by seesaw ➕follow (0) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 66 - 87 of 87 Search these comments
it’s nice to see that self-defense is still legal in NYC. perhaps this will dissuade the next round of “process as punishment” railroading.
if we want to help end this, there are two simple things to support:
castle doctrine.
stand your ground laws.
castle doctrine means your home is your castle. (your car too as an extension) you need no pretext to defend it. someone breaks in, the fault becomes theirs. this law places the burden of due care upon intruders, not on those they threaten. it’s just, fair, reasonable, finds strong consonance with longstanding common law and practice, and it works. places that remove it see home invasions spike.
stand your ground means if some one comes at you, you need not move. you can stay where you are and defend the patch upon which you stand. NY does not have this law. they have a “duty to retreat” in the face of an aggressor. minnesota also imposes such a duty and has shoit down several attempts to change it, a stunning choice after the riots they had. their supreme court upheld it.
quite literally, i can pull a knife on you and even if you are armed you cannot draw your weapon if it’s possible that you can flee.
this is a gross abrogation of natural law. ...
with both castle doctrine and stand your ground in place, there is legal latitude for self-defense. without them, it’s license for aggressors to aggress without price. they pull a knife, you must run, you cannot fight back unless cornered. that’s a BAD incentive set, especially with these social justice DA’s and jurists.
the remedy for this and the genius of our system lies in juries. juries do NOT have to follow the law. they do not have to explain their choices. they can just say “no.” jury nullification is a very powerful tool to keep the nature of a society within the society itself.
Folks have wondered why the jury would deadlock after four days on the more serious crime of manslaughter, but then quickly find “not guilty” on the lesser charge of criminally negligent homicide.
We find a clue in a different article about Jordan Williams, a black subway passenger who claimed to have stabbed to death another passenger in self-defense, and who was not charged by the same team prosecuting Daniel Penny. In the Williams case, the DA’s office explained that “Under New York law, a person is justified in using deadly physical force when they reasonably believe it is necessary to use such force to defend themselves or others from imminent use of deadly or unlawful physical force.”
In short, Danny Penny’s jury was on solid legal ground to find him not guilty. Even had Penny meant to kill the Subway Terrorist, the jury only had to find that Penny’s headlock was “justified” in order to defend others from unlawful physical force that Danny reasonably expected would occur.
So black people aren't even charged for much worse crimes
In the eyes of toxic libtards, blacks have no agency, similar to retarded people.
He's going to be sued civilly for sure. I hope he beats that too.
The lawsuit would likely get them less than attorney fees. Basically pointless.
WookieMan says
The lawsuit would likely get them less than attorney fees. Basically pointless.
No fees. Lawyers will line up to do this pro bono for just the publicity alone or, at most, some BLM type non-profit will pay it.
What would the family get though?
« First « Previous Comments 66 - 87 of 87 Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,258,676 comments by 15,019 users - Misc online now