TexasCHLforum.com

Morgan wrote:That's fine. I wasn't discussing wisdom, I was discussing legality. Substitute "your wife and child" for "your coworkers." Defense of another says that you must believe there is an "immediate need"... does leaving to get armed mean you "didn't act immediately"? I don't believe that's what "immediate" means in this case.

I log in again and see you are still stewing over this.

It is off base and missing the point to try to assert that the person left the building and came back, thus it wasn't "immediately necessary".

The standard for "immediately necessary" is the viewpoint of the person inside the building facing deadly force. The person inside the building is still in immediate need of self defense or defense by a third party since they are still facing a deadly threat. The standard of proof is based upon the circumstances of the person in need of defense, not the person providing the defense.

Thanks. :) That's the point I'm trying to put across, but no matter what, he keeps insisting that it's his belief that the ACTION must be immediate. It's to the point of willful ignorance at this point, so I've done what I could...another guy from this forum has weighed in as well, and if he just can't diagram a sentence in English and see that "immediately" modifies "necessary" and not "deadly force" there's really no hope for him, unfortunately.