While I appreciate the satire. It’s the combination of light emitted, the concentration and focus of the light and where it’s aimed. Flash photography among other sources are known to damage the retina. Shining wildlife is already a crime in many states. It’s admittedly being used a weapon to stop a potential attack. If the would be attacker wasn’t actually going to attack you then you wouldn’t be defending yourself, you would be ‘attacking him with weaponized light’ (new demon for the left to attack as soon as the get all those pesky guns ).
And to some degree I’m playing the white devils advocate here (miss you Mr. Walton), because I surely wouldn’t try to charge anyone for that, but if my feeble mind can make the connection surely some scumbag who thinks defending yourself should be a crime and happens to be better at arguing than me surely could.
You are seriously blowing this way out of proportion. You have had LEO tell you that you wouldn’t be charged but you are still going on about it. You have a choice to either shine the dang light or not, only you can make that monumental(apparently) decision. Can we please move on now.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro