Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitchens
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
On the surface, Stand Your Ground laws make sense. Those who defend themselves legally and legitimately should be protected from frivolous lawsuits from criminals and their families.
But is there a middle ground between Stand Your Ground and protecting those who defend themselves? Is it a good idea for untrained civilians to take on the role of police? I'm not sure.
What do you think?
|
There is a enormous difference between not having to flee from a criminal before you are allowed to use deadly force to defend yourself and taking on the role of the police.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitchens
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
In a civilized society, I think people do have a duty to retreat from a deadly situation if they are able to do so.
There is a distinct difference between advocating vigilantism and protecting people from litigation after defending themselves.
Just my view.
|
1. Whether we live in a "civilized society" is open to debate.
2. I'm sure you already know the arguments against retreat being required, and how "if they are able to do so" is the kind of phrase upon which lawyers make bank.
3. I don't think vigilante justice should be discussed in this context, since "not having to retreat from an unlawful and dangerous threat when in a place that you are legally allowed to be" has basically nothing at all in common with "unlawfully taking the role of law enforcement into one's own hands."