justified use of self defense ?

[davidmcbeth]

Filming him is the way to go.

You own stock in Kodak or something?

 

[Medic1210]

You own stock in Kodak or something?

Pretty sure Kodak doesn't make money off of digital cell phone videos... And I'm pretty sure there aren't too many actual film cameras being toted around these days.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Watch the video again. Every frame contains video of police officers. The person making the video specifically focused on police officers and, IMHO, was hoping to create this confrontation. Unfortunately, the last police officer fell into his trap, which he then uses to decry harassment by "a man with a gun," certainly a "headline" that was engineered to be misleading.

.....so? Cop couldn't not reveal his true self when "baited" even when he knew he was being filmed.

An inference without facts to support it. You claim a desired outcome based only on the observed outcome. That is intellectual dishonesty.

+1

 

[davidmcbeth]

Pretty sure Kodak doesn't make money off of digital cell phone videos... And I'm pretty sure there aren't too many actual film cameras being toted around these days.

Still sell batteries (at least under their name)....used in electronicle devices

http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-Xtralife-K3A-24-Alkaline-Batteries/dp/B00168S82C

 

[OC for ME]

The elements of common law self defense are four; be innocent of instigation, be in reasonable fear of great bodily harm; use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil; attempt to withdraw.

Yelling 'it' does not validate your point. Common law is not the same as statutory law, which, by the way, is what you would be charged under if you were to violate statutory law.

If your state uses common law as their statutory law I stand corrected.

 

[OC for ME]

"Yelling" no, making you acknowledge what you read, yes.

No one has suggested that common law and statutory law are the same, except perhaps you erroneously. Common law is the basis legal system of all US states except Louisiana.

If all of the elements of righteous self-defense under common law are satisfied, then where is the statutory criminal charge? You keyboard kommandos argue legalisms while the citizen on the cusp needs a simple heuristic on which to decide shoot/not shoot. Common sense common law provides that thumb-rule.

Be innocent of instigation. Be in reasonable fear of great bodily harm. Use sufficient force only to deliver oneself from evil. Attempt to withdraw.

Heuristic = general strategy or method for solving a problem. See also 'legalism' contrasted with law.

The wrongness of leaving "attempt to withdraw" as a stand alone statement is simplicity itself. The common law principle of “castle doctrine” says that individuals have the right to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. Attempting to withdraw in all cases of SD, as you recommend by including that last element without caveats, is a affront to liberty.