Open season on the law?

Opinion

January 13, 2010

Opinion

Anonymous The Commonwealth Journal Wed Jan 13, 2010, 09:24 AM EST

Shoot first and ask questions later. That’s the mindset a Kansas judge is advocating with a decision in a homicide case. And it’s all because of abortion.

Last May, Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed while serving as an usher at his Wichita church. Accused of first-degree murder in the crime is Scott Roeder, who authorities say objected to the fact Tiller performed late-term abortions.

Roeder has admitted to the killing in court filings and interviews, arguing he shot Tiller to save “unborn children.” Supposedly, Roeder openly confessed in order to use a “necessity defense” in his case, in effect arguing the shooting was justifiable homicide intended to prevent a greater harm.

Sedwick County District Judge Warren Wilbert refused to allow Roeder to present a necessity defense. However, he has ruled that Roeder can seek to have his murder charge reduced to manslaughter. Basically, Roeder will argue he killed Tiller in order to prevent other killings and that this somehow mitigated his actions.

Under Kansas law, a deliberate killing is classified as manslaughter if the guilty party had “an unreasonable, but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force.” Wilbert’s ruling has been appealed by prosecutors, a move that delayed the start of Roeder’s trial, scheduled for jury selection this week.

Let’s think through Wilbert’s decision in the given circumstances. If Roeder’s act was anything less than cold-blooded murder, what’s to stop a doctor or nurse involved in performing abortions from shooting protesters?

After all, one of these protesters could turn violent. And with the courts allowing justification of such actions, wouldn’t it be better to kill before being killed?

To suggest the shooting of Tiller was a somehow defensible act ignores the law. And that includes the law that has pursued Tiller aggressively without success.

Kansas isn’t exactly an abortion-friendly place in its politics. Tiller’s clinic and his activities long had been the legal target of abortion foes. Two state attorneys general unsuccessfully attempted prosecutions, and two months before his death, Tiller was acquitted of charges of failing to get a second opinion on a late-term abortion.

In other words, what Tiller was doing was legal. Some people may not be happy with that fact. But they have neither the right nor the authority to take matters into their own hands.

Wilbert’s ruling changes that. If you don’t like how law enforcement handled an issue of concern to you, just act on your own and attempt to justify it later. The courts will understand.

Wilbert’s decision must be overturned on appeal. Meanwhile, we think it’s worth noting prosecutors alleged that Roeder pointed his gun at two other ushers the day he said he shot Tiller. Those ushers were trying to prevent Roeder from escaping.

Would he have argued justification for shooting them as well?

•••

The New Castle News

New Castle, Pa.

Text Only

Opinion

Why not charter schools?
The number of parents choosing to home school their children has risen by 50 percent in the last five years. I believe this is a direct indicator of the frustration parents have in the interference of the federal government in dictating what their children should be taught.
State Representative Brad Montell announced the pre-filing of legislation that, if passed, would establish a charter school initiative in Kentucky. (House Bill BR 117) Kentucky is one of only nine states in the nation that does not have charter schools, helping place Kentucky at number 37 out of 50 states in quality of education.
In charter schools, if educators are performing below standard, they can be terminated, not reassigned or given additional training. Most charter schools are non-union and non-tenured, so an educator knows he/she must perform to a high degree of excellence to retain employment. They can increase their chances of advancement through performance incentives.

December 30, 2011 1 Photo
Opinon: Don't Penalize Players for Being Good
Sports are intrinsically amoral.
Not immoral, as in evil. Amoral, as in indifferent to right or wrong.
That is not to say that you can’t do something immoral — something that flies in the face of conventionally accepted ideas of good and bad behavior — while playing sports. Look at Ndamukong Suh, the Detroit Lions defensive tackle who’s expected to be suspended for a game or two for stomping, apparently on purpose, another player during a Thanksgiving game with the Green Bay Packers.
Most Kentucky basketball fans would recall Duke forward Christian Laettner’s infamous stomp on UK’s Aminu Timberlake during the 1992 NCAA College Basketball Tournament, and think he probably deserved a fate similar to Suh’s.
But in and of themselves, there’s nothing morally good or bad about throwing a ball, or kicking a ball, or hitting a puck with a stick, or anything of that nature.
There are only the rules of the game. Break the rules, and the game has a system built in to penalize you for it.

November 29, 2011 1 Photo
Road goes back to property owner
October 25, 2011 1 Photo
Fool me once...

When putting pen to paper (or fingers to keypad), it is so easy to fall into the trap of wanting to denigrate those with opposing views relating to political beliefs and social issues. I try hard to constantly remind myself that there are two sides to every argument, and each side can be as passionate about their viewpoint as the other. It is tempting to accuse someone of being an idiot if we passionately disagree with them. The term “idiot” is used to describe someone who is weak minded, of low IQ, or incapable of learning. Anyone who reaches the hallowed halls of Congress or the Whitehouse is definitely not an idiot, but they can be misguided. George W. Bush, Yale graduate with a Texas size ego, and Barak Obama, Harvard graduate with a Chicago thug style political background, are two such men.

October 6, 2011 1 Photo
What does it maen?
/11. An instantly recognizable reference. One of those references to an event that all United States citizens of a certain age will always recognize. We will always ask, “what were you doing when you heard” and the question will be answered without a second's delay. It was an event that seared itself into our national psyche along with other societal tremors. 9/11 ushered in a new age for the United States and the decade since has brought systemic changes to our society, some for the better, some for the worse. 9/11 revealed in us a willingness to help others at great risk to our own lives and uncovered a fear that we may not be as safe as we thought we were. 9/11 has been used as both reason and excuse for a lot of things, many not very reasonable.

September 13, 2011 1 Photo
The day of indelible memories

On a normal day, in my average, everyday, normal life, I would be hard pressed to tell you what I had for dinner the previous day. No, I’m not suffering from dementia or Alzheimer disease. The mind of the average person does not register routine activities as important enough to be a lasting memory. Not so on September 11, 2001. I would venture to say that the majority of the people in America have some indelible memories of what they were doing that day.

September 11, 2011
Dana Allen
Dana Michele Allen, age 25, of Somerset, departed this life on Sunday, April 25, 2010 in Lexington, Ky.

April 27, 2010 1 Photo
Ruth Morris Ruth Morris, 66, of Somerset, Ky., passed away Friday, April 16, 2010, at Lake Cumberland Regional Hospital in Somerset.
April 20, 2010
Betty Lou Payne Betty Lou Payne, 70, of Somerset, Ky. passed away on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 at her home.
March 29, 2010 1 Photo
Amidst the Tragedy
February 11, 2010
More Opinion Headlines

Opinion

Search Results

Open season on the law?

Opinion

Site Map