Self defense law has been just fine since before this country was founded. Reasonableness is supposed to be murky so that particular facts can always be taken into account. Why don't you want a jury to consider every possible factor in determining reasonableness? If you're acting reasonably, great, juist convincve the jury. If you're not, why do you expect to be protected?
I understand your point, and we're just going to have to agree to disagree here. I favor the added clarity and protection of SYG provisions for people who are attacked.
The real problem most people here have articulated is that SYG creates an enormous loophole for instigating a-holes with firearms:
21-5226. Use of force by an aggressor. [Amends K.S.A. 2010 Supp. § 21-3214]
The justification described in sections K.S.A. 21-3211, 21-3212 and 21-3213, prior to
their repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5222, 21-5223, and 21-5225, and amendments thereto, is not available
to a person who:
(a) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping from the commission of a forcible
felony; or
(b) Initially provokes the use of any force against himself such person or another, with
intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant; or
(c) Otherwise initially provokes the use of any force against himself such person or
another, unless:
(1) Such person has reasonable grounds to believe that such person is in imminent danger
of death or great bodily harm, and such person has exhausted every reasonable means to escape
such danger other than the use of deadly force, or
(2) In good faith, such person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and
indicates clearly to the assailant that such person desires to withdraw and terminate the use of
such force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of such force.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3214; L. 2010, ch. 124, § 7; L. 2010, ch. 136, § 24; L. 2011, ch.
30, § 10, July 1.
21-5230. No Duty to Retreat; exceptions. [Amends K.S.A. 2010 Supp. § 21-3218]
(a) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in a place
where such person has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand such person’s
ground and use any force which such person would be justified in using under article 32 of
chapter 21 of the Kansas Statute Annotated, prior to their repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5202 through 21-
5208 and K.S.A. 21-5222 through 21-5228 and K.S.A. 2010 Supp. 21-3212a, 21-3220 and 21-
3221, and amendments thereto.
History: L. 2006, ch. 194, § 1; L. 2010, ch. 124, § 10; L. 2010, ch. 136, § 28; L. 2011, ch. 30, ?
13, July 1
Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but the statute you cite, 21-5226(c)(1), states that if an aggressor provokes a fight, they have
no right to self defense unless (a) he has reasonable grounds to believe that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and (b) he "has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of deadly force."
The KS SYG statute, 21-5230, does not override the statute above, because it only applies to people who are "not engaged in unlawful activity" and are attacked.
So, if you're the "instigating a-hole with a firearm" and provoke the fight, you've got no right to SYG.
