There is something I have been pondering for a while. The standard for using deadly force in self defence is that that it must be against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.
But that seems to indicate that one could not use deadly force in a situation that guarantees major (but not serious) bodily injury and has a some non-zero probability of causing death or serious bodily injury. That seems to indicate a firearm wielder might have to accept catching a beatdown while armed?
How do you interpret it? For example, what percentage chance do you think amounts to imminent threat? How does a reasonable person resolve this data driven question without data?
But that seems to indicate that one could not use deadly force in a situation that guarantees major (but not serious) bodily injury and has a some non-zero probability of causing death or serious bodily injury. That seems to indicate a firearm wielder might have to accept catching a beatdown while armed?
How do you interpret it? For example, what percentage chance do you think amounts to imminent threat? How does a reasonable person resolve this data driven question without data?
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/3nvLGkS
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire