Search found 2 matches

by Soccerdad1995
Tue May 21, 2019 3:02 pm
Forum: Other States
Topic: California Move to Restrict Deadly Force
Replies: 10
Views: 9124

Re: California Move to Restrict Deadly Force

RottenApple wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:39 pm
Soccerdad1995 wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 2:12 pm
For example, if I wake up at 3 AM to the sound of glass breaking and turn the corner to see a man in my house, I would think that would meet the "necessary" standard. If it does not, then I agree that this standard is overly strict.
I may be wrong, but the way I read it is that unless deadly force has or is about to be used against an officer (i.e. - the suspect has already fired or is pointing a gun at the cop), then deadly force is not "necessary". So in your scenario above, if you did not see that man with a gun in his hand pointed at you, then you'd be charged. If you say him with "something" in his hand, and you fired, and it later turned out it was a cell phone or something similar, you'd be charged.

This is going to be bad law if it gets that far.
I suspected it might be something along those lines. If that's the definition of "necessary" then I agree that this is a terrible standard.
by Soccerdad1995
Tue May 21, 2019 2:12 pm
Forum: Other States
Topic: California Move to Restrict Deadly Force
Replies: 10
Views: 9124

Re: California Move to Restrict Deadly Force

On the surface, this doesn't seem too bad. After all, as a private citizen I would hope that I would only use deadly force if it is "necessary" to save the lives of myself or someone else. Imposing this same standard does not seem like "declaring war on cops". That said, I am not a lawyer, so I don't know the practical implications of this legal standard. It seems like LE should have a similar standard as private citizens, maybe a bit more stringent since LE has been vetted and trained more than your average Joe citizen, and again, the "necessary" standard seems to be in line with the requirements on me regarding the use of deadly force. But there may very well be something that I am missing here.

For example, if I wake up at 3 AM to the sound of glass breaking and turn the corner to see a man in my house, I would think that would meet the "necessary" standard. If it does not, then I agree that this standard is overly strict.

Also the title of the article makes it pretty clear that the author has some bias here.

Return to “California Move to Restrict Deadly Force”