Monster Hunter: Cryptids?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Emerikol

The key is if the jury believes you believed your life was in danger. It's self-defense not defend others.

Many states do have a "defense of self or others" exception.

Originally Posted by Emerikol

And you are right. In most states, your home is your castle and self defense is always authorized.

Well, most states say you don't have a duty to retreat in your home, but it still has to actually be defense.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by stranger38

PS: no way double barrels are LC4 in germany!

Yes, I phrased that incorrectly- not LC4. I just said meant they are legal. In Germany or Canada a weapon that in the US would be called a "Short-Barreled Shotgun" is no more restricted than any other firearm. So as long as you can own a shotgun there, you can own a short-barreled one, unlike in the US where you would need to go through further processes such as registering it and getting a tax stamp. On the other hand, in Germany or Canada you have to register every firearm at baseline, so any firearm is LC3 there, unlike in the US. And even in some US jurisdictions registration is required under local law (not federal) for any firearm.

But gun law in the US is needlessly complex.

Take for example the "Gun-Free School Zones Act", which prohibits possessing a gun within 1000 feet of school property. Just driving past with a holstered gun is a felony, and I challenge you to memorize the tiny scraps of territory in any urban area that are not with in 1000 feet of school property. So in practice the Gun-Free School Zones Act is a gun ban in cities. There is an exception for other private property within 1000 feet of the school, or travelling directly to or from there- so you commit a felony if you stop at a market inside the zone on the way to or from the shooting range. There is also an exception for a gun that is unloaded and locked in a container in a car.

So as I said- complex.

And then every jurisdiction gets to make their own laws, too, so that it is functionally impossible to travel with a gun without risking accidentally committing a felony just because some random township decided to make your gun or magazine illegal. (Many jurisdictions have banned magazines above a certain arbitrary capacity, usually 10 rounds, and made possession of one a felony.)

And individual property owners can ban guns on their property too, which on it's face doesn't sound unreasonable... until you consider public accommodations like grocery stores or a mall, and corporate ownership. Corporations (and many other owners) will always ban firearms on their property for fear that they will be held liable if anyone is ever harmed by a firearm that they have allowed in, even if only by omission such as merely not posting a "no firearms" sign. This in practice makes it functionally impossible to legally carry a gun while you run errands in the US even if you do have a concealed carry permit. Yet those owners will never be held liable if someone is harmed because they could not defend themselves when they couldn't carry a gun because a property owner banned them... as has happened a scant few times. So they are quite happy to leave you defenseless and let you die to keep from risking a lawsuit. Imagine being a small woman whose muscular ex-husband is a constant threat to your life and you can't even go to the grocery store with the gun that the local sheriff agreed was a good idea for you to carry and issued you a permit. That must be terrifying.

So, there is a lot of wiggle room about the functional LC for guns in the modern US. Or even more so for the legality of carrying guns.

Originally Posted by Emerikol

It's self-defense not defend others.

Defense of another is legally "self"-defense in every jurisdiction in the U.S.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by acrosome

But gun law in the US is needlessly complex.

Indeed, and of course it's not just the US where the simple LC system has difficulties with all the complexities. In the end, LC works as a decent abstraction for the game world. Those who prefer zooming in more and dealing with more of the complexities - like the PC's needing to be mindful of staying beyond 1000 feet of school grounds when armed - are best off just using the laws as-is (or having the GM make their own if appropriate) and ignoring the LC system.

Originally Posted by acrosome

And individual property owners can ban guns on their property too [...] This in practice makes it functionally impossible to legally carry a gun while you run errands in the US even if you do have a concealed carry permit.

I don't think this is quite right. While, yes, a property owner can ban firearms from their property, and if you are found to be in violation of the ban they have the legal authority to require you to leave said property, I believe the only thing you could be arrested for would be trespassing if you refuse to leave. There was an incident a few years back where a gunman fired into a crowd at a shopping mall that didn't allow firearms on the property (which I believe is standard practice for most malls), and a bystander drew his own concealed firearm and took the shooter out. While there were some who called for the bystander to be arrested, IIRC the police were adamant that he was within his legal rights to carry the weapon (this was shortly after the State in which it occurred had passed Constitutional Carry, and IIRC the bystander in question actually had a Concealed Carry Permit from before that when into effect anyway), and looking it up now basically every news story refers to him as being "legally armed," despite the mall's No-Guns policy.

Originally Posted by acrosome

Defense of another is legally "self"-defense in every jurisdiction in the U.S.

A tangent, but do you know when this came to be, or if it's always been like that? I distinctly recall learning that self-defense only extended to one's immediate family and significant other, and wasn't an option for a "defense of friends/strangers" situation. I'm just curious if this was previously the case, or if that information was simply wrong.