Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (138753)	8/10/2001 7:44:30 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575424

Tim, and what I was trying to point out is that the behavior/actions of the two deputies could lead to new laws being passed that restrict a person from shooting a bear on his own property. 1- If that was how it happened it would be unjust and practically bad if it excluded if it exluded self defense. If this was the reason it could explain why such laws exist but it would not deal with the point that they are unjust. 2 - That isn't how the law came to be. The person who shot the grizzly got in trouble because grizzlies are a threatened species under the endangered species act. On the other hand there is a provision for self defense in the ESA so it might be more the fault of a bad court decision then bad law (not the I think the ESA is an example of a good law). Tim