system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: The Rittenhouse verdict was correct, but self-defense laws are too broad and risk turning the US into the wild west

There was a phrase popular in the Trump era that "Facts don't care about your feelings", but the only standard for self-defense is that you "feel" your life was in danger. If two people both threaten each other, both their lives are in danger and both are privy to self-defense from one another.

National CC across state lines is a popular push for firearms enthusiasts, but it further endangers the lives of all, because anyone could be conceal carrying, and anyone could be a threat, and if someone feels they are threatened they can legally take *any action* to feel less threatened.

Do I know how to prove someone's life is actually in danger? No, I don't. But right now the law seems to be *If you live, you were right. And if you die, you were wrong.*

**Outcome View:** The law changes based on whether the jury believes the defense in each situation was reasonable. That's why it seems so broad.
gpt
Self defense laws haven’t changed recently, yet the US hasn’t turned into the Wild West. Why do you think that will change now? 

People seem to assume all gun owners are psychos that want to go around killing everyone. Right now anyone could be a threat regardless of legal concealed carry. The third guy KR shot was illegally carrying a concealed gun. Legal conceal carry across state lines means that the people carrying have passed background checks to do so. Random criminals carrying guns won’t change just because legal conceal carry is removed.