What a crock! So this allows a criminal to steal your car, trash it, then
when the "law" gets it back, you can do nothing but get the insurance
company to take their dear sweet time getting you into a new car or rental
car, after which, they jack up your rates to the moon. God help you if it's
a classic car like our roadsters, because you just lose out. What's the
criminal get? 6 months of hard time with parole after 15 minutes so he can
do it again? The loser is, of course, the owner of the car.
One of these days, the normal American is going to take back this country
from the lawyers, politicians, and insurance companies...
----- Original Message -----
From: "datsunmike" <datsunmike@nyc.rr.com>
To: <limprod@comcast.net>; <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: The key question is...
> In almost every state of the nation there is a duty to withdraw contact
from
> a perpetrator unless of course the perp has a gun or other defined
dangerous
> instrument/weapon or you feel your life is in immediate danger. If you can
> prove you can't withdraw and that your life or someone else's life is in
> immediate danger then you can use whatever force is necessary to end the
> confrontation including killing the perp. It's the affirmative defense of
> self protection.
>
> There have been many Supreme Court rulings on this matter and the law is
> settled. What the question is when put to the jury, could the defendant
> withdraw from the contact and end the confrontation? did the defendant
> really think his life was in immediate danger? What would a 'normal' man
do
> in his circumstance?
>
> I guess in TX the jury believed the guy was justified to use deadly force.
I
> remember that case.
>
> Mike
|