Enough time in the sun to realize I don't have the right to grab a gun and run over to my neighbors place and start poppin off rounds because I believe someone comming out their window MIGHT be the person I suspect of breaking into my house and no body witnessed....
Phil
What an ignorant mofo. Looky where the SFB (that [bleep] FOR BRAINS) is from. What a surprise. You deserve to live where you live.
Yeah, but what's Stray's excuse?
My excuse? Oh, Montana law, I suppose...
45-3-104. Use of force in defense of other property. A person is justified in the use of force or threat to use force against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property, other than an occupied structure, or personal property
lawfully in the person's possession or in the possession of another who is a member of the person's immediate family or household or of a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of force likely to cause death or serious bodily harm only if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
History: En. 94-3-104 by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; R.C.M. 1947, 94-3-104; amd. Sec. 1645, Ch. 56, L. 2009.
or this one...
49-1-103. Right to use force. Any necessary force may be used to protect from wrongful injury the person or property of
one's self, of a wife, husband, child, parent, or other relative or member of one's family, or of a ward, servant, master, or guest. History: En. Sec. 36, Civ. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 3606, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 5694, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Civ. C. Sec. 50; Based on Field Civil C. Sec. 33; re-en. Sec. 5694, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 64-210.
Hey, just a word to the wise...be dang sure of the laws regarding the threat of deadly force where you live.
