i am in a debate and i have looked EVERYWHERE for the answer... please help.
2007-10-17 07:38:58 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
That is what the courts are for. Both sides are presented and a jury or judge makes the decision of punishment / justice.
Vigilantism is wrong and does not belong in a government of checks and balances a/k/a judicial court system.
101707 2:16
2007-10-17 08:17:06 · answer #1 · answered by YRofTexas 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well this is not a clear answer but I will try to help you as much as I can, this is something for a jury or judge decide but I will give you a little bit of help.
If you had to kill him the person in order save someone else from being murdered you may well be aquitted. If you are shown to have used excessive force to protect the other person then you are in trouble.
The question people will look at is;
Did you have to kill him/her to prevent someone from being murdered?
Could you have resolved this by suduing him/her?
Did you prevent the person from dying and continue to attack the would be murderer.
Killing someone else is only a last resor, if he/she was killing someone you knocked them off and then proceeded to kill them then you will definately be in big trouble. Also they may be suspicious at why you killed the person especially if you know them and may have a reason to use excess force.
Anyways hope this helps.
2007-10-17 14:48:38 · answer #2 · answered by Andrew P 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Since this is not a self-defence, you are not permitted to take anyone's life.
But, in limited circumstances, I would think, jury would find it hard to find someone guilty if during the course of trying to seve someone's life, the agressor gets killed.
For example, let's say you observed an adult trying to drawn a helpless person, such as small child, disabled, or injured. Let's also say, you observed he had a gun or other weapon. Let's also say, you had no way to contact authority, and you feel the victim's life is in immenent danger.
In this senario, you cannot fight with a person as he has a weapon that he will use against you. Also, the victim has no power to save himself. You also did not have a choice to call the authority, and the life of the third party sololy rests on you.
In these senario, District Attorney might not even press charges, and if they did, the jury might not find one guilty.
Since you only want this information for purpose of your debate, it might be sufficient to bring up these particular senario. Other than that, you might want to call the local DA's office or police's NON-EMERGENCY number and ask these what-if questions, clearly stating, you want the information for debate purpose.
2007-10-17 14:54:54 · answer #3 · answered by tkquestion 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
in SA, our defence of 'private defence' (self defence in some other countries) allows the protection of your body and property as well as that of third parties. so technically, you could kill someone to protect another's life. but it would depend on the nature of the situation, the amount of force reasonably needed... lots of things
for example, private defence can be used against use of violence or the threat thereof against you or a third party - as long as its directed against the attacked
2007-10-17 14:44:27 · answer #4 · answered by Kirsty B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No -- it's never legal to kill someone else in retribution -- unless you are the govt, of course.
It is legal to use lethal force to defend yourself or someone else -- but only if the person you attack was using lethal force (drowning might count) AND your attack was the only way to PREVENT the harm to yourself or another -- self-defense must be preventative, not retributive.
2007-10-17 14:48:24 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Check with your local law inforcement agency. It is still a crime if you kill someone, but if they are commiting a homicide at the time it is called justifiable homicide and usually not charged.
2007-10-17 14:47:29 · answer #6 · answered by ruby 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This link pretty much sums it up (in theory), however it could vary from state to state and/or jury to jury.
wingshoo...not true.
2007-10-17 14:42:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, only if your life is in danger and even then charges of manslaughter can still be brought up.
2007-10-17 14:44:59 · answer #8 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no it is not legal, but the case will be discharged under good intent.
2007-10-17 15:56:46 · answer #9 · answered by peter a 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it's not, but if they are trying to kill you, you have every right to restrain them in any way posable and if it kills them that's just self-defence.
2007-10-17 14:44:52 · answer #10 · answered by monkey_person_1991 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋