re: Qualified Immunity for Concealed Permit Holders?

quote:

---

Because current law already protects you from civil liability for a “good” kill.

---

Current law does not protect you from civil liability for a “good” kill. Any argument they come up with as to anything you did that fell below the standard of absolute perfection leads to potential comparative fault. Perhaps you shot several times but that last shot fell outside of the 1.5 second time frame some random expert thinks you could have made the decision to stop shooting because the aggression or danger had ceased. That evidence of something done slightly wrong on your part means you cannot get summary judgment (outright dismissal of the claims against you) and you will have to either settle or go in front of a jury where they’ll do everything they can to make you out to be a careless hothead just itching to shoot a young scholar who needed an involuntary contribution to his midnight basketball team.

Defending yourself for a “good shot” will cost lots of money one way or the other. Of course, I’d rather be alive for my family and broke than dead. Even better if i can be both alive and not spending money to defend myself for eliminating a threat. I would support some benefit of the doubt being given to self-defenders to avoid this situation.