Jump to content

Talk:Bad Elk v. United States/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Buffbills7701 (talk · contribs) 21:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  • Nicely cited.
  • "...discuss the issue as defense against unlawful force, and most also note that a person may not use force to resist an unlawful arrest." Shouldn't most become must?
  • The article states that in 1999, "sixteen states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest..." Is there a more recent version?
    • Same thing with this line. "By 1999, twenty-three states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest by statute."

Addressing:

  • "...discuss the issue as defense against unlawful force, and most also note that a person may not use force to resist an unlawful arrest." Shouldn't most become must?
 Done Clarified most to show that it meant "most of the cases" citing Bad Elk.
  • The article states that in 1999, "sixteen states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest..." Is there a more recent version?
 Done.
    • Same thing with this line. "By 1999, twenty-three states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest by statute."
 Done. GregJackP Boomer! 04:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict

[edit]