Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He wasn't harmed for any damage caused by himself. The moment he exited the vehicle and started to walk away, he was no longer any threat to her whatsoever. By her own admission she decided to run him over for what she believed he may have done in the future.
At the time of his injury he no longer a threat to her or anyone else.
That's no different than if I choose to run a total stranger down because of something I believe they may do in the future.
Not sure if Texas has this or not, but in SC, a criminal cannot sue for any damage caused to him or her as a result of their crime. Great law.
This is the way it should be.
How there are laws protecting a criminal for something they did seconds ago...is beyond me.
For example the one that if they are in their house and turn their back or try to leave, you can't attack. It seems like a glitch in a video game that all the cheats of society know about and will use against you.
How there are laws protecting a criminal for something they did seconds ago...is beyond me.
For example the one that if they are in their house and turn their back or try to leave, you can't attack. It seems like a glitch in a video game that all the cheats of society know about and will use against you.
Attacking someone who is fleeing is not self defense, it's pretty obvious to rational people.
I'm not saying they don't deserve a good old fashioned ass kicking, just saying that it's not self defense.
He wasn't harmed for any damage caused by himself. The moment he exited the vehicle and started to walk away, he was no longer any threat to her whatsoever. By her own admission she decided to run him over for what she believed he may have done in the future.
At the time of his injury he no longer a threat to her or anyone else.
That's no different than if I choose to run a total stranger down because of something I believe they may do in the future.
Attacking someone who is fleeing is not self defense, it's pretty obvious to rational people.
What is obvious to rational people is that you shouldn't be stealing, pointing a knife at someone, endangering kids, or in someone else's property (car, van, house, shed) without their permission.
And further what should be rational in the laws POV, is if the property owner gets the upper hand, they should be able to stop, or detain the person if desired without worrying about the criminal waiving their get out of jail free card by turning their back and leaving the crime scene.
Of course some will argue, that is what cops are for. When seconds count, cops are only minutes away.
Of course she was wrong, did you not read the article?
She has a 2 year old and a 5 year old and she's chasing a criminal who was armed with a deadly weapon.
That is freakin stupid and reckless.
The guy was out of the car and on the street. At that point what was he going to do?
I know and agree in the laws eyes, it isn't self defense anymore. However that shouldn't give the criminal a free pass to just walk away scott free (and likely not be caught)
What is obvious to rational people is that you shouldn't be stealing, pointing a knife at someone, endangering kids, or in someone else's property (car, van, house, shed) without their permission.
And further what should be rational in the laws POV, is if the property owner gets the upper hand, they should be able to stop, or detain the person if desired without worrying about the criminal waiving their get out of jail free card by turning their back and leaving the crime scene.
Of course some will argue, that is what cops are for. When seconds count, cops are only minutes away.
Chasing down criminals when you have a 2 year old = endangering kids.
How there are laws protecting a criminal for something they did seconds ago...is beyond me.
For example the one that if they are in their house and turn their back or try to leave, you can't attack. It seems like a glitch in a video game that all the cheats of society know about and will use against you.
Yes, something else our state allows. You can shoot them as their running out your door and you're still protected under castle doctrine. We don't have a huge home invasion problem here as you can imagine.
The guy was out of the car and on the street. At that point what was he going to do?
I know and agree in the laws eyes, it isn't self defense anymore. However that shouldn't give the criminal a free pass to just walk away scott free (and likely not be caught)
So chasing a dangerous criminal while you have two small children with you = good parenting???
I can't believe you guys are defending this women. Our society is really messed up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
