Reasonable person
IANAL. This is more of an FYI.
It is my understanding that when you read that type of legalese, when it says something like "a person reasonably believes", that refers to something that a "reasonable person" would think, believe, and do in that situation. While Wikipedia is not an academic resource, its article on a reasonable person does a good job covering the topic for folks like us: Reasonable person - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
From what I've gathered, you don't have to be able to define why you believed what you did as that may require you to forfeit your Fifth Amendment rights. That is not to say that you shouldn't give careful thought and use all due diligence before taking action; no, one should certainly be mindful that he may be misunderstanding the situation, and one's use of force may not be justified at all. One may have simply witnessed a father picking up a truant daughter rather than a predator kidnapping a little girl. But, regardless, one shouldn't feel obligated to explain his actions (remember the thread about not talking to the cops?).
well, ok, I'll not share my blanket...blanket statements are for twin beds only :>) ...and Im not sharing blankets with anyone on here LOL
and yes my new shooting muffs came today LOL
now....I'll tell you what my law background is if you'll do the same....zero....I'm not taking any chances with how a slick lawyer and jury might interpret the law either.......
my point I guess was not written well as happens on forums...the point being...in all the code citations above the wording refers to:
quotes:
--reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force
--believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury
--involves the use or threat of force against a human being, or in which there is imminent danger of bodily injury to a human being.
(1) by using or threatening the use of force on any person; or
(2) by putting any person in fear;
we can senario all day long but the word BELIEVES can put us in trouble I believe because it has to be a reasonable belief doesn't it? esp when we are observing two strangers in the senario...who might be husband and wife....brother sister ?
not practicing law no mo no mo :>)
not convinced on the audio of these new muffs either
any lawyers on here?...that will admit it :>)
IANAL. This is more of an FYI.
It is my understanding that when you read that type of legalese, when it says something like "a person reasonably believes", that refers to something that a "reasonable person" would think, believe, and do in that situation. While Wikipedia is not an academic resource, its article on a reasonable person does a good job covering the topic for folks like us: Reasonable person - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
From what I've gathered, you don't have to be able to define why you believed what you did as that may require you to forfeit your Fifth Amendment rights. That is not to say that you shouldn't give careful thought and use all due diligence before taking action; no, one should certainly be mindful that he may be misunderstanding the situation, and one's use of force may not be justified at all. One may have simply witnessed a father picking up a truant daughter rather than a predator kidnapping a little girl. But, regardless, one shouldn't feel obligated to explain his actions (remember the thread about not talking to the cops?).