Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ghbucky
If a cop can have his PD deal with his wrongful death charges, then the law should also make the PD protect me if my response is judged within the law.
|
What incentive would a PD have to competently defend you in a civil suit?
Do you want a municipality to incur a huge bill for your civil defense if they don't charge you after a shooting? Isn't that an incentive for them to charge you?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zeke
correct, but at least a beginning.
"dwelling, motor vehicle, or place of business"
|
I think that kind of narrow scope is a real advantage. So long as we are discussing immunity from suit by the very fellow who was coming at you in your home, the potential for abuse or unforeseen results is limited.
I see something in this sort of discussion that is understandable, but not optimal. We discuss scenarios with short descriptions of specific actions, but people then attribute the merit or fault for that specific action to subsequent actions. We call a character a "self-defender" then look for solutions to make that person's outlook the best, because he was the good guy.
Since real people wear more than one hat, have more than one motive, it's more conducive to fair rules to evaluate the acts as acts, rather than the description of a person. So one can be a valid self-defender
and a tortfeasor. We can applaud the valid self defense, but demand that he answer for the tort.
Noting that the law you reference is narrow isn't a criticism.