|
|
|
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:
Germany: American's stabbing of German burglar deemed self-defense
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
German authorities have dropped an investigation of a U.S. Army employee who killed a burglar during a home break-in, saying he acted within his rights to defend his family.
Prosecutors said the 41-year-old American fought off three masked men at his Landstuhl home in February, but a fourth pushed past him, ran upstairs to where his wife and three children were and attacked his wife.
Prosecutors say the husband, a civilian employee of the U.S. Army's Regional Health Command Europe, heard her screams, grabbed a kitchen knife and stabbed the burglar twice while fighting with him. The wounded intruder fled and later died. |
| Comment by:
jac
(5/9/2019)
|
| It is good this didn't happen in formally great Britain. They don't allow self defense there. |
|
|
| 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) |
|
|
