Talk:Imperfect self-defense
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Philosopher in topic Clarity
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Imperfect self-defense article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 20 December 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
I'll get more cites soon. Bearian (talk) 03:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please note that neither of the reference links provided actually link to the cases cited. They each link to different copies of the same recent Iowa case. That case, however, does cite both of the cases used here as references. I still think this should be merged into Self-defense (theory). --Evb-wiki (talk) 04:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Controversy
editThe Controversy section is uncited, and has been tagged since April. I am aware of no legal academic who argues the position put forth. I am being WP:Bold and removing it. --e Robert-Houdin 20:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rober-houdin (talk • contribs)
Clarity
editIf someone wants to expand the article, it needs two big things: 1) the fact that, at least in the United States, it is a minority rule and 2) a list of which jurisdictions it is good law in. --Philosopher Let us reason together. via alternate account 13:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)