As a new member I’ve enjoyed the learning process and running through scenarios to figure out in advance what the best decision might be. So here’s a scenario my wife and I were discussing. We’d love some input here!
Scenario : What if the front door was left unlocked during the day (a mistake by whomever last went through it) and a stranger walks into the house, someone who looks si aggressive (not some nice person who is looking for a cup of coffee).
If they don’t respond to verbal commands to leave, and continue to advance into the house, is lethal force justified? (They do not appear to have anything in their hands but it is unknown whether they have anything else on them such as a knife)
A) They are trespassing and have been told to leave.
B) There is a disparity of force should they attempt to head upstairs where there are minors in the house, or even others who would not be in a physical condition to fight off an attacker.
C) They are probably within a few steps from any object that could become a bludgeoning tool.
So assuming you had a firearm on you, and CA being both a SYG state and the Castle Doctrine being considered, can lethal force be justified before determining whether they were in possession of a weapon?
My suggestion here would be to have a non lethal tool available such as pepper spray first, however, what advice do you tell your spouse regarding lethal force? The last thing you want is a choice resulting in a criminal charge by your spouse who’s looking to defend themselves/family members.
I look forward to the thoughts here! Thanks everyone.