[climber]

They confuse the difference between eliminating the threat and making a bad guy pay. Not a big surprise, even police get that one wrong sometimes (Like LAPD sometimes does).

[turboSPE]

Would any of us seriously be having this conversation if an intruder were in the process of/inside our own homes? I certainly wouldn't. Besides, it's legal (in spite of not necessarily being "moral") in Texas to shoot someone who enters your property without your permission. According to our constitution:

"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."

And:

"It is not necessary that there should be actual danger, as a person has the right to defend his life and person from apparent danger as fully and to the same extent as he would have were the danger real, as it reasonably appeared to him from his standpoint at the time."

[climber]

Nobody said you could not use deadly force. But once the threat is neutralized and on the floor, you can not legally go over and execute them by shooting them in the head.

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by climber 

They confuse the difference between eliminating the threat and making a bad guy pay. Not a big surprise, even police get that one wrong sometimes (Like LAPD sometimes does).

It's hard not to act emotionally in such a situation but that's where training should take over. If people let their emotions get the better of them then they act violently and impulsively and their only excuse is, "they deserved to die and besides, I was nervous, pissed off, upset, scared, unhappy, or outraged."

They can learn the law from behind bars.

Or get training.

People who have seen Judious Use of Lethal Force say:

A gaping hole in a majority of commercial self-defense training is the legal aspects. When is your "self-defense" actually a fight? Where is the line where you cross from a defender to an aggressor? When must you stop or face jail time? In no other area is the line between legal and illegal so razor thin as with lethal force. With a weapon in your hand you can cross the line from defending yourself to murder in the blink of an eye. And when you are deep in the grip of adrenalin, fear or anger, it is all to easy to cross that line. The legal system doesn't care what you felt, it only cares about what you did and if that action was warranted. That is what you will be accountable for.

Martial artists, followers of reality based self-defense or knife fighting gurus are constantly complaining about the danger of being put into prison for attempted self-defense. Either that or they dismiss the idea of learning the legal requirements of self-defense with comments like "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by six." Self-defense is a legally defined term. And it is up to YOU to know those standards and to tailor your actions to both stay within them and to protect yourself. The lack of awareness about this subject of most self-proclaimed SD instructors and their followers is a guaranteed trip to the cornhole commune if they were ever to apply their training.

This tape gives you a basic understanding of the legal, moral and accepted standards of when it is time to take another human life in defense of yourself or others. This tape blows out the water almost every fantasy about using your deadly fighting style to defend yourself by explaining what standards must be present in order to use lethal force. If these conditions aren't present, DON'T, no matter how scared or mad you are. You will never again look at so-called "self-defense" training in the same light, because it will show you exactly how much of what is being taught is not only over the top, but actually encourages murder in the name of self-defense. If you aren't interested in ending up in prison, you need to watch this tape. Marc "Animal" MacYoung

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com...Lethalfull.htm

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by climber 

They confuse the difference between eliminating the threat and making a bad guy pay. Not a big surprise, even police get that one wrong sometimes (Like LAPD sometimes does).

Just putting someone on the floor does not eliminate the threat. In some situations it will just make that person even more dangerous. There's no point in even bothering to try and defend yourself if you're not willing and able to do what it takes to actually eliminate the threat.

And it's not about making the 'bad guy pay'. I'd much rather not kill someone. I really have no desire to kill anyone whatsoever. In most situations I'm all for giving people a second chance and not coming down too hard on them no matter what they've done. But if someone breaks into my home, I'm not giving them a chance to hurt me or my family. If I don't feel that I can safely ensure that they've been fully disarmed and that I can keep them under control until police arrive, what choice do I have? This isn't about legality or even morality to me. This is about protecting the lives of myself and my family. If I have to face charges for that, so be it. But at least my family is safe.

[moonmonkey]

This thread is full of animals.

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by moonmonkey 

This thread is full of animals.

What? Did someone tell you I prefer 'doggie style?'

[moonmonkey]

These forums have gone to ****.

[Eynstyn]

Originally Posted by moonmonkey 

These forums have gone to ****.

Dogz?