re: #304 Obdicut

I’m not asking you if you have the right. Don’t you think it would have been better for them to not shoot in that circumstance, at least to have tried something else first?
….
And how do you know they feel it would put them in danger?

I don’t think “What would be better…?” should be part of the equation. It’s completely subjective. You may decide in one situation that you can get away while I, in the exact same situation, may believe I don’t have that option.

But why do you not have the problem with the judges making the final call over if the person reasonably believed they had a chance to flee?

There has to be a line somewhere. “If you think your life is in danger you can kill without any questions being asked” shouldn’t be the standard. I think part of it should be left to the victim (to decide fight/flee) and have a judge/jury decide if it was reasonable for them to believe they were in danger.

To put it more succinctly (//) I think it’s a two part question. Who gets to decide the appropriate course of action when a victim believes their life is on the line and who gets to decide if that belief was reasonable.