Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:21:36 GMT, DYM > wrote:
>
> >John David Galt > wrote in news:dbrp07$s0h=
$2
> :
> >
> >> DYM wrote:
> >>> That would be vigilantism.
> >>
> >> It's not vigilantism when the VICTIM HIMSELF fights attackers, only
> >> when a third party does it.
> >
> >It can be by committee or a self-appointed doer of justice. This key is
> >that the doer (?) is acting as cop, judge and jury.
>
> So where do you draw the line between self-defense and vigilantism?

Self defense ends when the threat to ones person (or someone else's)
ends. The threat in the scenario ended the second the kids ran. That's
why you can claim, and usually win, on self defense for shooting
someone in your home at 0 dark 30 but not if they are leaving when you
shoot em in the back. Chasing to catch and hold em for the cops is
legal, beating them isn't.

Harry K

Harry K