(June 15, 2020 at 10:30 am)onlinebiker Wrote:(June 15, 2020 at 10:18 am)Agnostico Wrote: I tend to agree but did he intend to kill??? If so thats murder 2.
They will argue that by shooting someone 3 times in the back from 3 meters away your only intent is to kill. I think its hard to argue against that I think
So there could be a case for murder 2 i think
No. It is not.
It is a legal distinction.
You can use deadly force - and not intend to kill.
The deadly force is used to STOP the bad behavior.
This is the basis of self defense.
If we were sheep - like some countries - we would not be allowed to defend ourselves with firearms. But we are allowed such use - because of that distinction - of intent to stop and intent to kill.
Police have a more lenient definition of what is justifiable use of force. For instance - a cop can draw his firearm on someone robbing a bank - where the criminal is not showing a weapon. A civilian would likely go to jail for it.
And the laws vary by state.
It is never as simple as some here would obviously like...
Ye it would be complex with 50 states all having their own nuance laws.
I wasn't sure about the legislation that the cops had in using their firearms.
In the state of Georgia can a police officer shoot a man in that situation?
