Wrong answer again. You can't use deadly force against someone who you "feel' MAY have a weapon and "could" harm you. Read my post above for the legal requirements.64zebra wrote:---I guess I should feel sorry for someone that has broken into my house and that I feel may have a weapon and could harm megigag04 wrote:The "21 ft" rule (I'll spare you the proper name) applies in situations where your weapon is not at the ready and an attacker is armed with a knife. If you are investigating something suspisious with a holstered/unready weapon then you need a better plan of action.64zebra wrote:Whether I see a weapon in his hand or not, the 21ft rule applies in my house and on the street so if he makes a bad move its over with.
---I know about the 21 foot rule, thats why I mentioned it, point being that if someone is in my house that close that they can close the distance to me with a blunt object/blade/etc really quickly and I'll have to be prepared for that
Have fun in court. What if its your son's friend who is running from something dangerous? I could list many more "what ifs" that would get you in a heap of trouble with this mindset. Just read all the horror stories on people that acted without proper threat identification. Charles even has one (a certain shirt attack). This quoted statement is rediculous and gives me the impression you are irresponsible. It isn't your fault you shot someone you shouldn't have - they MADE YOU feel threatened...even if in ignorance.64zebra wrote: If they end up being unarmed then so be it, they shouldn't have broken into my house in the first place and made me feel threatened.
I'm not trying to pick a fight, but you really need to reconsider this point because the ramifications of this can be huge and even endager people's lives.
-nick
He was not cleared beause the guy gave the "impression" of anything. In that situation, the Trooper reasonably believed that the person was attempting to use deadly force against him, and he reasonably believed that deadly force was immediately necessary to stop the persons unlawful use of deadly force.ex: unarmed man that was shot by a DPS trooper here in town recently, guy made a threatening move that gave the impression he was armed and he got shot in the head, grand jury cleared the trooper;
You SHOULD protect your family. However, your statements here give rise to the appearance that you are unaware of the law and a little too anxious to drop the hammer on somone.listen, I'm not looking for trouble from anyone, I am a responsible person and firearms owner and there is no need to continue this little disagreement if you're going to say my reasons for defending myself are ridiculous,
I have an opinion about defending myself and I think everyone out there should too
---I don't think my statement is ridiculous at all, I'm just a man that will protect himself and his family
Making blanket statements that you would do this or that under vague and what will be dynamically changing situations leads us to that conclusion, and it will limit your ability to think on your feet and evaluate the situation as it unfolds in front of you.
If you see a weapon and the person does anything that you believe could harm you or your family, deadly force is certainly an option. However, I believe it is irresponsible to state things like "if he makes on wrong move its over".
I am a former cop, a current CHL and DPS private security firearms instructor. I attend MANY shooting schools. There is nothing macho about being too anxious to use deadly force. I pray that I am never again faced with being forced to use deadly force. If I DO have to use it, it will be because the other person left me NO other option.
Here is a tip from the CHL test;
Deadly Force shoud be used as____________________.
last resort
Be safe
