woman with gun

self preservation trumps right to bear arms, thus meaning the constitution is useless anyhow

Self defence used to require that you had a duty to retreat, meaning the fact that you carry a gun around made it difficult for a jury to believe you did literally anything else to defuse the situation.

Then ALEC came along and now you have the right to stand your ground and shoot first. But that's a new thing. And it certainly isn't protected by any right you had more than twenty years ago.

Wooo stand your ground baby, yeeeehaaaaa!

no, self defense used the mean.. well ... self defense, if someone was trying to hurt you you could defend yourself lethally if necessary.

same as today, except now adays govt's make laws that punish you for doing so,

like for example its illegal to discharge a weapon within 500 feet of any residential building.

I had the same rights 20 years ago as I do now, the only difference being that the govt was knocked down a peg, seriously, where do you think human rights come from?

its not the govt, its YOU at BIRTH. Everyone has rights simply for being human. Self preservation is one of them.

You are full of shit
Duty to retreat my ass
Good way to get shot in the back

That was the law until ALEC. Why are you whining to me about it?

Go read the constitution then come back and tell me more about it
There is no duty to retreat in the bill of rights

Ok. Read it. The instructions to the jury to uphold self defence only if the defendent took all possible action that would have avoided loss of life - including retreating - is unconstitutional in zero parts of the Constitution.

This has been standard practice in most Common Law legal systems since, I guess, the Middle Ages.

What now? Where we at?

"In law, the duty to retreat, or requirement of safe retreat,[1]:550is a legal requirement in some jurisdictions that a threatened person cannot harm another in self-defense (especially lethal force) when it is possible to instead retreat to a place of safety.[1]:549–554 This requirement contrasts with right in some other jurisdictions to stand one's ground, meaning being allowed to defend one's self instead of retreating."'

so what I read is that if you can run away, you are legally made to.

so if an arsonist is burning your house with your family inside, you cannot stop him or save them you must run away

if a rapist is trying to rape you, you have to find a way to run away instead of fighting back

if a man is trying to shoot you, run away.

what kind of retarded legalese douchbaggery is this?

Written apparently by people who are more concerned with the rights of criminals than with the rights of victims.
Imagine if the minute men had followed this protocol. We'd be celebrating Guy Fawks day instead of the 4th of July!

You know what? The Wikipedia page on the duty to retreat explains it really very well. Knock yourself out and direct all complaints to history.

https://i.imgflip.com/2tnewz.jpg

No it dose not

yes it does, you cant have the ability to own guns without the idea of self preservation.

the govt would have NEVER given people guns had "self defense" or "self preservation" been a thing.

my bad I miss read what you said

Grandma with an AK

*insert witty comment about boomers*

Sorry I'm just learning

It's okay.