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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (459461)	9/16/2003 3:50:21 AM
From: Kevin Rose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

No, I said that in a Waco-like situation, where there the officers are performing their duty, that the defendants cannot use a self defense argument if they kill the officers. The 'shoot first' was in the context of that situation, which I tried to always lay out. Obviously, if a bunch of police break into your house and start blasting away, that's completely different. If I inferred that it was legal for officers to shoot you without reason, or that you could not defend yourself if officers just come in shooting, then I was wrong, and I apologize. I did find a Missouri statue that covers 'excessive force' and when officers are justified in using deadly force. I believe that the 3c below applies. The agents clearly knew there was a danger to their lives, given the reports of possession of illegal machine guns. I believe we can infer that if the shooting by agents is justified, that the self defense argument by the BDs won't apply. Chapter 563 Defense of Justification Section 563.046 Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest. 563.046. 1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody. 2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful. 3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only (1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or (2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested (a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or (b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or (c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay. 4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.