|
|
|
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:
Claiming Self-Defense Isn't a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
It’s become an all-too-familiar scenario: a gun owner becomes scared that a protester or mere passerby could endanger him and brandishes a gun. The gun owner then asserts that the rights to self-defense and to keep and bear arms protect him from prosecution. This line of argument, which is playing out in the McCloskey case in St. Louis, greatly misconstrues the scope of the Second Amendment and how self-defense actually works as a defense to criminal charges. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(7/24/2020)
|
So .... trespassers breaking down a fence .... threatening to kill the husband , wife and dog, threatening to burn down their house ... and in a locale with Castle Doctrine ...
NO RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE????
They WERE NOT "MERE PASSERSBY" and they WERE NOT en route to the mayor --- there was no path TO the mayor through the Mcloskey's property.
|
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/24/2020)
|
This waste of words can be shot down with one fact:
THE PARAMETERS OF SELF-DEFENSE ARE CODIFIED IN MISSOURI LAW.
The Second Amendment right is a given, so it's not at issue. What IS at issue is that Missouri has gone to great pains to moot debate, and spells out in detail what acts are lawful in the exercise of self-defense rights. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| ...If a man lies under oath or procures the lie of another under oath, if he perjures himself or suborns perjury, he is guilty under the statute law. Under the higher law, under the great law of morality and righteousness, he is precisely as guilty if, instead of lying in a court, he lies in a newspaper or on the stump; and in all probability, the evil effects of his conduct are infinitely more widespread and more pernicious. — Teddy Roosevelt - May 12, 1900 |
|
|
