

I can't speak for Acala, but it seems as if he was talking about an attack rather than some form of mutual combat that we might run into on a playground pick-up game.

Reading it again I may have misunderstood. If that is the case then I agree.

 

[Pericles]

I voted "other". If someone is coming at you with a deadly weapon other than a gun (such as a knife or a bat) using a gun is justified. And any time someone starts a physical altercation? What's the definition of physical altercation? Let's look at the "MoveOn.org" lady that "assaulted" Rand Paul with a sign. Justified use of deadly force? How about the Ron Paul supporters that threw snowballs as Sean Hannity. That's definitely a physical altercation. And it could be deadly. One of those snowballs could have had a hidden rock inside. Had Hannity's security used their guns would that have been justified?

Anyway, every situation is different. That's why "hard fast rules" often cause more problems than they solve.

I agree +rep

 

[WilliamC]

Ill take it one step further. Im willing to use lethal force to protect not only my life and liberty, but also my property. If someone breaks into my house, they better pray Im not home, because I will shoot to kill. If they want to break into my car at nighttime, to steal my GPS... I will shoot to kill, and in Texas I will be legally justified in so doing. Maybe we get into some gray area if some 13 year old kids wanted to spraypaint my house. I would probably give them a warning the first time, and if they dont leave shoot them, and definitely shoot them if they come back a 2nd time.

Its nice to live in a country with the right to bear arms, but really any lethal force will do if you dont have a firearm handy. If you are willing to shoot someone, then the implication is that you are willing to take their life. If I didn't have a firearm, I would use an axe, or a baseball bat or chainsaw to defend my property.

Unless the property in question is a matter of life and death to you then you are a dangerous person.

I agree no one should take your stuff, but stuff is stuff and usually not worth killing over.

Especially young children, no matter how poor their upbringing.

I'd far rather someone steal my car from my driveway with me watching them drive off than kill the thief, my car just isn't worth killing for.

Threat to property is not the same as threat to life, and for you to value your non-essential property more than another persons life is kinda sad

Note, if you're talking about property needed to keep you alive then that's different.

If I steal your food that you can't easily replace and make it likely for you to starve then by all means that's different than stealing patio furniture to sell for scrap metal, for instance.

 

[eduardo89]

Edit: And self defense law doesn't require you to stand their and "absorb the first blow" either. If Zimmerman "merely" raised a fist at Trayvon, that is the legal definition of assault even thoughbecause there was no actual harm done. But in defending yourself you are supposed to use a reasonable amount of force in response.

Fixed.

Assault never involves any physical contact. If there is physical contact it is no longer assault, it is then battery.

In law, assault is a crime which involves causing a victim to fear violence. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact.

 

[AFPVet]

Fixed.

Assault never involves any physical contact. If there is physical contact it is no longer assault, it is then battery.

It depends on the state. In some states, like mine, there is no such thing as "assault"... only "battery"; however, some states treat battery as assault, or as something less than battery—as you have stated. It all depends.

 

[Acala]

I think you're opening yourself up for more problems.

I've played in basketball games where an accidental bump leads to elbows flying and eventually fists. It's never escalated beyond that and usually by the end we all have a beer. Anyone who introduced a gun in that situation is a murderer in my mind.

It can be a tough call at the margin as to who got physical first. But I hold to my position that the first person who intentionally initiates a physical attack has assumed the risk that things are not going to turn out well for him.

Just to complicate things a bit more, given your scenario, suppose the physical contact in the game that turns into punching, then turns into one guy putting the other guy in a stranglehold and proceeds to choke him out. Does the guy being choked out get to pull a gun and use it?

 

[libertarian4321]

This is in response to a discussion I am having in another thread regarding the Trayvon Martin case. We already have enough threads about that topic so let's keep that discussion out of this and keep it hypothetical.

I have always operated under the assumption that the person who introduces the weapon is at fault and you cannot kill someone and claim self defense against an unarmed man. Meaning if we are involved in a fist fight - even if I started the fight and even if I am winning - you cannot shoot and kill me and claim self defense - that this would be murder.

You do realize that fists can kill, right?

If person A attacks person B with his fists, person B has the right to defend himself, including with a gun.

Is person B expected to just sit there and take a potentially lethal beating?

That's absurd.

Oh, and I'd like to add that anytime some thug breaks into your home, you have every right to remove him from the gene pool, whether he has a gun or not.