Quote:
Originally Posted by Manigault
Proportionality is facet of the use of deadly force in self-defense.
|
No...it's not. I have to wonder where it was you were taught about use of lethal force. Back in the day the rules were pretty simple. You could shoot preemptively o stop murder rape or arson. Self defense was defined simply as "fear of death or great bodily harm" as justification. Those rules are still in effect for the most part outside of wokey tokey land. Proportionality? Seriously?
In the case in question here Alba was proportionally vastly physically inferior to his attacker. His use of lethal force was totally justified. He used what he had at hand to stop an attack that would have left him grievously injured at the very least stone dead at the worst. These urban thugs love to do beatdowns on weaker defenseless victims.
Witness the recent case in Philly. Alba had every reason there is to fear for his life. So he fought back with what he had which a knife. My philosophy on lethal force is garnered from many years of training and experience in the use of a firearm for defense. But in the absence of a firearm it's improvisation that matters. Albsa improvised. And he stayed alive. I shed no remorse at all for his attacker and I still think the girlfriend should be sitting in Rikers.
A 62 year old bodega worker confronted by a known violent street thug managed to turn the tables and walk away. "Proportionally" Alba was at a serious disadvantage. I say that for one he did the whole country a favor by killing this rodent and two he couldn't have been more justified in doing so. I have had to defend myself from street coyotes before. They don't follow any set of rules that we solid citizens have to.
Those rules are burned into my brain and I burned them into my students. There ae subtle nuances in self defense law that varies state to state. By far the worst was CA but I think NYC just topped that. In my case here in N NV a DA trying to make a name for himself tried to prosecute me based on certain custom add ons to my revolver. Which he said meant I was "hunting for trouble. Aftermarket grips and extended cylinder release and he also tried to through in my high viz adjustable sights which were factor installed. Bone stock.
But police reports and a slew of witnesses got that I was "hunting trouble" bilge tossed right out. The arraignment judge wasn't having any of it. These over reaching far left DAs and ADAs have been around a long time. But in all my years I've never seen this sort of reeking scupper brine. I thought my case was bad. It was for N NV but thankfully there's still some good judges out there. They just don't preside in NYC or pick any CA urban cesspool.
As a final thought on "proportionality" It's the victim of an assault that needs to factor that in. And proportionally the victim is ALWAYS at a disadvantage. An attacker is on offense the victim is fighting from a defensive position. At least until the victim chooses not to be food for the aforementioned varmints and puts 7 rounds in the attacker. Especially for disabled and elderly people (like Alba) tying to fight back bare handle or even with an LTL weapon is a fools venture.
Shoot that sumbitch.
The video ,at least the whole unedited video, shows a clear cut case of self defense. Anyplace but wokey tokey la la land anyway.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
