There are a lot of "What if's" in self defense. Many people consider (In my opinion) that self defense is protecting yourself using as little force necessary to get out of a dangerous situation. Others say if you're in danger "Let loose and kick their ***." Is self defense something that you shouldn't abuse or is it something that you should "let loose" with?
I think that self defense is..if you defend yourself form an attacker. Self defense is not if you get attacked and you use more force than the attacker used. For example if the attacker punches you, then you take out a knife and stab the attacker. That would be more than self defense.
Self defense means self defense, thus the word...self defense. DEFENSE. Not attack. If you start beating the **** out of someone, then you become the attacker, and that's not self defense anymore.
I guess there are some aspects to consider. If someone breaks into your house, and you beat him until he backs off, chances are he'll just recover and come back at you. Would that justify going after him before he got the chance to recover? He attacked you, so should you quit just because you had the advantage? I don't really know myself. I guess you'd sort of have to injure the attacker to make sure he doesn't just attack you again, but exactly how much is too much?
I think it all has to do with the situation... if someone attacks you with a dangerous weapon i think you should attack back until they stop moving (unless you can run)if it is just a fist fight... you should just do enough to get away
What if this happened in your home? Should you just run out and leave him in there with all your valuables, or would the fact that he was in your home justify injuring the attacker?
if he's in your house i think you can injure the attacker. he came in your house with the intentions of harming you/your family by stealing your stuff... i dont see the harm in hurting them
By too much I meant kicking someone in the face while they are on the ground drowning in their own blood. Or running after a guy that is clearly running away in fear seeing that it was a mistake to mess with you, while he has a broken arm you catch up to him and you start hitting him with bricks and big stones. Too much is when it gets to the point that your abusing your power.
My version of self-defense more neutral than what others have said. It is simply put: to overcome your assailant, but no further. It's to defend yourself against all attacks, disarm your assailant to prevent him/her from attacking, and then leaving it at that. Any unnecessary injuries after the assailant isn't capable of doing you harm goes beyond self-defense and into the offensive realm.
In that respect, courts can rule against both parties for damages, if they can prove that both the aggressive stance of the instigator and the recklessness of the defender were both out of hand. If the instigator was killed during the attack by the defendant, then they can rule that that action was going too far. The only way that the defendant can be found not guilty of homicide is if there was no other way out of the situation other than to kill. Then it would just be involuntary manslaughter.
Nothing like a large revolver to promote the use of your amygdala, I suppose...
You have free reign with whomever engages you in a physically offensive manner.
If they're being little idiots insulting your pride and honor, hoping to provoke you, let them provoke you and make them sorry.
If they're doing it to impress someone and it's working, then you've got no point to prove other than that guy is a knob and that they shouldn't **** with you.
It's reasonable, but I don't think you'd want to be friends with any of them either.
In version of self defense the person will most likly end up on the floor in a lot of of pain. Why? Because there's no point in self defense if the person has any intention of attacking you again. They need to know that you can put them on the floor in pain. And if they try what they just did it'll happen again.
