Let's start calling "Stand Your Ground" what it really is. "Legally allowing people to murder people

[Justice wanted]

they don't like".



Koch Brothers have basically got this B.S. passed in 20 states. How far will this law be acceptable.


Let's make it this question:

What if a Uber-rich White person higher another white man to say do construction work at his home. They argue about payment for the job. So the construction worker leaves upset by the payment and is refusing to do anymore work. Uber Rich takes out a gun and shoots the Construction worker. He argues that the construction worker stealing from him because he didn't fulfill his contract AND uber-rich felt threaten by all the tools construction worker had because he could use them to hurt uber-rich. Will that Uber-rich man get away with the murder?

I am just putting this out there because I honestly think this is a legit question to ask. Why would the Koch brothers -thru ALEC want this type of law passed in so many states. Yeah, it encourages more sells of guns and bullets BUT doesn't this law also demean the worth of a human life? I mean you say "This guy was going to threaten me or kill me" and we just say OKAY can't put the guy on trail to determine if it was an honest fear because this law is the get out of jail free card.

[Skittles]

1. CORRECT

now wait for all the gun nuts to start crying about how, no, it's a RIGHT!!!

[safeinOhio]

2. I would think the SYG laws

lay the ground work for "the perfect crime".

A spouse in the middle of a long divorce might come up with a great plan.

[Justice wanted]

5. Another case right there. Hubby is now rich after Wife put him through school doesn't want to pay

alimony. OR vise Vera. Wife has all the money claims abuse hubby going to kill her so she shoots.

[HereSince1628]

3. Aren't they already known as 'Make My Day' laws? Or is that some other horrendous

implementation of cinema machismo into the culture of American life?

[msongs]

4. any shooting can be justified now long as there are no witnesses. nt

[fascisthunter]

6. people warned this shit would happen, yet some influential sociopaths wanted it passed

[spin]

7. Despite what the media leads you to believe ...

this is not the intention of the law.

Has the law been misinterpreted by police, prosecutors and judges. Yes. Does it need to be rewritten to remove any ambiguity and confusion. Yes.

You pose a possible scenario and yes it is possible that if there was no witnesses or evidence the Uber-rich individual might get away with murder. Under the older law, the rich person could simply claim that he tried to retreat. The results might well be the same, except that he would probably be prosecuted and have to face a jury.The newer law simply removes the duty to retreat but unfortunately it could allow a local law enforcement agency to avoid arresting an indivual in a case where there were valid questions about his actions.

Let me pose a different scenario.

A man who has a concealed weapons permit is innocently walking down a street. He finds himself confronted by a street thug who appears irrational and angry. The thug is armed with a knife or a gun or is significantly larger and in far better physical condition then his innocent victim. The thug launches an attack or is just about to. The person with the concealed weapon draws and shoots his attacker in order to stop the attack. The thug dies.

Should the shooter be changed with manslaughter or murder because he chose to stand his ground?

If I ever find myself in such a situation I will appraise my the person who is threatening me. If he demands my wallet and I believe that he will not harm me if I turn it over, I will gladly hand it to him. I can always replace my money, credit cards and my ID. Replacing my health is not so easy and if I end up six feet under I can't bring myself back to life. My object is to survive the encounter without injury.

Obviously in some situations the best tactic is to retreat or flee. This might involve considerable risk if my assailant is in far better shape than I am. He might run me down and stab or shoot me. But if I am fleet of foot I might well use this technique as the chances of him catching me are slim and most criminals can't hit the broadside of a barn with a handgun. Unfortunately I am 65 years old and am also a candidate for a hip replacement. If I attempt to limp away, my best hope is that the thug will be laughing too hard to catch me.

Lets suppose that I realize that if I don't use some form of self defense, my attacker will not be satisfied with my merely turning over my wallet and I will probably end up in a hospital or in a grave.

If I have pepper spray with me I might try to use it and then flee. It would be wise for me to close the distance between myself and my attacker in order to increase the effect of the spray.

I have some skills remaining from a self defense course that I took 20 years ago and I might decide to try these tricks. The techniques that I learned require moving laterally to get out of the way of the muzzle of a firearm or the blade of the knife. I might then move closer to my attacker in order to grab his wrist and attempt to disarm him. None of the techniques that I was taught involve first retreating. You have to jam your opponent in order to disarm him. You don't want to be directly in the path of his weapon but to his side.

I do have a concealed weapons permit and I carry. I might decide that my best chance of survival is to draw my weapon and use it to stop the attack. I have 45 years of experience shooting a handgun and it has taught me that it is much easier to use a handgun while standing still or advancing. Stumbling backward does not enhance your accuracy even with practice. I should point out that handguns are nowhere as lethal as depicted in the movies or on TV. I could shoot my attacker several times with my .38 snub nosed revolver and he could still kill me. That's reality, but my objective is to stop his attack not kill him. I fully realize that my handgun might not stop his attack but it does offer me a fair chance.

Under the old law a overzealous prosecutor could charge me with manslaughter in the situation I described if I attempted defended myself but failed to retreat first and my attacker ended up dead. (Assuming there were witnesses.)

I don't believe that anything in the law allows me to confront an individual in an aggressive manner and refuse to break off the encounter before it turns violent. I feel that since I am carrying a concealed weapon it is my duty to walk away from an argument even if it makes me look cowardly. I will do so.

In my opinion the law should be reworded to require the review of any self defense incident by a higher authority than the local police and prosecutor. In those cases where there was any serious doubt that legitimate self defense was used, the shooter should be arrested and prosecuted and have his day in court. If the jury decides that the shooter was innocent, the state should reimburse his legal expenses and associated expenses for lost time at work. My suggestion is far from perfect but it would be an improvement over the current law.

[cr8tvlde]

9. Most crimes are not witnessed by others

so it's basically he-said/she-said/he-said whatever. The power person/person with the greatest ability to spin it/or the person left alive has the say. The dead person has no voice.

Mr. Zimmerman's father is a judge, presumably was an attorney, so he learned the talk and knowing all the local cops very well from all of his reports, helped him make the walk. There's no clarity whether he was oozing blood from head-bashing (5 weeks later) or looking pretty normal on the perp walk. And that's on 911 tapes and film...a rarity for most crimes.

It gives tremendous power to the strong and it's plain wrong. Stand your Ground is basically, you're making me afraid, boom! Now, prove the dead person DIDN'T make me afraid for my life and I WASN'T Standing My Ground.

And once we get guns in everyones hand's, legal and illegal, and these cases tie up forever and/or go away, why, we'll just revert to the Wild, Wild West.

[MrScorpio]

33. The best laid plans of mice and men paves a road to hell with good intentions nt

[jp11]

8. Police power

Sounds like these laws put the blanket of protection, meaning you can kill people at will, in the hands of ordinary citizens. Where the idea was police are trained to 'know better', debatable, the average citizen with a gun has no expectation or 'trust' put in them. The community didn't empower 'everyone' with a gun to have the 'right' to kill other people if they feel scared. Police at least are doing what they signed up to do, what the community 'asks' them to do when responding to events this isn't the case for your average citizen.

The average gun carrying citizen also doesn't get screened to make sure they are mentally healthy, get any assistance after a shooting, or necessarily have any training or experience when dealing with other people that they look on as a threat besides 'center mass'.

As to why someone might want these types of laws I can only guess to appease the extreme gun lovers longing for an America from the silver screen where you could shoot people for looking at you funny. Or perhaps the violence and controversy of having people living in fear of each other able to kill anyone and 'justify' it would just help build up the fear they so like that helps them get their agenda moving forward.

[derby378]

10. A woman has the right NOT to be raped...

...and if she has to pull out a Glock and dispatch her would-be rapist, so be it. That is the Castle Doctrine in a nutshell. She shouldn't have to run, she shouldn't have to beg for her attacker to wear a condom, etc. She has a right to her own dignity and integrity as a person.

I've seen what rape can do to women first-hand. Come on. Keep the focus on Zimmerman and stop running into the weeds, already.

[jp11]

13. Look at your own response.

Talk about the weeds making the erroneous claim that I was somehow arguing for rape or that people have no right to defend themselves when they are actually in danger.

[derby378]

16. My response wasn't aimed solely at you

For that, mea culpa. But Castle Doctrine laws have actually been working fairly well in Texas so far. I know one of our Democratic state senators is trying to get a handle on things to make sure our CD law doesn't allow for an aberration like Zimmerman, but our law is so far having the intended effect of keeping thugs at bay.

[ladjf]

11. It is just a small step from being legalized lynching. nt

[slackmaster]

12. Writers who misuse hyperbole deserve to be taken out and shot

[JVS]

14. In your hypothetical the possession of tools does not constitute a "Reasonable threat"

which is essential to the SYG law.

[Justice wanted]

20. I've heard of screw driver and hammers being used to kill people.

[JVS]

24. still not "reasonable threat" that SYG is talking about

[Justice wanted]

25. but candy and ice tea are? Because THIS is the same excuse George Zimmerman is giving.

[JVS]

26. No it isn't. Zimmerman's claim is that Trayvon assaulted him.

Being assaulted is a "reasonable threat". Don't use candy and iced tea to make a strawman.

[Justice wanted]

27. And the rich man won't claim the same thing? It is so easy to say I was attacked after the murder

happened.

[hack89]

28. But you still have to convince the police

there still will be an investigation.

How will things be different without SYG?

[Justice wanted]

29. all I have to say is LOOK at Freakin George Zimmerman. He has Yet to be arrested THE POLICE where

basically covering this all up and sweeping it under the rug.


When it come to a rich person or person with the right connections they seem to get away with it more.

(Edit: I am thinking more and more about our dialog)


Look at the way you keep saying How STUPID and DUMB this example I gave was BUT think about this: The Martin/Zimmerman case is maybe MORE dumb than my little example WHEN you think about it Trayvon was NO WHERE NEAR ZIMMERMAN"S HOME

Look at Trayvon's size compare to Zimmerman's size. HOW is my example so stupid OR is the reason my example is so stupid is because it is about 2 people of the same race?

[hack89]

31. There is an ongoing investigation by law enforcement

what if he is indicted? Will you agree then that SYG is not this magic shield that allows someone to get away with murder?

[Justice wanted]

34. ONLY BECAUSE OF PUBLIC DEMAND

[hack89]

35. So you are shocked that there are racists cops in the South?

this case is about racism. That is what the public outrage is about.

[Justice wanted]

37. I'm NOT SHOCKED I"M PISSED THAT in the 21st century in this united states SOMETHING AS BULL

SHIT AS ZIMMERMAN/MARTIN event happened. I'm even more pissed that we have this bull shit "Stand You Ground" Laws

And I'm pissed that when you take Racism out of the event people are screaming that I'm delusional BUT What is more "ridiculous" is the fact that Zimmerman stalked a kid and Killed him and he isn't inside a fuckin jail cell!

[BiggJawn]

15. If he's so damn rich...

...why doesn't he just pay some tweaker $100 to do the job? That way he takes out 2 dirt-scratchers.

Do you people lay awake at night thinking up these outlandish fantasies?

[Justice wanted]

18. Outlandish fantasy--Tell me than What do you call the Trayvon Martin case

Keep in MIND Trayvon Martin WAS NO WAY NEAR the ZIMMERMAN house. Trayvon had SKITTLES and ICE TEA I don't know about those items being used as weapons but I have heard of Screw Drivers being used as Weapons I've heard of Hammers being used as a weapon.

The Rich person could claim that the contractor came near him holding the hammer in a mensing manor.

[BiggJawn]

30. Zimmerman's a murderer. The "richman/contractor" scenario...

...is a masturbation fantasy.

I can't think of a word derogatory enough to describe this "Say! I don't want to pay the guy who cut my grass. I know! I'll shoot him and claim he was trying to run over me with the lawnmower! Stand Your Ground, after all!" bullshit.

People that think up this ridiculous fuck-waddery actually demean Trayvon Martin. You use his death to pursue an agenda of "Gun owners sit at home and fuck their guns while they dream of killing people".

You know anybody who does that? Hell, no you don't. You just fantasize about it.

Get a fucking life.

[Justice wanted]

36. hmmm. Get a Fuckin Life. Okay WHATEVER

[hack89]

17. No - SYG woluld not apply

there is no reasonable fear of eminent danger. The worker could have a gun on his belt but unless he took it out and brandished it, there is no eminent threat.

Perhaps a good starting point would be for everyone to actually read the details of the law before pulling wildass hypotheticals.

[Justice wanted]

19. Than how can George Zimmerman claim SYG against Trayvon Martin. HOW can it be HE HAS NOT

Been arrested.


SYG is basically covering Zimmerman's ASS

[hack89]

21. He can claim anything he wants - doesn't mean it is a legally correct interpretation

he has not been arrested due to the incompetence and racism of the local cops. There is an ongoing investigation - the legal system has not determined if SYG applies or not. You will get your answer when the special investigator decides whether to indict or not.

This case is about police racism, not SYG.

[Justice wanted]

23. Really. Why hasn't George Zimmerman been arrested yet? Actually SYG was basically George's

excuse for shooting Trayvon.

Today IT IS about Racism... What about tomorrow when It is a Black man shooting a Black Man or a white man shooting a white man.


SYG was the excuse.

[Initech]

22. Stand Your Ground should be declared unconstitutional.

But our SCOTUS...

[LynneSin]

32. Screw the 14th amendment when it's all about the 2nd amendment

[jpak]

38. K&R

yup