Faulty Premises: WSJ Article Assumes
Justifiable Homicides Don't Save Lives

A recent Wall Street Journal article makes claims about justifiable homicides using false, or at least unproven assumptions. From wsj.com:

It's easier than ever to kill someone in America and get away with it.

In 30 states, it often requires only a claim you killed while protecting yourself or others.

There are several assumptions wrapped up in the opening sentences. First is the assumption it is never necessary or justified to kill someone. The phrase "get away with it" implies the person was not justified. Even though the article is about justified homicides, the authors, in the first sentence, imply justified homicides are not justified. Why the literary double speak? It is because the premise of the article depends on convincing the reader justified homicides were not justified.

This is a progressive article of faith. It is not sustained by the facts. In a previous article at AmmoLand, this correspondent explained two different models of how homicide happens, at least in Western society. From AmmoLand:

The first model, which I call the "Progressive Elite" model, has these basic assumptions about criminal homicide and its causes: …