Since you own a gun...

[Ibby]

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.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Ibram

The reason I won't ever own a gun is that I know I wouldnt use it.

That is actually a very good reason not to own a gun.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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 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.

[Hippikos]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

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.

So, in the US you can kill another citizen without any question asked? You don't think, you pull your weapon and BANG! Go ahead, make my day punk... No wonder so many gun related death in th US.

Who is going say you're protecting life? You never have to proof that?

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.

Well, is it allowed by law to kill another citizen? Any proof? I can't imagine this Wild West rule still holds law in the modern US and A. In our country it's against the law to kill or even shoot at another citizen, at any circumstances. Probably we'r too liberal here. Then again gun related deaths are about 100 times less here too...

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Ibram

The reason I won't ever own a gun is that I know I wouldn't use it. I could never bring myself to use it, and having one would just escalate the situation.

Escalate it? Don't worry about that part. "Violence -- naked force -- has settled more issues in human history than anything else." "He's dead, I'm alive, and that's how I wanted it." Such a degree of escalation produces inevitable deescalation, and the life-and-death problem is solved. It still leaves the question of whether one acted lawfully. I'll list some reference works about it below.

Never bring yourself to use it? Well, I just couldn't bring myself to submit to being murdered the way you would. Or so you say you would now, anyway. Having a mind, you are at inalienable liberty to change it when a better idea comes along.

Intelligent discussion of the entire matter may be undertaken once these have been read and understood:

That Every Man Be Armed: the Evolution of a Constitutional Right by Stephen P. Halbrook, constitutional lawyer. He argued the Brady Law before the Supreme Court, and the Court ruled to void certain provisions of the Brady Law. Halbrook knows what he's talking about.

Lethal Laws: "Gun Control" Is The Gateway To Genocide by Simkin, Zelman, and Rice; sets forth the compelling moral reason for never refusing to own a weapon yourself, as making a genocide impractical is a highly moral thing to do by any standard. This argument has never been refuted in the dozen years it's been out.

The Truth About Self Defense by Massad Ayoob, self-defense scholar, firearms instructor, former police captain. Examines the combative, technical, and legal picture of armed defense of self or other in modern days.

Optional reading for fleshing out the big picture: More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott, professor of economics. The study this book is based on studied all three thousand-plus counties in the United States, covering a fifteen-year period.

[wolf]

Whether or not I could kill was something that I long considered before I made the decision to own a pistol. If the answer had been no, I wouldn't have a firearm in the house. I owned and shot a bow for many years. My purpose was enjoyment of target shooting. I still do this with a pistol, but with the understanding that there is a reason for my practice.

As far as "justification laws," one has to check their own jurisdiction's version because there is a lot of variance. Some states require retreat, some require feeling at risk of loss of life, and others allow you to shoot to defend property as well as life.

All of which beats what is sometimes called "Government Sponsored Dial-a-Prayer."

I live in a township that has a lot of officers on the street. It is not unusual to take up to 15 minutes for an officer to respond to a call. In some places, that can go as long as a half-hour, or even more. A lot can happen in that length of time.

I used to be the webmistress for a gunshop. I added a quote to the site that the owner loved.

Gun Control: The notion that a woman lying dead in an alley, raped and then strangled with her own pantyhose is morally superior to a woman in the same alley explaining to police how her attacker died of fatal bullet wounds.

[JayMcGee]

Originally Posted by wolf

I used to be the webmistress for a gunshop. I added a quote to the site that the owner loved.

Gun Control: The notion that a woman lying dead in an alley, raped and then strangled with her own pantyhose is morally superior to a woman in the same alley explaining to police how her attacker died of fatal bullet wounds.

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

[wolf]

Originally Posted by JayMcGee

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

I don't have that kind of a temper, another reason that I carry.

[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?

[zippyt]

Wolf ain't bull shitting , I Helped my wife pick out the correct hand gun for HER , tought her how to shoot ( she had shot Some , but I tought her how to shoot so it counts ) , she can shoot a 5 shot group the size of a fist at 25 + ft , all day every day and move that group ANY where she wants ,
We have had LONG discussions about deadley force , no warning shots , NO leg shots , if'n you have to draw you SHOOT TO KILL !!!

Mozambik drill . 2 to the chest , 1 to the head, if that won't drop a person that NEEDS shooting I dont know what will

Originally Posted by Spexxvet
When would actually use your gun to kill someone?

I would actually use a gun to kill someone when even if I didn't have a gun I would kill that someone anyway.

You can "what if" the topic to death; but, society evaluates each shooting as a unique set of circumstances. Sensible people use applicable laws and case studies to answer those questions for themselves. Among the things that case studies have demonstrated is that in the aftermath of any shooting, previous statements made by shooters in response to "what if" questions can be spun to work against them. It can be contended that a shooter was predisposed (i.e. already made up their mind) to act in a particular way regardless of the unique set of circumstances they faced in real time when a shooting occured. Even that which is learned through bona fide training by competent authority (e.g. law enforcement) should not be casually discussed in the context of "what if" situations. With all of the resources law enforcement itself has, it too at times has difficulty validating justifiable shootings. I don't think you will get many answers that specifically address your "what if" questions [at least I hope not].