Am I being too paranoid here?

[Guest 270win]

The little bit that I know about bankruptcy you can have problems hiding assets. You might want to discuss asset protection plans with an attorney in Tennessee. I'm not a lawyer and can't help you with that. There are some good ones on this gun board.

[NashvilleStage]

The time to prepare for a shooting is prior to it.

+1

I will never shoot someone to protect property, and can’t really see an unarmed person getting an altercation to the deadly force level.

I disagree with not using deadly force an unarmed person. "Disparity of Force" is a justifiable reason to defend yourself. The Larry Hickey case in Arizona would be one example.

[DaveTN]

I disagree with not using deadly force an unarmed person. "Disparity of Force" is a justifiable reason to defend yourself. The Larry Hickey case in Arizona would be one example.

There are many justifiable defenses to shooting an unarmed person. I’ll take an azz whipping over trying to argue any of them in court. It will be cheaper and I will get over it faster.

[Oh Shoot]

There are many justifiable defenses to shooting an unarmed person. I’ll take an azz whipping over trying to argue any of them in court. It will be cheaper and I will get over it faster.

Problem with an ass whipping is that you can't know if it might continue to your death knell, especially once one has entered geezerhood.

I've pretty much decided that even though I'm a fairly big guy and certainly in better shape than many of my age, I will NOT accept one any more, unless I started it.

- OS

[Guest aaron_wil]

Lots of great advice here. Definately makes me rethink things. I suppose that's what this sub-forum is for. Thanks, all!

[aquaman67]

There are many justifiable defenses to shooting an unarmed person. I’ll take an azz whipping over trying to argue any of them in court. It will be cheaper and I will get over it faster.

My HCP instructor told us that to use deadly force, you must be in fear for your life. Gettting your nose bloodied isn't fearing for your life.

[RobertNashville]

My HCP instructor told us that to use deadly force, you must be in fear for your life. A bloody nose isn't fearing for your life.

A bloody nose isn't but if someone is coming at you to, apparently, beat you up how do you know it will end at that??? Plus, what is a mere "ass whipping" to a 20-something in good shape could be a life or death issue for a senior citizen; even a senior in fair shape for his/her age.

In other words, if you are truly in fear for your life then you are in fear for your life...whether someone else would have been in the same situation is somewhat immaterial.

[Guest Ggun]

Unless you have prenup, all husband/wife property jointly owned. Not even sure how effective a prenup is in TN, though since contract law is pretty strong here I guess it works?

snip- OS

OS, Separate property ownership during a marriage is alive and well in the state of TN. It's a matter of proof. So is separate debt.

[DaveTN]

In other words, if you are truly in fear for your life then you are in fear for your life...whether someone else would have been in the same situation is somewhat immaterial.

No…. its very material. Only you will know if you were in fear of your life. Since no one else can know that, the standard is would a reasonable person in the same situation be in fear of death or great bodily harm. A jury will put themselves in your shoes and if they would have shot the person you are in good shape; if not they will send you to prison.

[Oh Shoot]

OS, Separate property ownership during a marriage is alive and well in the state of TN. It's a matter of proof. So is separate debt.

Here's hoping you won't ever have to prove your point.

- OS

[titan14]

My HCP instructor told us that to use deadly force, you must be in fear for your life. Getting your nose bloodied isn't fearing for your life.

I was once told by a very intelligent man...."When you get into an altercation(fist fight, etc)...it IMMEDIATELY becomes a life or death situation IF one of you are armed."

Your gun falls out and the other party grabs it....

You get your ass kicked and the other party TAKES your gun....

The other party beats you continuously until you die....

I said the EXACT same thing to this person....He changed my thinking within 2 minutes of explanation.

[Guest Letereat!]

IMHO you have very little to worry about in TN. We are one of 31 castle doctrine states and the law is very much infavor of the home owner. Unless you are dancing around with glee firing indescriminately into the air and the dead guy you should be good.

) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where such person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force against another person when and to the degree the person reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful force.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of § 39-17-1322, a person who is not engaged in unlawful activity and is in a place where such person has a right to be has no duty to retreat before threatening or using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if:

(A) The person has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury;

( The danger creating the belief of imminent death or serious bodily injury is real, or honestly believed to be real at the time; and

© The belief of danger is founded upon reasonable grounds.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Letereat!

[7dogguy]

While I know this wasn't directed at me and I am not educated in this area, but it would seem fairly clear in the law the answer is no.

39-11-622(a)(1)( says you are immune from civil liability unless, "The force used by the person resulted in property damage to or the death or injury of an innocent bystander or other person against whom the force used was not justified."

http://www.michie.com/tennessee

Or as I was taught from a young age hunting: you own your shots. Same rule applies here, clearly and unless I am dreaming is also discussed in courses required for an HCP in the Great State of TN (at least it was at G&L a couple of years back).

[7dogguy]

The time to prepare for a shooting is prior to it.

I am confident that if I have to shoot someone my shooting will be justified in any state in this country. While I don’t pretend to know the laws in all 50 states I’m pretty sure that they all allow for the use of deadly force if a Prosecutor, Judge or jury determine the person I shot was trying to kill me.

I will never shoot someone to protect property, and can’t really see an unarmed person getting an altercation to the deadly force level.

I am trained to look beyond my target. I’m not going to put myself in a situation where I am going to shoot an innocent bystander.

Go through all the possible shooting scenarios you can think of. Have a solution that will both leave you alive and will not devastate you financially.

Have a plan in case you have to use deadly force. If I have a clean shoot I’m cooperating with investigators from the beginning. But that is my decision from having been a cop and responding to shootings. You need to make those decisions based on whatever you are ready to take responsibility for. If I think my shoot might be questionable I have an attorney that I can contact any hour of the day or night. Even though mine is in another state he can handle things if need be.

I’m not an attorney, but attorneys are Officers of the Court. I doubt any of them will be involved in hiding money or assets from the court.

+1 and I like the way you think! But I still have the Umbrella policy, mostly cause I saw so many suits when living in CA, I reckoned the couple of hundred bucks a year was worth the protection (and having dogs, there is always a chance of someone getting bit and suing, not to mention the potential from even a lawful gun incident).

[NashvilleStage]

Separate property ownership during a marriage is alive and well in the state of TN. It's a matter of proof. So is separate debt.

Here's hoping you won't ever have to prove your point.

I'm pretty sure that Ggun is correct. However, OS, you're partly right in that it becomes a moot point for anything that is jointly owned.

For example, a person gets a huge judgment against them & has to sell everything they own to cover it. If their car is in the spouse's name only, it's not at risk. If the car is jointly owned, the spouse's 50% stake in the car is not at risk, but the car still has to be sold to get the other half out of it.

[Guest Letereat!]

Or as I was taught from a young age hunting: you own your shots. Same rule applies here, clearly and unless I am dreaming is also discussed in courses required for an HCP in the Great State of TN (at least it was at G&L a couple of years back).

Critical point indeed, I meant to mention that. If you hit and kill a "bystander" you are ON THE HOOK and likely going to prison

[Fallguy]

Problem with an ass whipping is that you can't know if it might continue to your death knell, especially once one has entered geezerhood.

I've pretty much decided that even though I'm a fairly big guy and certainly in better shape than many of my age, I will NOT accept one any more, unless I started it.

- OS

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/general-off-topic/50123-michigan-man-67-dies-after-punch-burger-king-worker.html

[robbiev]

The little bit that I know about bankruptcy you can have problems hiding assets. You might want to discuss asset protection plans with an attorney in Tennessee. I'm not a lawyer and can't help you with that. There are some good ones on this gun board.

Concur with BR situation. I used to work for a company that financed certain items. We would sometimes win lawsuits and the judge would check back a certain number of years for recently transferred assets.

In addition to that, I "pre-inherited" some property, and was told by my attorney who is also a friend of mine, that if anything happened (the person was elderly) the property may still be liable under that person's name for unpaid bills for a certain number of years. Seems like he told me 7, but I'm not sure.

[Oh Shoot]

http://www.tngunowners.com/forums/general-off-topic/50123-michigan-man-67-dies-after-punch-burger-king-worker.html

Yep. See?

- OS

[mikegideon]

Yep. See?

- OS

You're tougher than that. You survived being shot in the noggin

[Oh Shoot]

You're tougher than that. You survived being shot in the noggin

Barrett .50BMG recoiled into my nose in the last year, too.

You're right, I am a tough MF. I think I'll go out and pick a fight.

- OS

[tnhawk]

I'm too old to run or fight, so there aren't many options left.

[RobertNashville]

No…. its very material. Only you will know if you were in fear of your life. Since no one else can know that, the standard is would a reasonable person in the same situation be in fear of death or great bodily harm. A jury will put themselves in your shoes and if they would have shot the person you are in good shape; if not they will send you to prison.

The "reasonable man" standard isn't a one-size-fits-all and the situation must take into account all factors. What a 65 year old mobility impaired "reasonable man" would consider life threatening is ENTIRELY different than a 20-something linebacker for a the Titans (or any 20-something in decent physical shape for that matter).

And in any case, while I hope I never have to kill someone I'd rather be alive to face a jury and possible jail time than dead.

[Fallguy]

The "reasonable man" standard isn't a one-size-fits-all and the situation must take into account all factors. What a 65 year old mobility impaired "reasonable man" would consider life threatening is ENTIRELY different than a 20-something linebacker for a the Titans (or any 20-something in decent physical shape for that matter).

And in any case, while I hope I never have to kill someone I'd rather be alive to face a jury and possible jail time than dead.

Yeah, I've always thought the standard was whether it was reasoable for you in that situation to be in fear etc.....

So yes, the you and the situation is different everytime and therefore what may or may not be reasonable...

[waynesan]

Here is more on what the law says:

29-34-201. Injuries suffered in committing or attempting to commit felony on property of another — Recovery barred — Scope of immunity for one injuring a perpetrator of a criminal offense. —

(a) Any person who is injured while committing a felony or attempting to commit a felony on the real property of another is barred from recovery of actual or punitive damages resulting from injuries, either accidentally or intentionally inflicted by the owner, lawful occupier or tenant of such property, which the person receives while committing or attempting to commit a felony.

( (1) A person who accidentally or intentionally causes property damage to or inflicts injury or death upon the perpetrator of a criminal offense is absolutely immune from civil liability for or the payment of monetary damages from such person's actions if at the time such damage, injury or death occurred:

(A) The person was preventing or attempting to prevent the perpetrator from committing the offense or was apprehending the perpetrator of the offense; and

( The perpetrator was committing one (1) or more of the offenses specified in subdivisions ©(1)-(9) or was attempting to commit one (1) or more of the offenses specified in subdivision ©(10).

(2) The immunity conferred by this subsection shall only apply to property damage caused to or injury or death inflicted upon a perpetrator of an enumerated offense and only under the conditions set out in this subsection. Such immunity shall not be construed to extend to property damage caused to or injury or death inflicted upon a bystander or other person who is not the perpetrator of an enumerated offense.

© The offenses for which such immunity applies are:

(1) Any criminal homicide;

(2) Aggravated rape;

(3) Kidnapping;

(4) Aggravated kidnapping;

(5) Especially aggravated kidnapping;

(6) Especially aggravated burglary;

(7) Aggravated robbery;

(8) Especially aggravated robbery;

(9) Carjacking; and

(10) Attempt to commit first or second degree murder.

[Acts 1971, ch. 177, § 1; T.C.A., §§ 23-3003, 29-34-103; Acts 1999, ch. 268, § 2.]