BehindBlueI's
Grandmaster
- Oct 3, 2012
- 25,964
- 113
Well, you did kinda try to mush it up by including "every defense shooting"... but I will not go along with moving the goal posts that far.
I asked this question:
about your beliefs due to these statements in an attempt to clarify your position:So you think every self defense shooting that happens in this state let the bad guy shoot someone first?"
It is really sad to say but if one did it perfectly and took out the killer before he killed anybody, one would be in deep crap. In other words it is important that somebody got shot.
I disagree. I think he would have been charged with murder. The poor disgruntled kid didn't do anything worth getting killed for. Anyone that shot him would be fried.
Because, frankly, this was an ideal self defense/defense of 3rd party situation. If you think he had to let someone get shot in this one, and this one is about as text book perfect for the shooter as you can get, do you believe that to be a universal rule?