Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
On the right to resist.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:36 AM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:However, the Michigan state legislature – prompted by the Court of Appeals -- modified the relevant section of the state code (MCL 705.81d) by removing the clause recognizing the common law right to prevent an unlawful arrest (that is, an armed kidnapping) by a police officer.
Quote:Remarkably, Babbitt’s argument was met with withering skepticism by several members of the court. Among them was Chief Justice Robert P. Young, Jr., who asked Babbitt what “textual” support existed for the proposition that the legislature had abrogated the common law right to resist arrest. “I can’t answer that question, because it doesn’t say `We are abrogating the common law right to use self-defense,'” Babbitt replied, perspiration condensing on his brow as he realized where the conversation was headed. “I think you answered it, then,” Young replied, thereby causing that trickle of flop sweat to become a torrent. “Don’t you lose if you can’t answer that question?” Babbitt was allowed a brief interval in which to dither and dissimulate before Young summarized the matter with brutal concision: “I’m posing a very simple question to you, the answer to which, I think, is dispositive: If the arrest is unlawful, if the intrusion is unlawful, and a physical melee ensues because of the resistance of the resident, under the common law rule, he can do that…. You don’t win [the case] unless you can persuade us that the [statute under which] he was charged abrogates the common law rule. Tell me why, when the text is silent on the common law rule, you still win.”
Tuesday, December 6, 2011 11:40 AM
CANTTAKESKY
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL