AdamT
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 17,773
- Reaction score
- 5,746
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
So I must take a vantage point of the door were I can get a clear shot because I can't shoot through anything; thus putting me in his line of fire as well. I should pray that he doesn't have a weapon he's willing to use and will at least have the common courtesy of opening the door first before he chooses to open fire upon me. That's your definition of reasonable. Here's mine. If you don't want me to shoot you, do not commit crimes against me. How's that for reasonable? I'm not the one in the wrong, I'm not the one who made the choice to act against the rights of others. But I sure as hell DO have the right to defend my own rights and liberties against outside force.
If we exclude your obvious hyperbole, yes mine is more rational for mine puts power in the hands of the law abiding citizen protecting their own rights and liberties. If I have the right to violently overthrow the government should it become too large a threat against my rights and liberties (and I do), I have the right to use force against others equally trying to infringe upon my rights and liberties.
No, in most states, and in the state in question in particurlar, you would be breaking the law. You would be committing a more serious crime than burglarly.