[holymoly]

Picture this: A homeless man comes up to you and in a demanding voice asks for money. You have no knowledge if he is armed, and he says nothing to suggest he is. Still, you feel threatened. You are carrying a pistol legally because of the state’s concealed weapon law. You pull it out and shoot him.

And of all the (10?) States which have passed "Stand your ground"/"Castle doctrine" laws, Caitlin cannot provide a single example of something like this actually happening. All she can provide us with a hypothetical scenario. rather than the criminal/attacker?

Nothing like impartial reporting, Caitlin.

[holymoly]

rather than the criminal/attacker? = Bad editing, shouldn't be there.

[Puppage]

You read my mind.

[cripplecreek]

There aren't any homeless people around where I live so it's unlikely I'll be confronted with the situation.

[kittymyrib]

How about this scenario, Caitlyn. You are walking in some God-forsaken part of Detroit on assignment. You are attacked by a crazed homeless person who tries to strangle you. A by-stander with a license to carry shoots the attacker and saves your life. How do you feel about that carry law now, Caitlyn? I'll bet the latter situation is much more likely to occur than the one you presented in your biased, anti-gun report.

[facedown]

...not in self-defense against someone threatening to cause you bodily harm, but simply because you felt threatened.

Absolute BS, a classic straw dog.

[from occupied ga]

Picture this: A homeless man bum comes up to you and in a demanding voice asks for money. You have no knowledge if he is armed, and he says nothing to suggest he is. Still, you feel threatened. You are carrying a pistol legally because of the state’s concealed weapon law. You pull it out and shoot him.

Shooting the bum who accosted you in a threatining manner would be bad because?

[Balding_Eagle]

A homeless man comes up to you and in a demanding voice asks for money. You have no knowledge if he is armed, and he says nothing to suggest he is. Still, you feel threatened. You are carrying a pistol legally because of the state’s concealed weapon law. You pull it out and shoot him.

This sounds more like a advertisement to SUPPORT the new law than a reason to be against it.

Very few people want to put up with aggressive homeless, and a little fear and respect from them is reason alone to pass this.

[absolootezer0]

However, the law already gives citizens the right to protect themselves, says Shikha Hamilton, state president of the Million Mom March chapter of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Additional measures would just be overkill, Hamilton says.

the way the law stands right now, a person can literally kick in your door, and remove everything from your house, as long as they are not actively threatening violence. yeah, that makes me feel protected in my home.

[facedown]

The Florida "Castle Doctrine" law basically does three things:

One: It establishes, in law, the presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters or intrudes into your home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm, therefore a person may use any manner of force, including deadly force, against that person.

Two: It removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be. You no longer have to turn your back on a criminal and try to run when attacked. Instead, you may stand your ground and fight back, meeting force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others. [This is an American right repeatedly recognized in Supreme Court gun cases.]

Three: It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force.

[Mikey_1962]

I grew up on the lower Eastside of Detroit. We ALWAYS had a shoot first policy...trust Mikey on this one.

[taxed2death]

"You have no knowledge if he is armed, and he says nothing to suggest he is. Still, you feel threatened. You are carrying a pistol legally because of the state’s concealed weapon law. You pull it out and shoot him."

________________________________________________________


You (person in this hypothetical scenario) are a complete idiot. You deserve to be put in jail.

According to the first sentence there is no threat of lethality or serious bodily harm. If you REALLY feel threatened, get the F out of there.

This person should read up a bit on "escalation of force" and how it pertains to legally carrying a firearm.

[Dead Corpse]

Don't expect rational thought from the Left-stream Mass Media and all your surprises will be pleasent. This idiot "writer" is a perfect example.

In fact, people like Caitlin make me feel "threatened"...

[ASA Vet]

You are carrying a pistol legally because of the 2nd Admendment of the US Constituiton and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constituition concealed weapon law

[Joe Brower]

The legislators in MI need look no further than to their fellow state of Florida for their answers.

Of course, that's what they're afraid of.

[OXENinFLA]

A homeless man comes up to you and in a demanding voice asks for money.

I've had bums come up to me and they don't ask, they straight up demand.

One of their favorite lines is "What'chu you got for me man?"

To which I reply ".45 hollow points if you don't get the F*#% out of my face!!"

[Leatherneck_MT]

Good Law, makes scum quite a bit more apprehensive about accosting someone on the street.

[BILLNHILL MAKE ME ILL]

...have a “duty to retreat”...

Translated from liberalese this means an obligation to be a victim.

IMHO people are much more civil if they suspect that you are armed and you have a legal right to defend yourself against hostile intentions.

[absolootezer0]

one of the guys i know thru another forum was actually in this situation. bum threatened him with a knife, he pulled his weapon (he had a carry permit) and didn't shoot.
the bum called the cops and had him arrested. the guy i know got his carry license pulled, ALL of his guns confiscated and had to goto trial for assault.
this is why we NEED these kind of laws. lawyers and cops will almost always find the person with the gun to be at fault.

[mountainlyons]

How about the Marine waiter that was attacked by armed robbers and he killed one with a pocket knife and wounded others. He should have had a gun. Guns stop crime because criminals are cowards.

[BlueStateDepression]

Some folks can worry about what the government says when it comes to self defense. To a degree I guess I care what they say also. But...

If I am threatened I will respond regardless of what liberal lefties say I should do. Here in my state you are required to make attempt to flee, yes that even applies to your own home, before you can apply deadly force.

We have no carry laws here, just laws banniong that action. This allows criminals to attack people that are out and about becasue they KNOW those folks are not armed with anything to defend themselves. This policy is as backwards as it gets imho.

Make no mistake about it, if me or my family are threatened I have zero remorse shooting my way to safety if that is what it takes. If the law bars me from doing so then so be it. I will be happy to sit in front of a jury and explain my actions. I would even take any punishment they felt neccesary due to my respect for the rule of law.

I will NOT however forgo my natural right to self defense no matter what any politician or law states. I have shot a gun in defense of myself and my famliy in the past and will again if the need arises. I almost went to jail that time but I would do the same thing again without a second thought.

Guns do not kill people. People kill people. Stop going after the guns and go after the people, then, finally, we might actually make progress in this battle.