View Single Post
Old June 21, 2009, 05:57 PM   #320
Buzzcook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 6,093
Ok here's a what if that actually happened.

A kid I worked with was accosted in the street by a man with a knife.

In this scenario we change the kid or the assailant, to fit our argument. If we make the kid weaker and the assailant stronger we make an argument for use of force. If we make the kid stronger (or faster), we argue that the use of force is unnecessary.
stargazer65 brings up an option that it is possible that the kid was stronger than the assailant, but believes that the opposite is true, thus use of force is forgivable.
I suppose we could examine the motives of the assailant, but unfortunately for him he's just a plot device.

If we use my 95 year old mother-in-law in place of the kid, and she's packing heat. It really doesn't matter how weak the assailant is, we would all say that she had a reasonable fear of harm. Granny is free to blast away.

If we use what actually happened with the kid being a 270 pound exercise freak, army ranger vet, and occasional professional K1 fighter and the assailant being a very inebriated person with a table knife, I think we might agree gun play would be a bit excessive.

The kid shoved the drunk and that fellow fell into the gutter.
Buzzcook is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03812 seconds with 8 queries