Quote:
|
The problem with accepting a couple punches is you have absolutly NO IDEA what effect those would have. Maybe his first punch knocks you out. In falling to the ground your (once) concealed pistol is now exposed. You are not able to retain that gun and who knows what happens next.
|
This is precisely the sort of uncertainty that I can't bring myself to accept. Not only could the first punch knock me out (which is a serious injury in the form of a concussion and possible permanent injury to the brain), it could even kill me--or paralyze me, as you state.
In other words, the person, for all that I can tell, is attempting to do something to me that could result in serious injury in spite of all my attempts to "make nice" and get away. I can't let him hit me, there's too much at stake--potentially EVERYTHING.
So on the one hand you're carefully (and correctly) pointing out the deadly seriousness of preventing a person from hitting you by noting that it could cause serious injury or death. On the other hand, you're saying that the attempt by this person to attack you and cause an injury which you just said could be serious or even fatal doesn't justify responding with deadly force.
Seems like only one of these things can be true at a time.
Either getting hit isn't that serious and therefore deadly force isn't justified or it can cause serious injury or death in which case deadly force, by definition, would be justified if the defender can't get away or physically stop the person from attacking.