TexasCHLforum.com

Javier730 wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:

AJSully421 wrote:Disparity of force. (2 on 1, even if unarmed, age difference)

I don't get this argument. I've seen skulls broken, 1:1 - no disparity in size force. Any physical assault can be deadly. Why does it have to be 2:1 or a big difference in age or size?

I agree with your statement. Any assailant can be dangerous, but in this case, disparity of force would be easier to explain to 12 of my peers. If a one on one fight between individuals of the same stature was about to take place and one individual pulled a firearm and shot him, it could be considered justified but it would be difficult to prove. Would you draw on a person who became aggressive with you and did not have a weapon in their hands? Just curious.

I'm a medium sized middle-aged guy with zero training in hand-to-hand combat. I seriously doubt that I could do much against even one hardened thug who'd spent a lifetime "pushing weight" in a series of jail sentences, and even less likely if the thug was on drugs. So, if someone became physical with me, I would have to resort to other measures to defend my health and life. However, I can see your trepidation given the way the mass media "pre-convicts" people who defend themselves with firearms against an unarmed assailant, and the pressure that "pre-conviction" puts on the local authorities to actually convict the person who defended themselves from unwarranted aggression. Its a sad state of affairs in our nation.