three strange men

Father Steve wrote:

Killing is a sin.
Jesus got brutaly beaten and you didn't see him shooting people.
We should all follow the non violent teachings of christ and put pur faith in him.
Guns are wrong.
Kiilling is wrong.
YOU ARE ALL WRONG.
May God have mercy on your souls.

Molesting alter boys is wrong to Father.

BrokenBooty wrote:

<quoted text>
Molesting alter boys is wrong to Father.

Well I never.
Just like Jesus says, "forgive"

I believe in my Lords teachings, therefore I forgive you for your insulting post.

If you just believe in the good word, your broken booty shall be healed.

Amen

Here are the Illinois laws on use of force and forcible felony. I still don't see where it says you can shoot someone in the back. I also attempted to look up the Use of Lethal Force Triangle. I see that has a place in Military and LE but obviously doesn't apply to citizens. I also didn't see where it states that you can shoot a fleeing suspect in the back.
(720 ILCS 5/Art. 7 heading)
ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
(720 ILCS 5/7 1)(from Ch. 38, par. 7 1)
Sec. 7 1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
(b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.
(Source: P.A. 93 832, eff. 7 28 04.)
(720 ILCS 5/7 2)(from Ch. 38, par. 7 2)
Sec. 7 2. Use of force in defense of dwelling.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent,
riotous, or tumultuous manner, and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent an assault upon, or offer of personal violence to, him or another then in the dwelling, or
(2) He reasonably believes that such force is
necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.
( b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.

(720 ILCS 5/7 3)(from Ch. 38, par. 7 3)
Sec. 7 3. Use of force in defense of other property.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property (other than a dwelling) or personal property, lawfully in his possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his immediate family or household or of a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.

A forcible felony is defined in the Criminal Code of 1961:
"treason, first degree murder, second degree murder, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, robbery, burglary, residential burglary, aggravated arson, arson, aggravated kidnapping, kidnapping, aggravated battery resulting in great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement[,] and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual."

Lifer looking to leave wrote:

Here are the Illinois laws on use of force and forcible felony. I still don't see where it says you can shoot someone in the back. I also attempted to look up the Use of Lethal Force Triangle. I see that has a place in Military and LE but obviously doesn't apply to citizens. I also didn't see where it states that you can shoot a fleeing suspect in the back.
Sec. 7 1. Use of force in defense of person.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony.
(b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.
(Source: P.A. 93 832, eff. 7 28 04.)
(720 ILCS 5/7 2)(from Ch. 38, par. 7 2)
Sec. 7 2. Use of force in defense of dwelling.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's unlawful entry into or attack upon a dwelling. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
(1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent,
riotous, or tumultuous manner, and he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent an assault upon, or offer of personal violence to, him or another then in the dwelling, or
(2) He reasonably believes that such force is
necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.
( b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.
(720 ILCS 5/7 3)(from Ch. 38, par. 7 3)
Sec. 7 3. Use of force in defense of other property.
(a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with either real property (other than a dwelling) or personal property, lawfully in his possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his immediate family or household or of a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(b - In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7 4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.

You answered your own question... Sec.7.2

Lifer looking to leave wrote:

A forcible felony is defined in the Criminal Code of 1961:
"treason, first degree murder, second degree murder, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, robbery, burglary, residential burglary, aggravated arson, arson, aggravated kidnapping, kidnapping, aggravated battery resulting in great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement[,] and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual."

EXACTLY!

7.2 does not explicitly state that you can shoot them in the back. If their back is to you then there could not be fear of harm.

The only way that I think this could be applied to shooting someone in the back is if they were attacking another person in the dwelling or preparing to attack another person. Then have at it but obviously try to have an angle of attack so as to not hit the vicitim...which I'm sure you're well aware of.

If it's just you and him and his back is to you then I don't think it would apply.

Most of what I posted was more for others to see, as it clearly supports what you were stating.

Lifer looking to leave wrote:

7.2 does not explicitly state that you can shoot them in the back. If their back is to you then there could not be fear of harm.
The only way that I think this could be applied to shooting someone in the back is if they were attacking another person in the dwelling or preparing to attack another person. Then have at it but obviously try to have an angle of attack so as to not hit the vicitim...which I'm sure you're well aware of.
If it's just you and him and his back is to you then I don't think it would apply.
Most of what I posted was more for others to see, as it clearly supports what you were stating.

Thanks!

GOLDEN RULE : Better to be judged by 12 than be carried by 6.

Silence must be the end of this post. Right, Tommy Duece?

Tommy Three Toes wrote:

Silence must be the end of this post. Right, Tommy Duece?

no.... I proved my point... And was proven right.

I dont buy the muslim handing out flyers story. It could be a threat to your safety and belongings. Inform the police.