Do you own a gun?

[Busyman]

If you have to kill someone with it, you need to go back to the dojo. The whole point, at least when I did it, was to incapacitate them, or hold them down. Killing them was never the goal.

The point is that you may kill them.

Someone threatening your life or the life of your child may not make allowances for you to be picky.

By JPaul's same notion, if a woman sprays an attacker with mace then she is guilty of assault.

No sense.

[Agrajag]

That makes no sense whatsoever JPaul.

That would mean if I wounded someone with a gun (in self-defence) that it was premeditated.

Preparing to defend yourself does not constitute premeditated murder.

How is even killing someone in self-defense NOT reacting to the situation?

I know jujitsu. Am I a murderer if I use it to kill....in self-defense?

Like I said it's an attitude / country thing.

Shooting someone dead would not be considered reasonable force, in most circumstances. It would therefore not be surprising if you were charged with murder.

Using Jiu Jitsu to defend yourself is not even remotely analagous.

Ask any bank clerk, they can confirm this.

[Busyman]

Is there anything, at all, you can't do

Of course.

I can't dunk a basketball anymore.

[Agrajag]

The point is that you may kill them.

Someone threatening your life or the life of your child may not make allowances for you to be picky.

By JPaul's same notion, if a woman sprays an attacker with mace then she is guilty of assault.

No sense.

Not the same at all, as stated previously the mace would likely constitute reasonable force.

[Snee]

@busy: I never got taught any death-blows tho'.

Using it to kill someone would be an accident, not something deliberate, for me.

I might have been able to dislocate a shoulder, or break a wrist.
But if I'd killed someone it would have been through a throw gone wrong, or something, not a choice I'd made. It was, as far as I understood it, meant to be a non-lethal sport.

[Busyman]

Like I said it's an attitude / country thing.

Shooting someone dead would not be considered reasonable force, in most circumstances. It would therefore not be surprising if you were charged with murder.

Using Jiu Jitsu to defend yourself is not even remotely analagous.

Ask any bank clerk, they can confirm this.

But a moment ago you said it is murder.

It has nothing to do with attitude/country. It has to do with survival.

An intruder is aiming at you and you shoot first...in your house. By your account, if he dies, then it still wasn't self-defense.

You should took time to aim for his wrist or better yet just lay down and die (along with your kids that you did such a good job in protecting).

[Agrajag]

But a moment ago you said it is murder.

It has nothing to do with attitude/country. It has to do with survival.

An intruder is aiming at you and you shoot first...in your house. By your account, if he dies, then it still wasn't self-defense.

You should took time to aim for his wrist or better yet just lay down and die (along with your kids that you did such a good job in protecting).

You now paint a specific scenario, rather than a nebulous protecting one's family and one's goods.

Now the intruder has a gun (you think) and is pointing it at you. So you shoots and the intruder dies.

That still may be considered murder depending what they were holding in their hand and on whether you can prove that they were pointing it at you, prior to your shot. In my view if you shot someone dead then the police would arrest you on suspicion of murder. Once the circumstances were established you may or may not be tried for that or another offence.

This is my view, for my country. Your's has MUCH more liberal gun laws. A liberality j2 obviously appreciates, even if the only one.

[Busyman]

You now paint a specific scenario, rather than a nebulous protecting one's family and one's goods.

Now the intruder has a gun (you think) and is pointing it at you. So you shoots and the intruder dies.

That still may be considered murder depending what they were holding in their hand and on whether you can prove that they were pointing it at you, prior to your shot. In my view if you shot someone dead then the police would arrest you on suspicion of murder. Once the circumstances were established you may or may not be tried for that or another offence.

This is my view, for my country. Your's has MUCH more liberal gun laws. A liberality j2 obviously appreciates, even if the only one.

I did say protecting my family.

Now I did paint a specific scenario however YOUR view is no matter what the situation was, he died because I shot him while protecting myself and I'm GUILTY of murder.....premeditated at that.

I don't see the logic in that.

If this is to be the case then we can apply it to a multitude of "guilty self-defenses".

We still have investigations here. I couldn't shoot someone in the back in my house and necessarily get away with it.

[Agrajag]

I didn't say premeditated, that would imply (in my view) premeditating, to kill a specific person.

I meant (perhaps badly expressed) more like "going prepared" a term used here, normally for things like burglary when the person is caught carrying the tools of the trade.

If you are in possession of a device whose primary reason is to kill people then you are much more likely to commit murder than if you are not. Murder is simply the unlawful taking of another person's life. Premeditated murder (as you have chosen to read it) is planning it in advance.

[Busyman]

I didn't say premeditated, that would imply (in my view) premeditating, to kill a specific person.

I meant (perhaps badly expressed) more like "going prepared" a term used here, normally for things like burglary when the person is caught carrying the tools of the trade.

If you are in possession of a device whose primary reason is to kill people then you are much more likely to commit murder than if you are not. Murder is simply the unlawful taking of another person's life. Premeditated murder (as you have chosen to read it) is planning it in advance.

I am not willing to sacrifice me or my families life for a "more likely to commit murder" ideal which, personally, I have no desire for.

If an intruder comes then I want the best possible chance of survival besides "begging" for me or my families' life.

The what can happen if I simply own a gun outweighs the what can happen if I don't.

The way I view intruders is that one can't be sure as to what his intentions are. It seems that the more liberal attitude is to not be concerned about this and take a more passive approach if problems arise. You cannot attach normalcy to abnormal circumstances.