Advantage Martial Arts Has Over Guns

[Hot Lunch]

Shifting to whether these cases involve prosecuting someone for giving legal advice misses my original point.

No, THIS is your original point:

Just a quick reminder: legal advice without qualifications can lead to a knock on the door, especially under EU and Swedish regulations.

And as I said before, this doesn't apply in the US,

 

[drop bear]

 

[PhotonGuy]

Because you fight back. You're still liable to cause grievous bodily harm, and open up avenues for prosecution.

But it's self defense, that's why it's called fighting back. You didn't start the fight, you just defended yourself when you were attacked first. Im from the USA and in the USA you're allowed to defend yourself if you're attacked.

 

[PhotonGuy]

I've reported this thread (not the poster), as it's dangerous in my opinion to entertain any legal hypothetical involving guns and MA. People are impressionable.

Well as I said before in this thread, Im not trying to give legal advice. Im not a lawyer and if you want legal advice my advice would be to find a good lawyer. I was just stating my opinion and if Im wrong Im open to correction.

 

[PhotonGuy]

I've heard that in Sweden, a man is guilty of rape if he feigns an LTR and ends up pumping & dumping.

So in Sweden if you have consensual sex and then break up with your partner afterwards you can be guilty of rape? That's ridiculous.

 

[Haruhiko]

But it's self defense, that's why it's called fighting back. You didn't start the fight, you just defended yourself when you were attacked first. Im from the USA and in the USA you're allowed to defend yourself if you're attacked.

Just because you're allowed to fight back doesn't excuse you from the legal consequences should you seriously harm or God forbid kill someone.

I can't believe this conversation is still going on...

 

[PhotonGuy]

I'm not Swedish nor American. And my concern comes from people reading snippets of the thread and walking away with the notion that using MA against a firearm is a good idea that, should they be charged, is also justified lawfully in legal cases.

Using MA against a firearm is not something I would recommend. If you're faced with a firearm wielding attacker and you don't have a firearm of your own my advice would be to run, no matter how good at the martial arts you are.

The claim that referencing an internet post in a U.S. court would lead to "being laughed at" is inaccurate. U.S. courts often consider online content, including social media posts, as admissible evidence. Examples show that unconventional evidence, including internet posts, has been taken seriously in legal proceedings.

Here in the USA we've got the 1st Amendment which identifies freedom of speech.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Under EU and Swedish regulations, even informal online advice can fall under unauthorised practice or misrepresentation, especially if it risks misleading others.

So in other words, under the EU and Swedish regulations you can get in trouble for making internet posts even if you're just stating your opinion and not trying to give advice. It's a good thing we have the 1st Amendment in the USA and if you ask me, people are really gullible if they're going to believe everything they read on the internet.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Just because you're allowed to fight back doesn't excuse you from the legal consequences should you seriously harm or God forbid kill someone.

I can't believe this conversation is still going on...

Killing is quite cut and dry but as for what it means to seriously harm somebody, that can be debatable.

 

[Hot Lunch]

So in Sweden if you have consensual sex and then break up with your partner afterwards you can be guilty of rape? That's ridiculous.

Not exactly. Basically, if the act occurred because you lied to the woman to make it happen, you're guilty of rape.

 

[JowGaWolf]

lol at
"1 shot"
"121 foot away = run towards the guy with the gun and not away."
With that 40 yard sprint speed. I think he would be in trouble even during the days of musket ball