In article , Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:35:10 -0000, Lloyd E. Sponenburgh
lloydspinsidemindspring.com wrote:
"SteveB" fired this volley in
news

"So, Mr. Foreman ............ you
had a distance between you and the deceased client that would allow
you to flee, and you chose to stand there, carefully take aim, and
then shoot the deceased straight through the nose? Why didn't you
choose to flee instead of executing this nice young man?"

Sorry, sir, but that's not the case in Florida. The law actually uses
the words, "has no duty to retreat" and "may meet the assailant with
force."

Exactly. Keyword being, of course, "assailant". As in, he has initiated the
attack. That's kind of key, of course, and is the part that the anti's
gloss over. They pretend this is a license to shoot people who cut you
off on the freeway or chew gum the wrong way but, of course, the facts
are that it's just saying that good people don't have to just put up
with being attacked by bad people.

I still can't understand why the left so often comes out in support of
things that make the bad people safer rather than the good people.

Because it suits their purposes for society to become so dangerous that the
masses will *insist* upon a police state, just to restore domestic order.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.