duty to retreat

Is there a question in there, MA?

is the gayest concept on the planet

Duty to retreat is bullshit. Stand your ground should be universal law of the land

how does your coke and pepsi example apply?

"A man's home is his castle." ~ Legal Maxim

Maxim is a men's magazine

not a legal magazine

😉

```
Stand Your Ground: No duty to retreat from the situation before resorting to deadly force; not limited to your home, place of work, etc.
Castle Doctrine: No duty to retreat before using deadly force if you are in your home or yard (some states include place of work and occupied vehicles).
Duty to Retreat: Duty to retreat from a threatening situation if you can do so with complete safety.
```

yeah, that kinda leaves one open to become an unintended baliee though

if they set up the scene beforehand by throwing something on your property and you have no clue it is theirs.....

It's an analogy, MA. The man is like Coke and the woman is like Pepsi. For legal purposes, you are considered a "person," in this case a "natural person." A person is just a legal construct. To wit: a corporation sole, which the law views as having certain rights. What we commonly call corporations, trusts, companies, etc. are called "artificial persons," "legal persons," or "juristic persons."

When you get married, these two natural persons, these two corporations, merge to become one legal entity. One mind. It's presumed they do so voluntarily and agree on all the consequences and act as one unit. This is why spousal privilege is recognized, cuz again, you can't force someone to testify against themselves (they have to do so voluntarily).

In civil law, there is no incrimination. It's just dealing with torts and contracts, so a spouse is just like any other witness.

I have caught a queen waspp

This is the same reason "corporate personhood" is a thing

again, ANSWER the question i asked

not the question YOU wish

you didn't even address it; just added more details

Maybe I can has a wasp nest as a pet

all of that which you stated i understand and agree with

if corporations are people, they be hella psychopathic people

but in a CRIMINAL case, the husband can testify as the owner of what was stolen even if the wife or business was teh actual owner

>> oh you have cancer and need insurance money? The best we can do is one dollar

this is NOT so under contract l aw

"A maxim is so called because its dignity is chiefest, and its authority most certain, and because universally approved of all. All law has either been derived from the consent of the people, established by necessity, confirmed by custom, or of Divine Providence"

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/maxims.html

Maxims are like axioms of math or amino acids in biology. They're the self-evident building blocks of law.

Again, you can understand the law by studying moral philosophy

yes, yes; twas joke

MA is upset because he can't legally divorce his wife

w/o losing a shitton of money

no, i am trying to get him to explain something i experienced in real life

with a certain criminal

who is now in a federal prison

you mean the scam artist your wife got tricked by?

yup

"To one consenting, no injury is done."

Contract law supercedes all other law, except in the case of immoral consideration. Again, I can't contract to murder a third party. This is why lovemaking isn't rape and BDSM isn't assault and battery.

and who is the main reason as to why you want to divorce your wife?

criminal law has different standards and rules from civil law

MA, it would depend on the specifics of the case. There are always exceptions to every rule, I'm just explaining the theory behind the procedure

Did the scam involve a good dicking?<:thunk:462282216467333140>

the man in question and his shaddy attorney used thos edifferences in his schemse

in a criminal proceeding, the state doesn't CARE about distinctions