Take a look at your state's laws regarding the use of deadly force. Here in FL, as it has already been mentioned, the castle doctrine would permit engaging the attacker.:bigun2:
Was recently reading an Ayoob file where the GG shot the BG and then retrieved his wallet prior to the arrival of LEOs. Had a heck of a time explaining that he was fearing for his family's life because the BG had his wallet and keys, when the BG did not currently have his wallet.
Here's a rule of thumb: If you shoot somebody, DO NOT EVER TOUCH THEM! Except maybe to separate them from a firearm, but you get the idea.
An issue very similar to this has happened twice here in Texas within the last few months. Joe Horn was the first and killed two men that had broken into his neighbor's house. The second was during broad daylight in a man's yard and the BG was unarmed but breaking into the man's garage. He injured him with a shotgun and the police returned his weapon on site within minutes of arriving on scene...
Whats the difference then being away from your home, the guy in the parking lot at a store has to come into your house first. A threat is a threat handle it the same. Jeopardy, ability, means if they are present it doesn't matter where you are.
If answered "Yes" by a reasonable person, you might be in a "matter" of some concern, if "No", then I follow all of the other threads. It also depends on the political climate you live in. e.g. MA, NY or CA versus Texas, etc.
I'll answer the question with a question
If you could only defend yourself inside your house, then why are there concealed carry permits being issued across the county? You don't need a permit to defend yourself in your house.
It's much easier to clean up after an "outside" shooting! :tongue:
Seriously, if I can articulate reasonable fear of substantial bodily harm or death I will shoot to stop wherever that threat presents itself! :wink:
Here in the PRC about the only consolation you'll have is that your're alive. After the DA gets done with you then the civil suit begins. This state is a self defense sewer pond.
I really don't understand why there is an issue. If you are already outside of your house, as for example taking out the trash, and you are attacked by a man with a knife, you pretty clearly can establish that you were in reasonable fear for our life. Agreed that you could be in trouble depending upon the investigating officer and predeliction of the prosecutor. The only difference the "Castle Doctrine" makes, if applicable under your state law, and it is an important difference,is that there is then a legal presumption that you were , in fact, in fear for your life, and the burden of proving otherwise lies with the prosecutor. If the "castle Doctrine" does not apply, then the person who used deadly force has the legal burden of proving that they were in reasonable fear for their life.