At 3:54 AM -0500 5/29/04, Robert Woolley wrote:
> On 5/29/04 1:57 AM, "C. D. Tavares" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This is the unsinkable "duty to retreat" doctrine. Curiously, the Supreme
>> Court has several times struck down this doctrine on the federal level,
>> most notably in Alberty v. US, 162 US 499, when it struck down a lower
>> court instruction that:
>
> Interesting, though not relevant to my personal decision making. Whether
> statute or case law require it or not, I would rather retreat than shoot
> another person, assuming I can do so safely.
Fair enough, although this response runs directly contrary to your original
instruction:
At 12:15 AM -0500 5/28/04, Robert Woolley wrote:
> PLEASE NOTE: This invitation does not extend to debating the tactical wisdom
> (or lack thereof) of warning shots. The questions here are legal ones, not
> tactical ones.
--
Escape the Rat Race for Peace, Quiet, and Miles of Desert Beauty
Take a Sanity Break at The Bunkhouse at Liberty Haven Ranch
http://libertyhavenranch.com
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
