State high court to rule: Does 'stand your ground' protect felons who shoot?

[SecularMotion]

Source: Tampa Bay Times

TALLAHASSEE — The Florida Supreme Court will consider whether convicted felons have the right to claim immunity under the state's "stand your ground" self-defense law — even if they are barred from possessing guns in the first place.

Justices agreed this week to hear the case of Brian Bragdon, who was charged in Palm Beach County with two counts of attempted first-degree murder, shooting into an occupied vehicle, discharging a firearm from a vehicle and being a felon in possession of a firearm, according to court documents.

According to the Palm Beach Post, Bragdon was arrested in 2012 after he shot another man outside a strip club in suburban West Palm Beach.

An arrest affidavit, the newspaper reported, showed Bragdon and a group of other patrons got involved in a fight inside the club. The altercation continued outside and investigators said they later found 40 shell casings.

Read more: http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/state-high-court-to-rule-does-stand-your-ground-protect-felons-who-shoot/2187242

[Cosmocat]

1. This is seriously an extension of this ridiculous thing

The way this thing stands now, up to and including actual criminal acts would be considered standing your ground.

[SecularMotion]

2. Here's a good article on the application of the law in Florida

Florida 'stand your ground' law yields some shocking outcomes depending on how law is applied

Florida's "stand your ground'' law has allowed drug dealers to avoid murder charges and gang members to walk free. It has stymied prosecutors and confused judges. • It has also served its intended purpose, exonerating dozens of people who were deemed to be legitimately acting in self-defense. Among them: a woman who was choked and beaten by an irate tenant and a man who was threatened in his driveway by a felon.

Seven years since it was passed, Florida's "stand your ground" law is being invoked with unexpected frequency, in ways no one imagined, to free killers and violent attackers whose self-defense claims seem questionable at best.

Cases with similar facts show surprising — sometimes shocking — differences in outcomes. If you claim "stand your ground" as the reason you shot someone, what happens to you can depend less on the merits of the case than on who you are, whom you kill and where your case is decided.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133

[secondvariety]

3. Soon,

the media won't be able to report on individuals who use the SYG plea successfully.


http://rt.com/usa/florida-guns-bill-nra-333/


This is one effed up law...

[pipoman]

4. Not a plea, it's a defense. ..

[Demeter]

5. Which came first: the chicken, or the ego?

[avebury]

6. I havea to admit that, if I were on a jury in a case

where the "defendant" was someone with a criminal record on trial for "murder" with a really good lawyer able to sell SYG within the boundaries of the SYG law I would consider deliberating in the defendant's favor. SYG is SYG. You don't have the option of picking and choosing who benefits from the law. I would probably make a comment to the news media afterwards that Florida reaped what it sowed. If they are just now realizing that the law has unintended consequences then I have no sympathy for them. If they find enough really bad guys getting away with, let's be honest, murder - then maybe they will rethink the law.

[Thor_MN]

8. Seriously? A felon, with no rights to firearms, commits a crime simply picking up a gun.

They don't even have to fire it to be sent back to prison. This isn't a chicken or egg situation, possession of a firearm itself is a crime for them. I suppose under the idiocy of SYG, the murder charge could be removed, but they go back to prison for the weapons charge.

Actually, now that I think about it, using SYG means pleading guilty to the weapons charge. Can't defend oneself saying the shooting was justified without admitting that you did indeed shoot. Although the insanity that is going on in courts today could well say that picking up the weapons was justified as well.

[avebury]

9. You can get the hypothetical defendent on the weapons charge

or anything else that is relevant but SYG and SYG and the defendant does not necessarily have to defend himself/herself with a gun, it can be another weapon that is not prohibited by being a convicted felon. Picking up a gun, though it might be a crime in and of itself, does not negate a SYG defense on any murder charge.

The point is that the state, in passing the SYG law, failed to see the long term ramifications of passing the law in the first place.

[Turbineguy]

11. Probably the only way to get rid of the law

is to ensure that enough murderers and drug dealers get off and that they kill again and again.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that under the Florida SYG law, innocent bystanders who get shot are unable to sue for damages.

[JoeyT]

13. You can't defend yourself while engaged in unlawful activity.

The Florida statute on justifiable use of force is very clear about it.

Once cannot defend oneself if

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

[avebury]

14. The prosecutor would need to press

charges for the underlining crime (i.e breaking & entering, robbery, car jacking, what ever) and not focus solely on the shooting. It really doesn't matter how the law is written but on the prosecutor's case, how good the defense attorney is, the quality of the jury, and so on. Having the law on your side does not guarantee a victory for the prosecution. Call me a cynic but I don't have much faith the the justice system. It is far too often neither fair nor just.

[JoeyT]

15. Not having faith in the justice system

isn't cynicism, it's realism. I figure he won't get off because the law doesn't usually bend in the direction of people without a lot of money or power to back them, and the money and power in this fight doesn't want "A felon can unload an illegal firearm into you and walk" attached to their cause.

"Defend your family against a felon!" is easy to sell to the masses, "A felon can defend themselves against you!" isn't as easy a sell.

[gopiscrap]

22. I agree

you can get for illegal possession though.

[CanonRay]

7. This has reached the lunatic stage

A shooting outside a strip club after a fight and involving a convicted felon with a gun. My, my, Florida is over the edge.

[Tetris_Iguana]

19. Gun-toting thugs infest every state.

Shootings like this happens in lower-class neighborhoods all over the country.

It is not just a Florida problem, it is a complex socioeconomic problem.

[CanonRay]

21. I guess I wasn't clear

It is the fact that the court is considering applying stand your ground.

[broadcaster75201]

10. This Nation of morons is flat fucking insane. n/t

nt

[JoeyT]

12. Not if they follow the law.

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

Possession of a firearm by a felon is an unlawful activity.

[Iggo]

17. What if it ain't his?

[Omaha Steve]

16. Here is how the FELON gets the firearm legally in FL (I think)

He gets into a fist fight with a good guy with a gun in a toy store. He takes away the firearm. He feels threatened and fires off several rounds. He hits a few innocent bystanders in the store. But SYG makes it nice and legal.

[blkmusclmachine]

18. Only if they're white(-ish), straight, Conservative Christian Republican men. Otherwise, NO !!!

[samsingh]

20. i can't believe this would even be a consideration

[JohnnyRingo]

23. It seems a bit of an injustice....

...that if someone kicked in a homeowner's door with intent to kill that the resident would be charged for defending him/herself. On the other hand, if it was truly a life and death situation, I'm sure the homeowner would gladly accept a minor charge over the alternative.

To be honest, if I were not allowed to possess a firearm, I'd still have one in my house under someone else's name. Certainly it would prevent me from leaving the house with it, but I don't believe in these new portable SYG "castle laws" anyway. Everyone would be able to defend themselves against legitimate threats while in their home if I were on the jury.

On edit:
Upon review I see this particular case involved a felon who packed a handgun before going out for the evening. There's no excuse for that. Because of the defendent's violent life style it's just a shooting waiting to happen. People like that rightly need to change their lives so they aren't as likely to be in a situation where deadly force is necessary.