[BrainSmashR]

Originally Posted by joepole

>No, it says that YOU as the legal resident must have a REASONABLE BELIEF that the use of force or violence was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motorvehicle.

Yes, it does. Then it says that the mere presence constitutes a reasonable belief. Try reading it again, more slowly. I'll even highlight the parts you're missing:

For the purposes of this Section, there shall be a presumption that a person lawfully inside a dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle held a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent unlawful entry thereto, or to compel an unlawful intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle, if both of the following occur:

(1) The person against whom deadly force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcibly entering or had unlawfully and forcibly entered the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle.

(2) The person who used deadly force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry was occurring or had occurred.

Read it once, take few deep breaths, then read it again. Then get somebody smart to explain it to you. If you do that and still believe that your previous assessments of this law are accurate then you have some sort of serious deficiency and really should begin to question your competency in performing other daily activities.

Why don't you just go ahead and shoot somebody in the back and test your little theory?