Mea Culpa. I thought the question of an armed individual "duty to rescue" too narrow for just a discussion in the legal context since "duty to rescue" laws explicitly exclude the "duty" when acting would place your life in danger (even Jewish law has similar exclusions http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/kitveyet/assia_english/kirschenbaum.htm ).
Since use of deadly force (e.g., threating some one with a gun) is illegal unless someone's life is in danger, unless you were in the situation of relative safety and viewed an attack endangering the life of a third person, you would have no legal "duty to rescue" by threatening deadly force. Even in those circumstances, legal "duty to rescue" is limited to cases where you are somehow responsible for the conditions that placed the life in peril. So, if we are limited to legal questions, the circumstances for an armed private person having the legal "duty to rescue" should be limited to cases where the person has created the peril somehow -- perhaps by knowingly allowed thugs to use his property for illegal activities and an attack is made by one of those thugs on his property. Then, if he sees this attack while he is armed, he might have the legal "duty to rescue" if he can do so from conditions of relative safety. In a nut shell, if you are armed and close enough to an attack that your life is in peril, you can legally respond to protect your life (or not if you want), if you are far enough from an attack that your life is not placed in peril by your respond, you still have no legal "duty to rescue" unless you are responsible for the circumstances leading to the life being placed in peril. Phil Quoting "Volokh, Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Folks: Let's stick with the law and policy of firearms regulation; and > let's also recognize legal terms when we see them (since this is a list > on which legal discussions are quite important). "Duty" is a word that > has (at least) two meanings; it can mean either moral obligation or > legal obligation, depending on the context. The discussion so far has > been about the extent to which the availability of firearms to citizens > affects any legal duties of rescue that the law imposes on citizens in > some jurisdictions. This "duty of rescue," a legal term of art, refers > to legal obligation to rescue or else suffer legal consequences, just as > people may have a duty to report for jury service, a duty to pay taxes, > and a variety of other duties imposed by law (whether or not they are > also imposed by morality). > > Eugene > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:28 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: List Firearms Reg > Subject: Re: Fw: Duty not just to rescue but to defend implicit in > militiaduty > > Duty is not defined by the law. Thinking that it is demeans duty and > reduces it to squabblings in court. To quote from a different era "Duty > is the sublimest word in the language. You can never do more than your > duty. You should never wish to do less." > > Duty, like morality, should be taught at home. The law should concern > itself with the gross failings of morality. So a doctor should have the > duty to apply his skills in an emergency situation and the law should > encourage that duty by protecting him against lawsuits. The doctor > should wish to apply his skills out of a sensor of morality and his > upbringing, not out of a sense of obligation under the law. > > Even police officers have been known to kill other police officers in > confusing situations. But, it should be clear in the law that we have > have the duty to protect one another and the law should protect good > faith efforts to halt attacks. > > That protection is not the same as requiring a person to respond. > > Each of us decides for ourselves where our duty lies. If it is defined > in the law, we are not free -- we are slaves of the law. > > Phil > > > > > > Quoting Jon Roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> > > > <head> > > <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" > http-equiv="Content-Type"> > > <title></title> > > </head> > > <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Here is the message I sent the > > > author which takes a different position. > > Of course one should be sure of what one is doing before intervening, > > just as a law enforcement officer should be. The duty of the civilian > > is the same as the duty of the cop. Just not done as a paid job. All > > the same cautions apply, but so do all the obligations, and one of > > them is to know what one is doing. That is why the Founders emphasized > > > the militia is to be "well-regulated". Everyone should not only assume > > > the duty of being armed, but the duty of learning how to competently > > enforce the law. It is not that difficult. Police training should be > > mandatory for everyone, armed or not.<br> <br> > > -------- Original Message -------- > > <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> > > <tbody> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Subject: > </th> > > <td>Duty not just to rescue but to defend implicit in militia > > duty</td> > > </tr> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Date: </th> > > <td>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:33:56 -0600</td> > > </tr> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">From: </th> > > <td>Jon Roland <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" > > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"><[EMAIL PROTECTED] > g></a></td> > > </tr> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">Reply-To: > </th> > > <td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a > ></td> > > </tr> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" > valign="baseline">Organization: > > </th> > > <td>Constitution Society</td> > > </tr> > > <tr> > > <th align="right" nowrap="nowrap" valign="baseline">To: </th> > > <td>David Hyman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"><[EMAIL PROTECTED]></a></td> > > </tr> > > </tbody> > > </table> > > <br> > > <br> > > <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" > > http-equiv="Content-Type"> <title></title> Been reading your paper on > > the duty to rescue at <font face="ARIAL, HELVETICA" size="2"><a > > href="http://ssrn.com/abstract=796384"; > > class="textlink">http://ssrn.com/abstract=796384</a> > > . </font>I suggest that there is a larger body of legal theory around > > the concept of militia that is neglected in your paper. See <a > > class="moz-txt-link-freetext" > > > > > href="http://www.constitution.org/cs_defen.htm";>http://www.constitution. > org/cs_defen.htm</a> > > where I argue that militia is > > just the duty that comes with the social contract and involves the > > legally enforceable duty to defend the community. Just because the > > state of the law has devolved from the Founding Era doesn't mean the > > foundation is not still in place.<br> <pre class="moz-signature" > > cols="82">-- Jon > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 > > 512/299-5001 <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > > href="http://www.constitution.org";>www.constitution.org</a> <a > > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > > > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]< > > /a> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > </pre> > > <br> > > <pre class="moz-signature" cols="82">-- > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 > > 512/299-5001 <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > > href="http://www.constitution.org";>www.constitution.org</a> <a > > class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]< > > /a> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > </pre> > > </body> > > </html> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, > unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly > or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others. > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
