Thursday, August 8, 2013

Duty to Retreat

Dave Hardy notes that Connecticut has a duty to retreat, yet they are scrutinizing their self-defense laws (I.E. thinking about weakening them even further.) Here in Delaware you also have a "duty to retreat" in public. From commenter Norman Yarvin, here's CT's language. It's virtually identical to Delaware. In both states the duty only applies to defense of self. There is no duty to retreat when in defense of others. So if someone comes at me with an axe I have a legal duty to retreat (if I can do so with "complete safety" whatever the hell that means) My friend, however, could draw a pistol, shoot them, and not have an obligation to retreat first. I think most of my readers can see how positively moronic this is. "...a person is not justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if he or she knows that he or she can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety (1) by retreating ..." The instances in which someone defending themselves with deadly force would know that he / she could retreat with "complete safety" are vanishingly small.


Anonymous said...

Any rational person would do whatever he could (including running away) to avoid a kill-or-be-killed situation, whether the law requires it or not, so imposing a legal duty to retreat is unnecessary. (And if a person is not rational, it is illegal for him to own a firearm anyway.) (Obviously, police are expected to confront criminals instead of running away, but duty to retreat laws are presumably aimed at civilians.) "Duty to retreat" laws have been abused. Prosecutors and plaintiffs' lawyers can argue that the defendant theoretically could have fled instead of shooting an attacker. But the lawyers have plenty of time to construct their hypothetical scenarios. The defendant had a split second in which to make a life-or-death decision. Stand Your Ground laws are needed to protect innocent people from being second-guessed.

Bubblehead Les. said...

Uh, so If I'm walking down the Street SOLO, and a Pack of Goblins come after me, I have to Retreat? But if I'm walking down the Street with MY "Pack" and the Goblins attack, we can have an "O.K. Corral Shootout?"

Uh, just how LOW have they set the Maximum I.Q. Score to be a Legislator nowadays? 50? 55?

Glenn B said...

"(And if a person is not rational, it is illegal for him to own a firearm anyway.)" Where, under what law, is it illegal for someone who is not rational to own a firearm. People can be and very often are irrational at any given time of any given day; just look at the president and the current Congress. It is not a crime nor is it a mental condition unless it is acutely persistent or chronic. Even then, one would have to be adjudicated mentally incompetent, at least under federal law, to be barred from the right to bear arms.

As for the need to retreat, we have that law here in NY State. It is ridiculous because it states that a person must retreat only if he knows he can do so in complete safety. Who is to say what I know or do not know or whether I would be wrong or right making such a decision in a life threatening situation.

Anonymous said...

Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) has introduced a bill to require states to abolish SYG and impose a duty to retreat, even in one's own home (most states that have a legal duty to retreat only require it in public places). States that did not comply would face a 20% cut in federal aid. She said it was because of "what happened to Trayvon," although both the defense and prosecution in that case said that Stand Your Ground was not a factor. But then, this is the same congressperson who asked NASA if the Mars Rover had taken a picture of the flag that Neil Armstrong had left there.