Quote (NatureNames @ Jan 25 2015 06:17pm)
To the people talking about shooting people in the legs in a legal self-defense situation, from a legal perspective the reason why its a bad idea is because shooting somebody in the foot is just as legal as shooting them 4 times in the chest or head. Once you pull the trigger, you are using lethal force. Whether or not you kill them, doesn't make a difference is the eyes of the law. This is why police shoot to kill - because they can. It makes the legal process cheaper, faster, and much more defensible when you dont have a living person to testify against you. If you really cant stand the thought of killing a person, you could choose to just shoot them in the knee, but you're going to have a harder time proving that your actions were in self defense. If you had the leisure to aim at their knee (and possibly miss), it appear that you didn't really have to need use deadly force in the first place.
I'm honestly having trouble understanding what you are trying to say. Could you possibly rephrase that and indicate what law makes that scenario legal? My intent is only to point out what is legal and what isn't legal. If its legal to point a gun at somebody in your state without shooting them, then it is news to me and I'd really appreciate it if you could alleviate of my ignorance on the issue by telling me about that law. I know in some states its legal to shoot an unarmed intruder on sight and I'm not sure what gun brandishing laws apply in those situations. But to my understanding, pointing a gun at somebody is never legal unless you shoot them.
I'm not talking about logic or opinions. I'm only talking about the law. If you want to make any posts regarding laws, I'd be interested in hearing them. But so far you haven't said anything about legalities and your insults are also irrelevant to the matter.
please show me the LAW where brandashing a gun at someone but not shooting them in a situation where you claim to fear for your life. Show me that case.