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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (15987)	6/29/2002 3:43:34 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

If one thinks oneself to be justified, or to be so over- wrought as to diminish accountability, then make the arguments. If the jury and/or judge doesn't buy it, make an appeal for gubernatorial clemency. I mean, there are avenues if you think that you should not be held to account. But most people claim justification, because they had motive, and want to get away with it. Protestations like that, per se, mean nothing. The article you adduce is very interesting. Of course, it is mainly a failure of law enforcement, and, additionally, if one shot such a person when in imminent danger, one would be in the right. The fact is, plenty of people make threats, and even worse, and do not follow through on murder. If we allowed people to shoot those who had frightened them, who know where it would end? And, if the conditions necessary to justify the use of deadly force are too restrictive, then perhaps one should loosen them up, not overturn the whole criminal justice system......