1 down, 49 more to go!
Kentucky doesn't have SYG b/c it never had a requirement to retreat afaik. I really like the approach b/c it spells out when you can use deadly force to defend yourself and doesn't speak either way to a requirement to run away or that you can stay where you are. The question is "are you being threatened with great bodily harm" (or similar, a gross legal summary obviously) and if so then you can use force to defend yourself.
It doesn't spell out that you have no obligation to retreat b/c it doesn't really have to, it just needs to say when you can and cannot use force to defend yourself and leave it at that to have a good, clear, applicable law.
Like you I'm glad to be in a state where law abiding people have no obligation to give the wrongdoer a wide path. I hope I never need to worry about it, dont' know what I'd do if I did, and if someone can save lives by retreating then by all means do so b/c a TV or whatever isn't worth the risk, but I don't want the law to REQUIRE us to give criminals that edge.
It's far better if the law is against the aggressor in as many cases as possible, in order to deter as much aggression (crime) as possible. Otherwise all we've done is encourage more aggression, more crime against the innocent, and we're up to our ears in it already.
