2006-08-14 00:57:45 · 9 answers · asked by slyintellectual 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The operative point here is that these new laws allow a gun owner to shoot-to-kill an unarmed person. Whether that person is a threat is now up to the sole discretion of the shooter.
2006-08-14 01:27:27 · update #1
Oh Conservatives support killing, just not the killing of a cluster of cells that have no signs of intellegent life.
2006-08-14 01:01:55 · answer #1 · answered by The Prez. 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No.
As others have stated, abortion = taking innocent life
act of self-defense = shooting / killing criminal in defense of life.
Pretty weak argument saying that the law allows people to judge what's a threat. People who get/give abortions try to make the justification that the baby might not live in the best conditions or it's not wanted by both parents, so they don't even give it a chance.
2006-08-14 04:38:31 · answer #2 · answered by gunsandammoatwork 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only reason a human life should be taken is if it is to save another or to save your own. As a former law enforcement officer in Forida we were trained never to shoot to kill. The object was to shoot to stop. Whether the the perpetrators objective was trying to kill or cause great bodily harm. The ONLY time we were allowed to shoot to stop was for either those two reasons.
2006-08-14 01:08:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
by "shoot to kill" do you mean castle doctrine? These laws state that if you are attacked you are not required to run away before returning fire. how is this so wrong???? Obviously someone who is threatening you with a weapon has malicious intents. Also these laws are now in most of the states, not just florida. They specifically state that it only applies to someone you dont know, who has a weapon (either knife gun or blunt object), is threatening you IN YOUR HOME OR CAR ONLY.
I fail to see how this is shoot to kill, or shoot on sight, or how this could have an adverse impact on innocent people.
2006-08-14 01:06:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is not murder. Our current law system has it set up so that unless the heart is beating, and at minimal the brain is active, it is not a living being.
Thus, making a law against abortion is simply wrong.
I support keeping abortion illegal on the grounds that they find the point where the brain becomes active, which I would consider the difference between a cluster of cells and a human life.
The government is not allowed to make laws on purely religious ideals.
Just because abortion is legal doesn't mean you have to like it. It doesn't mean you have to like anyone who supports abortion. In fact, I myself do not support abortion, I simply oppose making it a crime.
I find that abortion is sick, and all around wrong. But legally, there are no grounds to make it illegal.
Though I will say, if there is a god, I think mothers who get abortions are in between rapist's and murderers on the "Going to hell" list.
2006-08-14 02:21:29 · answer #5 · answered by cat_Rett_98 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Abortion is wrong because it is killing an innocent life. shooting a criminal is not the same thing. one is a baby the other is a criminal attempting to harm or rob a victim.
the baby is a victim, the criminal victimizes. wake up and smell reality.
2006-08-14 01:14:08 · answer #6 · answered by W E J 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are alot of ins and outs with this law. I live in FL, and really don't understand it. Not everyone agrees on abortion either.
2006-08-14 01:03:04 · answer #7 · answered by FL Girl 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A baby is innocent.....a criminal is not. Eye for an eye?
2006-08-14 01:14:17 · answer #8 · answered by dawn6463 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No.
2006-08-14 01:58:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋