English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I agree that women who are subjected to physical or sexual abuse should not be subjected to the same penalty as a cold blooded murder.
However on the other hand I dont justify violence unless one life is in risk at the moment.
I feel that some women who use this defense were not abused and are using this as a way to get out of their punishment. I also feel that this defense will encourage women who are encountering abuse not to use other means to escape it and will use violence as their first option rather than a last option which was the only reason why many states allowed it to serve as a defense against murder.

2007-07-18 16:52:02 · 5 answers · asked by NBA Man 1 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

5 answers

No.

2007-07-22 12:59:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's a matter of how the law is phrased.

Some states only require a personal (subjective) belief to trigger self-defense. And in those states, someone who is so terrified constantly would meet the standards.

Other states require an objective (reasonable person) component, so the belief in imminent attack need be both actual (subjective) and not irrational (reasonable).

Personally, I have done enough counseling work to know the psychological toll that constant emotional abuse can generate. And this is just one version of what's effectively a temporary insanity defense.

I wouldn't eliminate it entirely, because it has value in some rare situations. But I think requiring both the subjective (actual fear) and objective (reasonable belief) component is a good balance.

2007-07-18 16:58:12 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0 0

Re: means of escape. In many situations, the woman does not have family who is supportive (her mother may well have been abused herself), and there is probably not a domestic violence shelter in her area. She will most likely not have any financial resources to pack up and move, and hide. They do not have an escape. Violence will not be these women's first option.

2007-07-18 17:01:34 · answer #3 · answered by FredaBeth 1 · 1 0

Yes. SOME women abuse the option.

That doesn't make it an invalid defense. Whether or not it should work is up to a jury.

2007-07-18 16:59:29 · answer #4 · answered by Atavacron 5 · 0 0

Absolutely not! In fact, women should be encouraged to resist abuse even more than they are now.

2007-07-18 16:59:44 · answer #5 · answered by DAKal 5 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers