« For any ATFE readers | Main | Big changes in Missouri »
Dr. Helen on police shootings and stress
Article here. It may be an aspect of what Prof. Renee Lerner noted at the last 2nd Amendment seminar at George Mason Univ. -- a profound disconnect between attitudes of the intelligensia and the rest of us. The former views a defensive use of force, no matter how justified, as a matter of last resort, to be tightly controlled. The general public views it as "one rapist or robber or even burglar fewer -- that's a social good, who cares about the details of how it came about?"
I sent Prof. Lerner a bit of personal knowledge. I know a local prosecutor who, about 20 years ago, went to the County Attorney and proposed that they stop prosecuting homeowners who shot burglars in the back, which under state law is about the only no-no in that situation. He pointed out they'd taken three of those cases to trial in his time, and every one had ended in a unanimous acquittal. So far as local juries were concerned, it was open season on burglars, no bag limit. The County Attorney responded they had to prosecute, it was against the law. The prosecutor replied -- if juries universally acquit, it isn't against the law, for all practical purposes.
5 Comments | Leave a comment
I would not shoot a fleeing man, unless he was in my home or had caused physical harm to one of mine. Then, by God, he is paid for. If he steals my car from the driveway I won't shoot him. If he invades my home or attempts to steal my car when family members are in it, I will pray for his soul, because his body will be dead.
Three cheers for jury nullification!!
And a Bronx cheer for the jury selection process.
Singing (to the tune of the Mickey Mouse Club closing song...
: " N- U- L..."
"Convict the law Abiding? Not on Ur Life"
"-L-I-F..."
"Effing burglar broke in my house..."
"F-I-C-A-shun!"
Goodnight, boys and girls!
Same deal here in florida. No point in prosecuting people who shoot rapists and burglars in the back if the juries always acquit.