[skidmark]

The link is to an ADOBE file.

People v. Aiken (03/31/05 - No. 31)
A individual standing in the doorway between his apartment and the common hall of a multi-unit building has a duty to retreat into his home, when he can safely do so, before he may defensively use deadly physical force against another.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/ny/cases/app/31opn05.pdf [PDF File]


If you are not aware of FindLaw, it is free and a good resource for legal info. They do not have a "gun law" section as such, but for those that are willing to do a bit of research you can usually find a few "gun" cases every week.

stay safe.

skidmark

[armoredman]

AZ - stand your ground. MUCH better.

[Graystar]

I don’t think the NY duty to retreat is any different for any place else (except maybe Texas) because, as was stated in the opinion, the duty to retreat only exist if one can do so in complete safety. This makes perfect sense because if you can initiate a retreat and be completely safe while doing so, there exist a question as to whether you were in any danger to begin with. I don’t think any state allows you to use deadly force if your life is not in danger (except Texas.)

As the opinion states, even in NY you don’t have to retreat from an attacker in the street if you can’t do so in complete safety.

[mete]

What's the big deal ? Inside your apartment is a better defensive position anyway .Remember you have the right to use lethal force to prevent death or serious injury [defense !].

[USMC_2674]

Graystar,

There are other states which allow defense of a third person as a reason to use deadly force.

In Utah, we can use deadly force to A) Prevent or Stop a Forcible Felony B) protect from serious harm or death for ourselves and C) protect from serious harm or death for a third party (human, not a dog or animal).

[Standing Wolf]

AZ - stand your ground. MUCH better.

I concur. Requiring law-abiding American citizens to retreat before criminals is moraly wrong.

[Graystar]

There are other states which allow defense of a third person as a reason to use deadly force.So does NY. It’s explicitly stated in the Justification law

[Old Fuff]

As I am sure Standing Wolf understands, the Left-Wing Elite believe it is much better to let criminals escape from an armed (potential) victim so that they can go try again and hope to find a sheeple. One must not harm the goblins just because they exercise bad judgment while picking targets.

[Standing Wolf]

As I am sure Standing Wolf understands, the Left-Wing Elite believe it is much better to let criminals escape from an armed (potential) victim so that they can go try again and hope to find a sheeple. One must not harm the goblins just because they exercise bad judgment while picking targets.

Well, heck, yes! Criminals overwhelmingly vote for representatives of the Democratic (sic) party.

[beerslurpy]

Since when can criminals vote? Oh thats right, in states other than Florida.

The real reason is that the more people that are victimized by the same repeat offender, the louder the cry will be for more help from the government. Contrast to (what I feel is) the ideal situation, where the attacker dies during the first crime and everyone else lives happily ever after.

Ironically, although people will generally depend upon them less, my ideal is actually better for the cops. Every violent crackhead that bleeds to death on someone's patio floor is another crackhead they dont have to chase, apprehend or get shot by.