I am involved in a discussion on another (non-gun) forum about the Dont Ask, Dont Tell policy. I do not want a political discussion...only legal pertaining to gun use.
I also want a civil discussion and not bring it down to the low-brow level. If this is not appropriate for this forum, I'll understand if the mods delete this. I am not trolling.
In the discussion, "BB' claims that he is within his rights to use deadly force...shoot a man....in a public restroom that is using a urinal and has (necessarily) revealed 'himself' to BB.
BB says he rarely ever uses public restroom or locker rooms and if he does, uses stalls or private showers. He says that it is deviant behavior to expose yourself in public, period...one would wonder why public restrooms and locker rooms/showers are legal at all then?....but this is his stance.
He says that such 'exposure' in the restroom would make him extremely uncomfortable and he would see it as a threat. Note: in this scenario, the other man would not be armed in any way.
I asked him why, if the other man was not armed, he just did not leave the premises. He claimed he could feel trapped if the man was between him and the door.
I pointed out that he could still use less-than-lethal force to 'escape' and that he had NO GROUNDS to use lethal force.
When I brought up laws regarding use of lethal force, he claimed that the laws also support use of lethal force in the face of sexual assault.
He claims that he could convince a jury that he felt the assault was imminent...because the jury "would never hear the dead victim's side" (*sigh*).
He also claims that something called 'agoraphobia" (an extreme fear of public places) could be used to justify his reactions. (I pointed out that if he had been clinically diagnosed with this...he'd need to to use it in defense....he mostly likely should not be carrying a gun, period. And might even not be legally carrying according to mental health restrictions).
I would like opinions on this, esp if our lawyers can contribute. This person has a major issue and I'd like to see him at least better educated on this....he sounds possibly like a danger to the community...and would certainly be a black mark on cc. I will send him a link to the discussion.
I can also provide a link to the other discussion, if not appropriate here, you can pm me for it. http://forums.myspace.com/t/4787219.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread&PageIndex=13
It starts on page 13, I'm Lursa. Mods can remove if they feel it's wrong.
Thanks in advance for your comments.
I also want a civil discussion and not bring it down to the low-brow level. If this is not appropriate for this forum, I'll understand if the mods delete this. I am not trolling.
In the discussion, "BB' claims that he is within his rights to use deadly force...shoot a man....in a public restroom that is using a urinal and has (necessarily) revealed 'himself' to BB.
BB says he rarely ever uses public restroom or locker rooms and if he does, uses stalls or private showers. He says that it is deviant behavior to expose yourself in public, period...one would wonder why public restrooms and locker rooms/showers are legal at all then?....but this is his stance.
He says that such 'exposure' in the restroom would make him extremely uncomfortable and he would see it as a threat. Note: in this scenario, the other man would not be armed in any way.
I asked him why, if the other man was not armed, he just did not leave the premises. He claimed he could feel trapped if the man was between him and the door.
I pointed out that he could still use less-than-lethal force to 'escape' and that he had NO GROUNDS to use lethal force.
When I brought up laws regarding use of lethal force, he claimed that the laws also support use of lethal force in the face of sexual assault.
He claims that he could convince a jury that he felt the assault was imminent...because the jury "would never hear the dead victim's side" (*sigh*).
He also claims that something called 'agoraphobia" (an extreme fear of public places) could be used to justify his reactions. (I pointed out that if he had been clinically diagnosed with this...he'd need to to use it in defense....he mostly likely should not be carrying a gun, period. And might even not be legally carrying according to mental health restrictions).
I would like opinions on this, esp if our lawyers can contribute. This person has a major issue and I'd like to see him at least better educated on this....he sounds possibly like a danger to the community...and would certainly be a black mark on cc. I will send him a link to the discussion.
I can also provide a link to the other discussion, if not appropriate here, you can pm me for it. http://forums.myspace.com/t/4787219.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread&PageIndex=13
It starts on page 13, I'm Lursa. Mods can remove if they feel it's wrong.
Thanks in advance for your comments.