View Single Post
  #67  
Old 12-12-2017, 8:39 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 5,594
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonreg_89323423 View Post
This is a wonderful discussion that I always hoped I would be able to read on here. There's one contradiction that puts home invasion/burglary into a life-threatening situation under most circumstances: They would need tools to break in, be it a crowbar, knife, etc. Those same tools can be used to kill somebody, which leads to reasonable assumption that your life is in danger. If I stick my gun in their direction from 20' and yell drop the crowbar/knife/screwdriver and they don't do it, they are destined for a different world because they are brandishing a weapon and walking towards me.
You don't need tools to break into a home.

You don't need tools to kill someone.

They key to having a lawful use of deadly force is that you be in reasonable fear for your life. That's the issue and it's one that is best addressed directly and not through the proxy of what resource was available to the suspect.

If one is in reasonable fear for their life, the loss of their assets in subsequent litigation is a non-issue. What good is a big bank account when you're deceased?

You should plan on being sued following a defensive shooting, particularly if you have assets. You really can't stop a lawsuit from being filed. There is no "quality control" on the filing of lawsuits. The best that you can do is to configure your affairs so that you have the best ability to have the suit dismissed early in the pleadings, or to prevail on the merits.
__________________
What is really needed here is less "Tactical" thinking and more "Strategic" thinking.
Reply With Quote