Murph wrote:So wait... It sounds like some people are advocating shooting someone who assaults them. Am I reading that right?
Regular Guy wrote:In SC if you are attacked by two or more people it's considered deadly force and you are lawfully able to respond in kind.
It's very important to know your local laws regarding self defense. It could mean the difference between going home, or going to jail. However, that wasn't really what I was asking... Unless of course you're implying an answer.
I'm quite sure nobody is advocating shooting an assailant in retaliation for an assault, if that's what you're asking, Murph. Nothing I've read in this thread seems to recommend that.
I would never advocate the use of a handgun to defend against a simple assault. There are situations where you may have technically been targeted for an attack, but don't have good reason to believe your life is in danger. Someone shoves you in line, throws a drink in your face and taunts you, takes offense at something you say and smacks you, puts their hands on you in anger but doesn't seem capable of really hurting you, or seems like they might calm down if you say or do the right placative thing, or whatever - there are lot's of non-lethal assaults, and if there isn't a good reason to believe that death/sexual assault/serious debilitating injuries are an imminent consequence of an assault, then no. NO guns or other lethal tools should be brought to bear, other means should be used instead.
However, to defend against an assault in which there is
a near certainty of death/rape/serious injury, sure. And depending on the physical stamina of the victim, and the number of attackers and their persistence - yes, being attacked by a gang of people could well be a life threatening event.
WRT "happy slapping" or "knockout king" or whatever the current vogue term might be - If someone stuns you with one punch and walks away, then the assault is over, no point grabbing your weapon and pursuing them - that wouldn't be self defense, it would be revenge or a counterattack,
and unethical. But
in many cases referenced in this thread, the first punch is followed by a mob attack. People die quite easily
when a mob tries to beat them into submission. If you're unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end of mob violence, it probably would be appropriate to use a weapon to save yourself. Not to "shoot someone who assaults" you, no. But to save yourself
from grave bodily harm, yes. If you are an older person, physically frail or otherwise vulnerable - as most of the victims seem to be - then the danger is even greater.
It's always preferable, of course, to steer around the iceberg instead of relying on your life jacket, preferable land the plane safely instead of relying on your ejector button and parachute, preferable to refrain from setting your kitchen on fire instead of relying on your fire extinguisher. Better to avoid confrontations instead of trusting a firearm, but it's still just as useful an item to have as the aforementioned life jacket, extinguisher, etc. and just as capable of saving your life if used appropriately, in the right circumstances.