Originally Posted by Doc3402
I always figured that deadly force was for imminent risk of death or great bodily harm. The operative word to me was imminent. If I am at imminent risk I don't think I want to take a warning shot.
Here's the part that I think is going to hurt us. Where warning shots were illegal, what is going to happen now? I can see some poor slob that had to shoot to live trying to explain from the witness stand why he didn't fire a warning shot. I can see the jury being swayed by the fact that he didn't try to scare off his attacker first. This reeks.
that's a good point Doc. not one i considered either. and i can see your point and if in a case it got as far as a trial, it could be possible for them to use it against a person, for not firing a warning shot first.
a lot will depend on how the statute is written.