When a self-defense shooting case lands in a courtroom because of an accusation or some question as to the legality of the defender’s (not necessarily the defendant’s) actions, there is a frequent standard against which those actions are measured. Essentially, the question is asked: what would a reasonable person who possessed the information the defender had, and saw what he saw, and was where he was do in this situation? This is commonly called the reasonable person standard.
The reasonable person is a term frequently used in tort and Criminal Law to denote a hypothetical person in society who exercises average care, skill, and judgment in conduct and who serves as a comparative standard for determining liability.
Note that it’s not called the “gun-toting maniac standard.” It’s called the reasonable person standard because free citizens being habitually armed is reasonable. Free people defending their safety, property, or lives with deadly force is, in many situations, reasonable. Shooting another person is, in some unfortunate situations, reasonable.
The anti-liberty, gun-sense communists in the US would have you believe that owning firearms is something only a paranoid or sick maniac would do, and that carrying a firearm in public is something only a murderous fiend would do; but they’re neither of these things. Owning and carrying firearms is normal. It’s ordinary. It’s reasonable.
The organized enemies of liberty are continually conspiring to replace the reasonable person standard with the tyrannical communist standard or the cowed subject standard. Free, American, ordinary citizens must not allow them to do so.