We have a rule: If your life is threatened by another person, you can kill them. No, correction: If you say your life was threatened, no one can question your right to kill them.
It has been two years this past month since Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow came up missing, believed to have been killed by their parent figures, Chad and Lori Daybell. Perhaps you have heard about the case, if you follow news much at all.
A string of other deaths are connected to the story, including the killing of Lori Daybell's fourth husband, Charles Vallow. (Chad is her fifth husband). Charles had been killed months earlier during a heated exchange between him, the Daybells, and Lori's brother Alex. Alex said he shot Charles in self-defense, as Charles had hit him with a baseball bat.
Police took Alex's statements and closed the case.
Months later, Alex died. So, even when they eventually got looking into the case again, Alex was not around to be charged.
The point is, if you allow someone off the hook just because they say they killed in self defense, you might be letting a murderer off the hook. We have laws that say if someone believes he or she was just defending themselves, they can legally kill the other person.
If we don't see the danger of this law, and change it, we leave on the books one of the most terrible of laws. Yes, allow a person to shoot the other if it is truly necessary. But, do not allow them to be their own judge and jury. Do not allow them to get off the hook just by saying they believed their well-being was threatened.
No comments:
Post a Comment