a lucid and accurate explanation of self-defense and SYG. Perhaps some of it will penetrate...

to be one that goes AGAINST the black person, be they the plaintiff or defendant. In too many cases, SYG is being used as a way to abuse people of color.

This is why they are so upset. Black people don't usually get positive outcomes in SYG or self defense court situations.

,,,an occurrence a gun fight is. Add that to the fact more than half the gun owners aren't great shots. I'm thinking SYG equals a lot more people shot by stray rounds.

Average number of shots fired in a personal defense scenario involving a gun hovers from zero to two, with two being the outlier. Just read that recently, though I'd let you know.

fired has relevance to magazine-capacity discussions as well; it would be very interesting to see an analysis...

Mag limit was almost a non-issue; I think the total rounds expended was in the realm of 5 shots? But I'll see if I can find the study again.

...empty the mag.
Personally, I prefer aiming. That's wrong, personally, I prefer avoidance. Then detente (Visual display and repeated loud warnings). Then a warning shot into a backstop. Aiming is, at best, my fourth choice.

Most of my firearms are bolt-action, and they're all non-pistols. Outside of three instances where I genuinely did have to protect my life (thankfully never shot), you'll likely never see me with a gun, unless I'm at or going to a tournament. :0

Chemotherapy is expensive. Now a days, house breaker will be facing a Katana.

...It is a terrible choice between break the law in the safest way available or separate a soul and body. I have stated my preference.

that firing that warning shot is generally considered evidence that deadly force was not warranted and makes it highly probable that it will be YOU doing jail time.

..in a no-escape situation.
If I still had a gun.

ALEC is the Worst...but NRA is involved.

We need to stop this SHIT from happening...but, realize ...you are never gonna take away Guns from the Southern Half of the USA....Unless you convince them about how ALEC has MANIPULATED THEM!

There needs to be a strategy.. I don't know what that strategy will be..but, I believe that SMART FOLKS will FIND A WAY to get BOTH SIDES together for some Common Cause..that maybe we don't see right now...BUT...it will come.

We gotta (as Dems) keep on WORKING/TRUCKING...whatever it TAKES!

prosecution must prove its scenario beyond a reasonable doubt.

Does that mean that a juror may believe the defendant is guilty, but must acquit if the state doesn't prove their case?

People are saying that the jurors "believed" the defense's case, but might not the juror not "believe" the defense's case and still vote for acquittal?

thanks for any help you can give.

That is *approaching* certainty, rather than certainty because we cannot be certain 100% of much of anything.

A reasonable doubt is any doubt based on reason. You can think of a way the person is innocent that fits the evidence and that doesn't require flights of fancy.

Say the only evidence is an eyewitness who picked a robber out of a line-up. Is it unreasonable that someone could be mistaken in that identification?

On the other hand, if the evidence is a fingerprint, we can reasonably say that no two fingerprints are alike... even though we have never checked everyone.

Beyond a reasonable doubt does mean beyond any doubt, but if there is a plausible interpretation of the evidence where the defendant is not guilty and a plausible interpretation where he is guilty then he must be found not guilty even if the guilty scenario/interpretation is likelier.

The standard of confidence of guilt in a criminal trial is way more than likely to be guilty or probably guilty.

A way I like to think of it is "would you stake someone else's life on your certainty" because that is really what a convicting juror is doing. Not staking his own life, but staking all or a big part of someone else's life.

Maybe it shouldn't have come in to play, but the fact that at least one juror has said that SYG was part of the rationale for her decision means that, unless she was lying, it most certainly did come into play.

You might argue that this particular juror was an idiot, and didn't understand the law, but idiot jurors are part of the system.

And in the sense of an overall cowboy mentality in the state it came into play indirectly.

It is part of a "shoot everybody, ask questions later" mentality that probably was involved in some way.

...is in your place of residence (aka at home). All other places you need to retreat if it will end the confrontation.

Most of these SYG laws need to be changed or repealed.