The Flaws in Self Defense Laws in America

Americans "Some people say that a man's house is his castle, but what kind of right can the owner protect the castle?" (Pavis). People use this law to use deadly weapons to defend them. They have not even thought of getting rid of what might possibly endanger their ideas and they felt that we could use our guns according to the laws of the castle. "Castleism allows citizens to stay in their homes - in certain states ownership of cars and workplaces protect themselves by force, others and their wealth, and in some cases a deadly force Even "(Purves)

Self-defense law prescribes what is a legitimate force and what is not. They decide when self defense can be used as a defense against crime or civil action. These laws assert themselves and protect individuals claiming to be self defense. In order to protect self-defense persons under this law, the following principles apply. In order to carry out self-defense, the threat of injury must be direct. If a person threatens violence at some point in the future, this will not justify the use of self-defense. Likewise, an aggressive rhetoric that does not threaten any direct physical harm can not be a reason for using self-defense.

A writer and firearm instructor, Jorge Amsel, claims that self-defense in the United States requires "to protect their country's law". These laws stipulate that the use of weapons for self defense and personal property defense will bring effective legal defense in this case. In contrast, professor and writer James Beckman thinks that "defending my law" is outdated in modern society. In addition, Beckman believes that these laws encourage individuals to choose to expand potential violence rather than spread the situation.

Historically, the law does not distinguish between self-defense and property protection. However, with the emergence of centralized police force, the modern legal system tended to treat both as a clear defense, since it transfers responsibility for peace from individuals to security forces managed by the government. As a practical statement, if he claimed that the defendant took self-defense action he admitted that he committed a crime, but claimed that his behavior was evidence of the violent threatening act. When judging whether you can successfully defend a client, judge whether there is evidence of physical struggle (for example, whether there are scratches or other injuries to the customer, etc.) and also note the relative scale It is necessary to pay. Customers and victims

Expert's testimony on abused women's syndrome has criticized the self-defense law in several ways. First of all, the testimony tries to establish self-defense elements, although there is no certainty. If successful, these attempts are self-defense and are considered reasons to become excuses. Second, the testimony depicts the weakness and helplessness of abused women, thereby encouraging jurors to adopt self-defense theory. As a result, the jury will only pronounce beaten female defendants only when they think that the murder is coincidental. Third, testimony of the experts establishes the elements of self-defense, to promote counsel negligence and inadequate defense and to develop defense of other victims' syndrome. Finally, finding out that expert testimonies explain the unhealthy mental state of an abused woman and prove that there is an inherent contradiction in the rationality of self-defense behavior is a social goal of self-defense It will not be damaged.