#1: -

Self Defense by definition can only occur as a means of defense when a person's safety and welfare are threatened. Self defense in a person's home is the escallation of a series of unlawfull events.

What is evident in Sashko's case is that;

A) His and his family's home was entered into unlawfully

B) The perpetrator of the home-invasion was armed with a weapon

C) The perpetrator was prepared to use the weapon as appears evident from the early reports

D) Reading of the psychological state that Sashko is currently in, indicates very strongly that:

(i)  He was in fear of his life and in fear for the welfare of his family

(ii) The psychological impact indicates clearly that he was not prepared to take a life but is now living the horrow of           protecting himself

Having briefly outlined Sashko's intent of self defense only as a last resort the question is and should be the discussion of the appropriatness of the law itself.

Should a person lay down his own life or have the ability to protect himself?

Laws are driven by the people for the protection of people. In a just society the people should not be afraid of their government and It's laws rather the government should listen to the voice of the people. If we are not satisfied that the current laws are just, then lets keep rasing our collective voice of all citizens and enagage our government in discussion and pressure for a change not just for one man but for all men for this and future generations.

#1106: - Re: Self Defense

"In a just society..."

Ah, there is the problem - Serbia is a long long way from being a just society.