[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What if the gun has real bullets, but they don't work properly?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, I meant to ask something along these lines. Like what if the guy unloads on me but completely misses? He hasn't attacked me yet according to Jogger (he could have been shooting at the wall behind me, who am I to know his intentions?!) so unless I let him reload and try again, I'd be the one to INITIATE the violence right?

Edit: Question is meant for jogger, I agree with your points Nietz.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is (if we take out all the silly exaggerations) a pretty decent question. Not just for AC v. State, but in everyday life.

At what point have the rights (let's assume we agree on the rights to one's person and the safety thereof) of a person been imposed upon. I tend to favor the common sense explaination here, but attempting to apply it as law (AC or state law) is trickier because sense really isn't that common.

If a man shoots near you, but is shooting at the wall behind, then one could argue he's threatened you, and that he has a responsibility to caution those inbetween his gun and his target. But that may not be the opinion of everyone. Do we have any metrics that can be used across the board here?

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's just common sense and social norms. How often is a stranger going to start opening fire at the wall right behind you? I don't know if I've ever heard a story where there was a mistaken self-defense shooting because the perp was taking target practice at a wall that a person was standing in front of.

Of course, according to Jogger, since we can't read minds,

[/ QUOTE ]

Link, liar.

[ QUOTE ]
(fabrication deleted)

[/ QUOTE ]