Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
I believe that there should be absolute immunity from both
Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:38am

civil and criminal action to any person who responds with force to a violent felony.

No matter what the victim does to the perpetrator, the perpetrator or his estate should not be allowed to file any law suit.

No matter what the victim does to the perpetrator there shall be no criminal charges laid upon the victim from the episode.

The concept of "reasonable" force is absurd. When somebody is trying to kill you, you use the maximum force available (preferably a gun) to counter your assailant. You do not have time to reason about it to figure out how little force you can use. The courts expect you to predict in one-half second what the judge and jury shall decide to be reasonable after hours of deliberations.

In particular, when the perpetrator flees, he should be a fair target. There are two reasons for this:

1. He is likely to commit many other crimes if permitted to get safely away.
2. More immediately, just because a person is running away does NOT mean that he cannot turn around and shoot, or change his mind about running away and resume his attack.

Violent criminals must be stopped permanently, and there is no more efficacious way to do this than to give the victim full authority to do whatever is needed to stop them.


  • A long time ago a very expensive bicycle was stolen from my car. I still have a strong dislike towards thieves because of that. If the lady decides to fight the charges, and goes to trial while... more
    • I believe that there should be absolute immunity from both — DFM, Fri Jun 30 7:38am
Click here to receive daily updates

Religion and Ethics BBS