Poll: Do you agree with the Stand Your Ground Laws
Yes. They are good self-defense laws
No. They are unnecessary and often abused and misused
Unsure. (Comment)
[Show Results]
 
Stand your ground laws
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-07-2013, 12:56 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 12:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:49 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  A premeditated attack is not covered under the Castle Doctorine. They are two different things.

I didn't say premeditated, I said preemptively. As in, the confrontation begins for one reason or another, I feel threatened and think they may attack, so I shoot them. I am protected under that law.

If you feel you are in real danger of life and limb from an actual behavior (not a mere verbal threat), yes you can use deadly force to protect yourself. Bear in mind, you better hope the police, the DA and a jury sees it the same way, or you're looking at a murder charge.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 12:59 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 12:56 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I didn't say premeditated, I said preemptively. As in, the confrontation begins for one reason or another, I feel threatened and think they may attack, so I shoot them. I am protected under that law.

If you feel you are in real danger of life and limb from an actual behavior (not a mere verbal threat), yes you can use deadly force to protect yourself. Bear in mind, you better hope the police, the DA and a jury sees it the same way, or you're looking at a murder charge.

Does the fact that there is so much discrepancy in the law not mean it is poorly worded and in need of change?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 01:00 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 12:42 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:30 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Some of the original motivation for them was justified. They were written, not taking into account all the unintended consequences. So, I couldn't vote. They need to be re-written in light of the abuses that have come to light after they were passed.

I'd go as far as saying it's just unnecessary as an addition to self-defense laws.

In Massachusetts, the law was that a victim had a duty to retreat. That law is, to my mind, immoral and unethical.

The law was changed to the more common "Castle Doctrine". In some states this applies only to one's home, in others it applies to anywhere one can legally be. That extension is the "Stand Your Ground" concept.

Any stand your ground law needs to be carefully written to prevent abuse, but it should be legal for a person who is attacked by an armed person or by overwhelming force to use deadly force in self-defense.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-07-2013, 01:01 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 12:56 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I didn't say premeditated, I said preemptively. As in, the confrontation begins for one reason or another, I feel threatened and think they may attack, so I shoot them. I am protected under that law.

If you feel you are in real danger of life and limb from an actual behavior (not a mere verbal threat), yes you can use deadly force to protect yourself. Bear in mind, you better hope the police, the DA and a jury sees it the same way, or you're looking at a murder charge.

A highly subjective and emotional opinion, is not a good reason for allowing someone to be able to kill another human.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 01:02 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 01:00 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:42 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I'd go as far as saying it's just unnecessary as an addition to self-defense laws.

In Massachusetts, the law was that a victim had a duty to retreat. That law is, to my mind, immoral and unethical.

The law was changed to the more common "Castle Doctrine". In some states this applies only to one's home, in others it applies to anywhere one can legally be. That extension is the "Stand Your Ground" concept.

Any stand your ground law needs to be carefully written to prevent abuse, but it should be legal for a person who is attacked by an armed person or by overwhelming force to use deadly force in self-defense.

But what if not attacked, or what if the person who shoots is the one who instigates the fight in the first place?

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 01:03 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 12:59 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:56 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  If you feel you are in real danger of life and limb from an actual behavior (not a mere verbal threat), yes you can use deadly force to protect yourself. Bear in mind, you better hope the police, the DA and a jury sees it the same way, or you're looking at a murder charge.

Does the fact that there is so much discrepancy in the law not mean it is poorly worded and in need of change?

No. There's nothing new about justifiable homicide. It's been a legal concept for as long as murder, practically.

It's not always easy or as black and white as you might think. We saw that during Zimmerman's trial.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 01:11 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 01:03 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:59 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  Does the fact that there is so much discrepancy in the law not mean it is poorly worded and in need of change?

No. There's nothing new about justifiable homicide. It's been a legal concept for as long as murder, practically.

It's not always easy or as black and white as you might think. We saw that during Zimmerman's trial.

Ah yes the Zimmerman case, where an armed man followed an unarmed teenager and then fatally shot him and was acquitted because in Florida that does not count as manslaughter.

As far as justifiable homicide the law needs to be crystal clear not a muddy pool. Thats the problem with the stand your ground laws they muddy the water too much.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
18-07-2013, 01:18 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
As an example, here is anther case in Florida that will attempt to use the Stand Your Ground Law to justify a self defense killing.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/jordan...ground-law

Michael Dunn will stand trial for the murder of 17 year old Jordan Davis over a dispute between the two over Davis playing loud music in his SUV. Dunn claims Davis verbally threatened him and Dunn then shot Davis, claiming that his life was in danger.

In my opinion, the Stand your Ground Law will not work here and Dunn is going to prison for murder. Good riddance!

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-07-2013, 01:18 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 01:01 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 12:56 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  If you feel you are in real danger of life and limb from an actual behavior (not a mere verbal threat), yes you can use deadly force to protect yourself. Bear in mind, you better hope the police, the DA and a jury sees it the same way, or you're looking at a murder charge.

A highly subjective and emotional opinion, is not a good reason for allowing someone to be able to kill another human.

You might want to think that through to its logical end.

If I am attacked and not allowed to defend myself, I die.
If I am allowed to defend myself, the bad guy(s) die.

Seems pretty clear to me.Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-07-2013, 01:20 PM
RE: Stand your ground laws
(18-07-2013 01:02 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(18-07-2013 01:00 PM)Chas Wrote:  In Massachusetts, the law was that a victim had a duty to retreat. That law is, to my mind, immoral and unethical.

The law was changed to the more common "Castle Doctrine". In some states this applies only to one's home, in others it applies to anywhere one can legally be. That extension is the "Stand Your Ground" concept.

Any stand your ground law needs to be carefully written to prevent abuse, but it should be legal for a person who is attacked by an armed person or by overwhelming force to use deadly force in self-defense.

But what if not attacked, or what if the person who shoots is the one who instigates the fight in the first place?

Like I've said, the law has to be written clearly.

Whoever starts the fight is the aggressor and self-defense does not apply to the aggressor.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: