I don't think there would have been much of a problem due to the difference in age between the two. Also, we don't know the physical differences, but would presume that anybody that mean, probably isn't a 90-lb weakling. Note the BG seems to prefer "aggravated" robbery.dubya wrote: Edit: I read the linked newstory (surprising how much detail was there). Looks like you tangled with a serious criminal.
I don't think it's drifting off topic since the crime is the topic here; I am not sure I remember the consensus on deadly force for this type of attack. This is probably good to go since it is behind Charlie's house. But, it was day time. And, what if it was a different location. I don't know if we can answer this question in this same thread without drifting but do we believe deadly force would be justified here?
Search found 1 match
Return to “robbed wasn't armed”
- Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:41 pm
- Forum: Never Again!!
- Topic: robbed wasn't armed
- Replies: 72
- Views: 12835