Sunday, April 26, 2009


I%26#039;ve read a news article saying that a man shot his wife to deaf with a 22 rifle and he clamed that it was all in a act of self defense because his wife was chasing him around the house with a knife. But that man shot his wife over 8 times with the rifle witch only takes six rounds of bullets to reload. Did this man have the right to say that this was all in the act of self-defense?|||Self defense with UN-necessary force, it sounds like.

Vet-USAF|||In my eyes it is self defense, unless it was proven otherwise that it was murder, a person with a knife can kill you and sometimes 6 rounds from a 22 will not subdue your attacker especially when the adrenaline is pumping and the rounds didn%26#039;t hit vital organs, the attacker will not even feel any pain. He probably ran to another spot to reload and when he still determined she still had a knife, he shot her again. There is no rule/law about how many rounds that can be fired in self defense. If the shots stopped the attacker cold in his/her tracks, then don%26#039;t shoot.|||No,that%26#039;s not self defense its murder, 8 times that%26#039;s harsh....but the law says a person is innocent till proven guilty.Justice isn%26#039;t always served.

My point of view is if u shoot somebody with a 22mm rifle twice there will be nothing to defend. He wanted her dead......|||The law includes concepts of %26quot;minimal required force%26quot;, and %26quot;proportional response%26quot;, although they are called different things in different jurisdictions. Without knowing all the details, can%26#039;t say for sure... but at first glance it appears that the man%26#039;s response doesn%26#039;t square with those ideas.|||when police fire on a target their supposed to fire 3 rounds then pause and assess the situation. un-neccessary force.|||sounds like someone is trying to cover up their tracks ;)

No comments:

Post a Comment