At 12:59 PM 11/07/2016, Paul Bolger wrote: >I'm not sure though that this approach is justifiable. If the operator >of the robot/remote unit is not under any danger from the offender are >they still under the legal protection of 'killing to save themselves'. >I suspect not.
That's a very good question. But it appears there may be one law for the police and another one for everybody else. Until that is sorted, people of color aren't safe in the US. I just listened to a podcast on Generation Why where a man who lived with his girlfriend (with a child) in Missoula, Montana was sent away for 70 years for baiting who he thought had been stealing from his garage and shooting a kid who showed up one night, killing him. Four pump-action shotgun blasts, in the dark garage, where he and girlfriend had set up baby-monitor cameras, left the garage OPEN, put a high-priced handbag out, and waited three nights for someone to show up. Charged and found guilty of intentional homicide. I agree with the outcome, but many in the US thought the law should have supported the pot-head owner, when he was under no physical threat. Turns out as well that the kid he killed was an exchange student, and NOT the one who had stolen his bong, pot and iphone from him before. Worth a listen if you're a podcast junky like me. Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia [email protected] Twitter: <https://twitter.com/JL_Whitaker>JL_Whitaker Blog: www.janwhitaker.com Some psychopaths become serial killers, and other psychopaths become prosecutors. - Bob Ruff, Truth and Justice, June 2016 Sooner or later, I hate to break it to you, you're gonna die, so how do you fill in the space between here and there? It's yours. Seize your space. ~Margaret Atwood, writer _ __________________ _ _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
