|
I had to read the first post several times , and still couldn't get the gist of where the debate was.
It really IS about the words , and words do have specific meanings.
There IS a right to self defense , and to certain extent defense of others ( not going into details at this time).
In many jurisdictions citizens can lawfully carry firearms, for among various reasons , to assist in self defense.
In such situations at times potentially lethal force is justified. This would be a firearm, but could also be other potentially lethal options.
When using force in self defense , the goal is to cause the threat to you to cease. If that occurs w/o injury to assailent, fine. If the attack continues , but assailent dies next week in the hospital from complications it didn't acomplish your imeadate goal. The decision making by the defender is as to the type of force used, the ultimate health disposition of the attacker is an indirect byproduct not imeadately known or controled by the defender.
Self Defense is a Positive Defense. The defendent acknowledeges that they did particular action delibertly, and that it was justified. This would be if resulted in a death, or various assult charges, or whatever.
Anytime a human being dies as result of actions of another human being, it is Homicide.
Homicide could be justified or excusable.
IT could be a form of Manslaughter ( at least two flavors , some states have additional flavors by statute ).
It could be a form of Murder ( at least two , some states also have 3rd degree Homicide by statute.
|