|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
PA: Don't excuse gun violence
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
So-called “stand-your-ground” laws originally were meant to ensure that someone could not be prosecuted for using deadly force in self-defense when that was the only option. State laws generally included a “duty to retreat” to avoid violent confrontations whenever possible.
But beginning about a decade ago, a wave of states including Pennsylvania vastly altered those laws to protect overtly offensive rather than purely defensive behavior by people using deadly force, most often with guns. |
Comment by:
jac
(8/3/2018)
|
The whiners complaining about stand your ground in the Clearwater shooting ignore an important fact. The victim was on the ground and couldn't retreat when he shot his attacker. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|