Actually in real life, people probably would react that way out of a parasympathetic response. There was recently a case in Australia where a passenger on a train killed an armed Muslim who had been provoking and threatening to kill the other passenger for looking at his sister. When he pulled a knife out, the other passenger beat the muslim guy dead out of genuine fear, and the eye witnesses and courts ruled it as a case of self defense, and no charges were pressed against the guy that killed the armed Muslim.
That's a "necessary" reaction to a real threat. Platinum87 is famous here for claiming he would react vastly disproportionately to minor stimuli. In this case it's moron he claims to have seen handling a weapon badly. Something which I promise he
is making up.
In the past it has been him very directly claiming that he would kill anyone who threatened to kill him, regardless of how serious that threat was or wasn't, and that he would do so with premeditation. Claiming that "in his eyes" this would be entirely justified.
You need to understand we're dealing with a world class bull****er and classic keyboard warrior here.
Whereas in the UK, you go to jail for a long long time if you punch an intruder in your house.
That is a complete fallacy, perpetuated by extreme right wing media. There are rare cases where the defendant has been convicted, but only where they
did go over the top. Officially you may use "reasonable force to defend your person and your property", the majority of cases where even lethal force was used have been deemed reasonable.
If you kill someone in your home and that was a reasonable action given the circumstances and you believed they were a threat to you, then you are essentially in the clear.
This means that if you are confronted by an armed intruder and you attack them with the nearest weapon like thing and they die, you are probably OK, even if it can be proven that that intruder would not have used their weapon.
If you Grab a knife, then investigate the noise, and stab an unarmed intruder who is not posing a threat to you, you stand a chance of a conviction, probably manslaughter.
If you follow the fleeing intruder out of the house, down the street, then beat him with a cricket bat until he has brain damage, you are in trouble.
If you can show that I'm wrong I would be very interested to continue this discussion, but it's one we've had on this forum many times, it only ever ends one way...
.
Though saying that the father isnt much better!