Quote:
|
Originally Posted by punkworld
You seem exactly like the kind of person I dread running around armed in the streets. You talk about "the zipper effect", a corpse not suing for injuries, and seem almost excited at the prospect of killing someone. In short, you seem just like the kind of person who might endanger people (possible criminals, yourself and the public) in a fit of rage after getting something stolen from you, getting into an argument or whatever.
But aside from that, imagine the following, simple scenario:
A: Hey asshole! Yeah you, you fucking fag!
B: What the fuck? Leave me alone man.
A: What's the matter, you fucking fairy? Shitting your pants yet?
B: Fuck off man!
A: Your mother was an AIDS-infested whore, you shithead!
B: *punch* (illegal attack)
A: *shoots B* (using deadly force in retaliation for an illegal attack)
Now, are you telling me A was well within his rights to shoot and kill B, thereby also risking the lives of innocent bystanders?
|
First off, as always, you may only use deadly force if you are in fear for your life. Getting punched does not constitute "fearing for your life" and the dumbass in question (person A) would be found guilty. Now if you were to amend the previous scenario to:
A: Hey asshole! Yeah you, you fucking fag!
B: What the fuck? Leave me alone man.
A: What's the matter, you fucking fairy? Shitting your pants yet?
B: Fuck off man!
A: Your mother was an AIDS-infested whore, you shithead!
B: I'M GONNA FUCKING KILL YOU!!! *pulls out a knife and tries to stab A* (illegal attack)
A: *shoots B* (using deadly force in retaliation for an illegal attack)
...then this new amendment would apply in regards to person A fearing for his life.