Quote:
Originally Posted by gwalchmai
So then if you attacked me with a 9mm I would not be justified in defending with a 9mm +P, huh?
Pretty silly theory you have there, isn't it?
|
9mm = deadly force. 9mm+P = deadly force. Same force. If someone attacked to with a 9mm, and all you had was a 50 BMG handy, you would be justified using that. In the legal community, force is not the foot-punds of energy, only the consequential damage.
"In OK, if someone breaks into your house, the only justification you need for using any force you choose is that they broke in and you felt 'any danger, however slight.'"
Now this addresses the defense of the home, not self-defense. It would be a justified homicide on completely different grounds. In AZ, you may THREATEN deadly force for a mere trespass, and use deadly force on a burglar. All that one has to do to become a burglar is, 1. Enter a walled or gated in yard or, 2. Enter ones place of residence or attachment.
"A 250lb man can use lethal force against a 100lb woman if he felt he was in serious danger."
Incorrect.
The danger must be from an objective standpoint, not subjective. If some guy looks at you funny and YOU feel that you are in serious danger, justifiable homicide? It is up to those "12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury duty" to determine if your fear was reasonable and justified.
As for the FMJ vs. HP argument, look up the case McCarthy v. Olin Corp. There a judge dismissed a lawsuit against the company that made Black Talon bullets based on the grounds any bullet is lethal, therefore a bullet that expanded and fragmented upon impact was not excessive. The concept of bullets are to kill, and Black Talons achieved this quite well. That decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
"Add FL to the list. You can defend without retreat against a forceable felony, car intrusion or home intrusion. The burden of proving you wrong is also placed upon the state."
Those justifications are specifically created by statute, and are thus, an exception to the common law. AZ has those also, but you can add kidnapping, rape, arson of an occupied structure, and a few others to that list of specific scenarios where it is in the state statute that deadly force is justified. These are state exceptions to the common law, and each state has their own. The common law is what is used when there is no specific statutory justification, ie, a hands and fists beating that I describe above.