by Jack – Real World Protection
Self Defense Fighting ? Recently in Louisiana, USA, a case was heard in the courts where a Japanese exchange student was killed by a gun on Halloween. The facts of this case are that the student and a friend had dressed up and gone to visit a friend in their costumes and accidentally rung the wrong doorbell.
The homeowner of the doorbell that they did ring shot the Japanese student dead, in “Self-Defense”. When this case of real world protection reached a court, the home owner was acquitted of any criminal wrong doing on the understanding that he was defending his home in a reasonable manner with his gun – that it is his right to own.
Due to America’s second amendment in the constitution: giving “American’s the right to keep a loaded gun at their home for personal use”, tragic cases such as our one featuring the Japanese student are frighteningly common and more often than not being judged in the favour of the homeowners and gun wielders as the courts judge them to be using a justifiable amount of protection for their home.
The second amendment to the constitution is something that the gun lobby has always used to support their case for Americans keeping guns for their self defense. However, with developments in technology and advancements in manufacturing – non-lethal but very effective forms of self defense ‘aids’ are now readily available. Within the budget of most guns.
The non-lethal alternatives to guns serve as a realistic form of protection in a modern world. For example, a taser gun can be brought from any gun shop for the same or less as a standard hand gun, pistol or riffle. However, if someone were to need to stop an intruder at their home or for their real world protection, then a taser gun would simply temporarily disable an attacker or intruder from the same distance as a gun but with less disabilitating or lethal consequences.
This development in the market of self defense weapons that can be used for real world protection without the need for serious injury of loss of life will, in my humble opinion and the opinion of numerous legal scholars, soon have an affect on the supreme court’s interpretation of the constitution’s second amendment – hopefully making situations such as the one with Japanese student a thing of the past.
If you must equip yourself with a weapon for your real world protection then I recommend that you no longer wield a gun; but you invest in defending your family with a taser gun. This will never see you having to defend your reasons for protecting your self in front of a judge and jury.