Since you own a gun...

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Thanks for not answering the question. I guess it depends what your definition of "is" is.

I'm not interested in the laws. When would you, MaggieL kill someone with your gun?

Still want to play slippery slope, eh?

I would use deadly force in a situation in which the conditions in the cited law were met. Good thing you don't carry, since you aren't interested in the law. But fact that you could conflate a citiation of the law on Justification with Clinton's pathetic equivocation verges on tragic.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Ibram

The reason I won't ever own a gun is that I know I wouldnt use it. I could never bring myself to use it, and having one would just escalate the situation. But I figure people dont know if I have one or not cause of all you people who do have them, so yeah.

If you don't think you could use a firearm, then you're absolutely right not to carry. And your observation that the 3% of us who do carry extend protection to the 97% who don't just by creating that uncertainty is very much on-point.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by JayMcGee

mmmmm..... substtute 'ex-husband ex-lover some guy in th street who pissed me off for 'attacker' in that quote...

Did you actually have a point?

[Hippikos]

I would use deadly force in a situation in which the conditions in the cited law were met.

Does US law permits civillians to kill another person without any repercussions?

And please define the situation.

[Ibby]

I'm actually not sure which worries me more, having one and not using it or having one and using it...

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Hippikos

Does US law permits civillians to kill another person without any repercussions?

And please define the situation.

It's state, not federal law, so you are welcome to look up the justification law in all 50 states. For all intents and purposes, the United States actually functions like 50 little independent countries, each with its own laws.

[MaggieL]

It just amazes me how liberals will hold forth on this issue without actually being willing to read the law. Pennsylvania's justification law is typical amongst the "shall-issue" states; I posted a link to it earlier.

Originally Posted by Hippikos

Does US law permits civillians to kill another person without any repercussions?

And please define the situation.

Yes. If you are protecting your life or anothers. It is very simple.

Also, you do not think, you just do or do not... you pull your weapon and fire.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by JayMcGee

Que? This is an international BB on the WWW..... pray explain the relevence of Pennsylvnia Borough Council ByeLaws to the rest of us....

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is considerably larger than a borough. It has it's own constitution, a population of about 13 million people, and a land area roughly twice that of Ireland. Its laws are important to me since they're the ones I live under and will observe.

If you're disintrested, because you live in a country where you're not allowed to defend yourself with anything but a cellphone, you're invited to move along quietly.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Also, you do not think, you just do or do not... you pull your weapon and fire.

Well, you *do* think. But you likely will not have time to think much.

Ok, you think "There is my target".

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Ok, you think "There is my target".

Hopefully you started that thought with "That *is* a target", and followed it with "There's clear space behind."

[Pangloss62]

What if someone walked into your house, unarmed, and said nothing - just kind of walked around looking at things, but not touching anything, and wouldn't leave when you asked him to or told him to?

That would be weird. What a great scenario. "Who are you? What do you want?" And he would just walk around, open the silverware drawer, close it, maybe hurrumph a few times, but never say anything. That would be truly odd. It would make a great reality TV show too. What would people do? How would they react? "Would you like a glass of water or something?" Maybe you could "kill him with kindness." Maybe watch a movie together?

In fact he once came after me with a piece of re-barb, and I barely made it into my house in time to lock the door and call the cops.

You clearly meant to say rhubarb, not re-barb. Rhubarb is a poisonous plant, so I can understand your apprehension. If not cooked properly, one could die.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

It just amazes me how liberals will hold forth on this issue without actually being willing to read the law...

It just amazes me how conservatives think that because the law states such-and-such, that such-and-such will actually happen. Don't you have a gun for situations occur outside of the law? Aren't there going to be situations that are ambiguous in terms of the law? Are there situations where your judgement and actions are not consistent with the law? Do you wear your republinders so close to your head that these possibilities don't even occur to you?

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Do you wear your republinders so close to your head that these possibilities don't even occur to you?

Of course those situations exist. But she has already acknowledged that she's not going to play the "what if" game--both because of the futility of such a thing, as well as the potential legal complications if she ever were to have to shoot someone and this messageboard somehow got entered into evidence.