Hi RICH, as you were just saying about Re: Home Security....
RG>  RT> I understand what you are saying and there are very narrow
RG>  RT> differences.  I was making a general statement.  BTW, as you 
mentioned,
RG>  RT> EMT, nurse or doctor is held to a different standard under *those*
RG>  RT> conditions.  They should not be held to a different standard under
RG>  RT> other conditions.
RG> 
RG> Thats what makes the world go 'round.  People have expectations of
RG> others that they consider professionals based on their training. 
RG> And they will be held to that standard without regard to any
RG> conditions that are present.
Why would a doctor's training have anything to do with how that doctor
should react in regard to a bank robbery or a dime store sale?  If
there is a medical emergency, I could understand it, but not if it was
something outside his area of expertise.
RG> RG>> Same goes if you sit in court and watch how a Judge handles people
RG> RG>> defending themselves vs. Attorney's defending them.  They tend to
RG> 
RG>  RT> Difference in expectation.  The judge just wants to make sure that 
the
RG>  RT> money spent on that law college education wasn't *all* spent on beer
RG>  RT> and wild parties.
RG> 
RG> Sometimes I wonder about that myself :).
RG> 
RG> RG>> When I hire a plumber, he'd better be doing the job right, or
RG> RG>> he'll hear from me.  If my neighbor comes over and offers to help me
RG> RG>> fix the problem, then I have to realize that I'm taking my chances
RG> RG>> instead of calling a professional.
RG> RG>>
RG> RG>> Way life goes...
RG> 
RG>  RT> Yep, but do you think that the law in general should treat your
RG>  RT> plumber differently than your neighbor?
RG> 
RG> Through sitting in court and listening to civil hearings 
RG> prior to traffic court
RG> starting, yep, seen it many times.  You have to take
RG> responsibility for your own judgement, you call you neighbor and he
RG> helps, and the job is screwed up, the court will say, you should
RG> have called a plumber.
You are still hanging in there on a plumbing job.  I agreed with you
on that.  Then, I said "in general" meaning under general conditions of
law, not just the expectations from a plumbing job.
RG> The best case I can remember was in 1970, when I was a truck
RG> driver.  One night, at the Lucky Food loading dock two teenagers
RG> were trying to steal a box of lettuce.  An armed security guard
RG> intervened and a  scuffle ensued.  Those of us on the far end of the
RG> dock started that way, but before we could get there, the teens
RG> managed to knock down the security guard and began to run.  The
RG> security guard pulled out his pistol and ordered them to stop, one
RG> of the teens, still holding a head of lettuce, threw it at the
RG> guard.  The guard shot and killed the teen.  The Prosecution in the
RG> case tried the guard for manslaughter, the jury brought back a
RG> verdict of guilty of involuntary manslaughter (an allowable option
RG> under the court instructions).  Reason being the guard did not have
RG> the same training as a Police Officer with regard to shoot, don't
RG> shoot policy and law, so he didn't have the knowledge to make a
RG> proper decision. 
In Arizona, he would have had to show that a "reasonable man" would
have beenin fear of his life or serious bodily harm.  If he could not,
he may very well see slammer time.
RD 
sandman@azstarnet.com - A newspaper ISP - Arizona Daily Star
sandman@brassroots.org - A no compromise gun rights organization.
http://www.azstarnet.com/~sandman
___
 X KWQ/2 1.2i X Never try to outstubborn a cat
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------