Not disagreeing, but think you need to include the full text of the opinion.
So with the above, you happen to come into possession of a handgun after the threat of imminent danger of loss of life, you may then use "Necessity" as a defense.
I truly like where this is heading, but need to be careful that we don't just take snippets of this out of context.
IANAL by any means! Just someone that is intrigued..
reading even more of the text, it uses the word "impending" twice.
impending danger is not in any of the statutes. apprehended danger is.
two vastly different concepts.
impending danger would not allow anyone to qualify for a permit. and if it did, a 90 day wait would negate a permit's effectiveness.
but still, there are two different things posted in that excerpt. reasoning and a conclusion. the reasoning is a little off, but the conclusion is good.