Ive got close to 10 years of combat sports under my belt. I still dont see any fucking point to forcing people to give someone attacking them a fair fight.
Exacting what they want, sadly. Only 6 companies own legacy media and they are either corrupt or being extorted in so many areas by corrupt govt agencies doing business for lobbyists
But still, don't stay to fight the danger. If you can always get away from the danger, they will try and find something for crossing the line of self-defense. A 72 year old person maybe can't put herself/himself out of danger, but a younger person can. It's the same as if someone is in your yard and wants to harm you or your family. You can pull the gun in self-defense but can't shoot them if they aren't hurting someones. Just tell them to leave or call the police.
Ty! I've got 100+ hours of law studies under my belt. Your statement < "Attorneys don't know the law" > is GOLD. We need state laws that say the 12-person jury or Bench trial Judge must be informed in writing of the law that was violated word for word.
A punch in the head or a grapple that throws someone into oncoming traffic are quite lethal. You can't use x-ray vision to look into someone's pockets to confirm that they don't have a knife or gun of their own. When a dude rocks up to me and starts throwing hands, i have every right, justification, and reasonable assumption to treat that physical assault as potentially deadly force, and i should be able to respond in kind. I'm no martial artist, I've never taken advanced self defense training, and even if i had the potential presence of a knife causes my odds of survival to drop DRAMATICALLY regardless of any krav-maga-special-forces nonsense i might employ, and im not going to face down a jury and a prosecutor that tells me it would have been more responsible to learn a martial art than take a gun class. Bare fists are DEADLY FORCE. Bare fists can reach into a pocket to pull out a knife or a gun, which is universally recognized as DEADLY FORCE. If i point my gun at a man that is punching me in the head, i am defending my LIFE against DEADLY FORCE by employing a swift and effective deterrent that can get me out of danger and neutralize a threat to myself and others in the shortest possible time.
You can retreat then retreat if you kill them when you simply could have escaped then you murdered them. I don't give a s*** what the law says it's wrong.
Sorry but you say 72 year old lady gets beaten to death because she can't out run the much younger guy? Sorry but your logic is so full of holes I can see through it. Sorry but want 72 year old to learn to fight with possible osteoporosis. Sorry crime happens to anyone and increasingly to the elderly so telling all those elderly to just die is very rough.
This is stupid because fist are a lethal force you can beat someone to death, telling me that people instantly die from gun wounds is also stupid in fact even if shot in the lung or head you have a chance of living, getting hit in jugular or heart or any major artery would likely kill you but those are small areas. Shooting center body mass is most effective most they get is stitches worst they get is internal repair to organs or they die. But if they fully intend to kill you, you can run but what prevents that person from following you? 😂 seen it in BLM guy walking home from work, several BLM members jumped the guy he ran they followed so he pulled a gun out they continued at him and he shot at them. Your theory there like I said has bad logic. Ever thought that the act of taking a life isn't a bad experience for normal citizens? No most people would be traumatized.
Maybe it's different from state to state but in Texas, one of the most Gung ho gun states there is, you will 100% get in trouble for using a gun in a fist fight. Or a gun when you could run.
Texas here, your ability to carry a firearm is a privilege given to you by the state. And you are expected to use the minimum force required for the situation. Exactly why we are required to hold a licence for that firearm.
@@dgaf9843they actually have stand your ground laws so this is untrue not saying that you won’t get in trouble but lawfully you can. Also under the constitution it is your RIGHT to carry not a privilege.
@dgaf9843 Wrong. Our right to own and carry a firearm doesn't come from Government. The only thing regarding that, which is actually legal, is the 2nd Amendment which says government can't infringe on that inherent right.
Would you still be onboard if the example was the other way around? A 78 year old woman harassing a 22 year old man - hitting him with her purse or stick or whatever and he shoots her? - genuine question
The debate there might be that a 78 yrs old grandma cant cause enough damage for a self defense to even have been required. I mean. If a kid punches you while he punched you, the damage would have been so minimal that you could hardly claim that you where being assaulted. Can you claim self defense if you where being hit with pillows?
My thoughts exactly. This lawyer is making a black and white case that shooting someone for any form of self defense is always legal. This mindset is just another reason why shootings are getting more common.
Ive got close to 10 years of combat sports under my belt. I still dont see any fucking point to forcing people to give someone attacking them a fair fight.
Wow did not know that. The media is changing the law with myth.
Need more guys like this.
Knowledge is power
Exacting what they want, sadly. Only 6 companies own legacy media and they are either corrupt or being extorted in so many areas by corrupt govt agencies doing business for lobbyists
But still, don't stay to fight the danger. If you can always get away from the danger, they will try and find something for crossing the line of self-defense. A 72 year old person maybe can't put herself/himself out of danger, but a younger person can. It's the same as if someone is in your yard and wants to harm you or your family. You can pull the gun in self-defense but can't shoot them if they aren't hurting someones. Just tell them to leave or call the police.
Castle doctrine in Indiana, also protects you from public servants acting under color of law.
Ty! I've got 100+ hours of law studies under my belt. Your statement < "Attorneys don't know the law" > is GOLD. We need state laws that say the 12-person jury or Bench trial Judge must be informed in writing of the law that was violated word for word.
👍🏼
A punch in the head or a grapple that throws someone into oncoming traffic are quite lethal. You can't use x-ray vision to look into someone's pockets to confirm that they don't have a knife or gun of their own. When a dude rocks up to me and starts throwing hands, i have every right, justification, and reasonable assumption to treat that physical assault as potentially deadly force, and i should be able to respond in kind. I'm no martial artist, I've never taken advanced self defense training, and even if i had the potential presence of a knife causes my odds of survival to drop DRAMATICALLY regardless of any krav-maga-special-forces nonsense i might employ, and im not going to face down a jury and a prosecutor that tells me it would have been more responsible to learn a martial art than take a gun class.
Bare fists are DEADLY FORCE. Bare fists can reach into a pocket to pull out a knife or a gun, which is universally recognized as DEADLY FORCE. If i point my gun at a man that is punching me in the head, i am defending my LIFE against DEADLY FORCE by employing a swift and effective deterrent that can get me out of danger and neutralize a threat to myself and others in the shortest possible time.
Thanks. Education is so important.
Like dirty harry said the law is stupid buy a shovel
And that is a fucked up law
Not in NY
God created Man....Sam Colt made them equal.
HELL RIGHT
GETSUM
definitely not in california
You can retreat then retreat if you kill them when you simply could have escaped then you murdered them. I don't give a s*** what the law says it's wrong.
Sorry but you say 72 year old lady gets beaten to death because she can't out run the much younger guy? Sorry but your logic is so full of holes I can see through it. Sorry but want 72 year old to learn to fight with possible osteoporosis. Sorry crime happens to anyone and increasingly to the elderly so telling all those elderly to just die is very rough.
This is stupid because fist are a lethal force you can beat someone to death, telling me that people instantly die from gun wounds is also stupid in fact even if shot in the lung or head you have a chance of living, getting hit in jugular or heart or any major artery would likely kill you but those are small areas. Shooting center body mass is most effective most they get is stitches worst they get is internal repair to organs or they die. But if they fully intend to kill you, you can run but what prevents that person from following you? 😂 seen it in BLM guy walking home from work, several BLM members jumped the guy he ran they followed so he pulled a gun out they continued at him and he shot at them. Your theory there like I said has bad logic. Ever thought that the act of taking a life isn't a bad experience for normal citizens? No most people would be traumatized.
Ahhhhhh ❄️
Maybe it's different from state to state but in Texas, one of the most Gung ho gun states there is, you will 100% get in trouble for using a gun in a fist fight. Or a gun when you could run.
Texas here, your ability to carry a firearm is a privilege given to you by the state. And you are expected to use the minimum force required for the situation. Exactly why we are required to hold a licence for that firearm.
@@dgaf9843they actually have stand your ground laws so this is untrue not saying that you won’t get in trouble but lawfully you can. Also under the constitution it is your RIGHT to carry not a privilege.
We do not need a license to have firearms. You have constitutional conceal and open carry@@dgaf9843
@dgaf9843 Wrong. Our right to own and carry a firearm doesn't come from Government. The only thing regarding that, which is actually legal, is the 2nd Amendment which says government can't infringe on that inherent right.
Thats bullshit you obviously don't know anything about the law or texas law specifically
Would you still be onboard if the example was the other way around? A 78 year old woman harassing a 22 year old man - hitting him with her purse or stick or whatever and he shoots her? - genuine question
The debate there might be that a 78 yrs old grandma cant cause enough damage for a self defense to even have been required. I mean. If a kid punches you while he punched you, the damage would have been so minimal that you could hardly claim that you where being assaulted. Can you claim self defense if you where being hit with pillows?
That's the 'credible threat' part.
The force doesn't have to be proportional though and there's no requirement for me to retreat
@@Alex-ik8pr credible threat.
My thoughts exactly. This lawyer is making a black and white case that shooting someone for any form of self defense is always legal. This mindset is just another reason why shootings are getting more common.
Good man!!!