Discussion in 'The Howard Stern Show' started by SuperFarts, Sep 9, 2016.
Wow! That gun was effective as shit! Threat over!
I'm guessing this was shot in Italy and they were Italian.
First shot: Good Shoot
Second Shot: Highly Questionable
Third Shot: Murder
You never know who you're fuckin with.
Not worth it.
I was wondering how the extra shots would play out in the eyes of the law.
That is no doubt the Balkans. You do not fuck with people there.
There is no "law" there, keep quiet and dont be a shithead.
Simple: You can use deadly force anytime it's objectively reasonable to defend yourself against an imminent threat of grave bodily harm (or worse) or to protect someone else from the same. However, if you're defending someone else, you're strictly liable (civilly) for a mistake, even if it was a totally reasonable mistake (like if you accidentally kill the wrong person in the process because you thought the victim was the attacker). Once the immediate threat to life or limb ends, so does your right to use deadly force, because, as a matter of law, deadly force is no longer reasonable.
States that have stand-your-ground statutes don't require imminent threat to life or limb provided deadly force is objectively reasonable otherwise. That means that even in a SYG state, a 6'-4"/250-lb male can't just bust a cap in the ass of an unarmed 100-lb shitbag because he could have protected himself just as well using his fists. If the same shitbag came at him after demonstrating a Bruce-Lee flying kick first (or reaching into his waistband), deadly force would still probably be OK. No matter what statutes exist, "reasonableness" always controls and juries decide whether it was reasonable based on the evidence.
I won't see it, because he's had me blocked ever since the last time he embarrassed himself pretending he knows a fucking thing about the law or aviation, but I'm sure that fool "NewCastleFan" will be along shortly to post some totally incorrect nonsense about this topic as though he knows something about it.
Never mind. You can bust a cap if someone looks at you wrong.
Lol. Never bring a wood bat to a bullet fight.
dawesome, dotally dawesome...
this is why i strictly use blowdarts for all road rage activities
that bat sure showed him
you get what you get.
Guy with the bat was a stupid hot head ...paid the price
All shots: Just.
Definitely no loss to society.
In PA with a license to carry for protection ...that was a clean shoot
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. There's no such thing as any "license" for anything that allows you to pop someone in the back of the head after he's already lying on the ground with two slugs in him. Post the statute you're talking about or GTFOHWTBS.
If you haven't already befriended NewcastleFan, go ahead; you two should get along just great.
Perfect example of why it's fucking scary the way anybody can carry a weapon legally in so many states, without knowing Jack Shit about what's legal or reasonable.
Use of deadly force to combat use of deadly force. In case you haven't noticed there have been thousands and thousands of people killed with baseball bats. The guy still looked dangerous, still had the bat, he was put down. Dont want to die? dont go after someone with a bat
Nobody's disputing the first shot. But once he's on the ground after being shot, you don't get to pop him again in the head, at least not in any state in this country, especially after other people are in between you and the guy's no longer a threat.