Posted on 01/11/2012 3:58:36 PM PST by marktwain
When former Broward Sheriff's Office deputy Maury Hernandez pumped several shots into an unarmed homeless man during a confrontation in an ice cream shop, he decisively ended what he saw as a threat to himself and his family.
But that Saturday shooting also served to revive a debate over the state's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law.
Bradford Cohen, a Fort Lauderdale lawyer, said the Hernandez shooting was a perfect example of the law's utility. "Before, you had to explore other options, which is ridiculous," he said.
"If you feel your life is threatened, and you have to use deadly force, then one bullet or 10 bullets doesn't make a difference," said Cohen, president of the Broward Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "It's called deadly force, not wounding force."
But to others, resorting to gunfire — even one shot — in a public setting is a recipe for mayhem. "Historically, you were to retreat rather than use deadly force," said Nova Southeastern University law professor Bruce Rogow. "This incident underscores the potential dangers of the law."
Hernandez, 32, who himself survived being shot in the head after making a 2007 traffic stop, fired several rounds at Alain Romero at about 1:15 p.m. Saturday in the Haagen-Dazs store in Windmill Gate plaza in Miami Lakes. Hernandez, on an outing with his fiancee, his mother and three young children, said Romero was aggressively panhandling for money.
After an exchange of words, Romero "attempted to assault" Hernandez, police said. "He then turned his aggression towards the toddlers and infant who were at the same table."
Witnesses told police that Hernandez issued several warnings before he pulled out a weapon and fired several times. Police called to the scene "discovered Romero suffering from multiple gunshot wounds," according to a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at orlandosentinel.com ...
They need to ban panhandling. It’s dangerous to one’s health.
An armed society is a polite society.
Gee, no slant in the verbiage in this report, huh?
And this duty to retreat created in a lot more dead innocent people than stand your ground ever could.
Need this law in downtown San Francisco.
The law should absolutely provide that someone may “stand their ground”. Sure, the better part of valor is to withdraw and avoid bloodshed if possible, but it can’t be left up to a court to determine what was, and was not “possible” at the time. I wouldn’t want anyone second-guessing my threat perception, especially when they have the luxury of cool-headed distance of time and space, and I didn’t. I would hope the law would back me up.
The panhandler was shot four times, three in the chest, and was treated and released the same day? Can that be true?
How long do you think it took this ambulance chasing shyster to find this homeless guy and take him on as a client. Probably not as long as it took the deputy to pull his gun and shoot the guy. Lawyers are scum.
Fixed...
That is why he is an ex-deputy...can’t shoot worth a damn.
I favor a no retreat law provided the threat amounts to grievous bodily harm or death and the shooter did not provoke the confrontation. The former Florida law mandating a duty to retreat was the old standard under the English Common law and was rejected by most states.
Oh, and to elaborate:
Hey “Nova Southeastern University law professor Bruce Rogow,” you idiot: This retired officer was supposed to retreat? How? Leave his kids behind to be assaulted by the aggressive panhandler? Magically teleport them away? Use less than lethal force, thereby putting himself at risk of having his firearm taken and used on himself or his children? Should he have stood there contemplating these options, giving the aggressive panhandler the opportunity to actually hurt his children?
What a typical holopophic leftist academic...
If you read carefully, you will see that the shooting was on Saturday and the panhandler wasn’t released from the hospital until Sunday afternoon. Still, post 11 stands.
Remington 870 or Mossberg 500?
9 mm.
“Need this law in downtown San Francisco.”
Geez, morphing libertarian, if you applied the castle doctrine to aggressive panhandlers in San Francisco, half the city would be pushing up daisies, and good portion of them would be liberal politicians.
What are you thinking, morphing libertarian?
Guy gave him several warnings. Don’t know how easy it would have been to get everyone and just leave. Generally even if you’re in the right you still don’t actively want to have to use your gun on someone. I am assuming the guy was getting more and more upset and probably would not have let them leave in peace.
In all states it’s what you believe at the time that counts, not what is or isn’t actually going on after the fact.
This ex-cop was shot in the head with a .45 in the line of duty a few years ago. He barely survived and has limited use in one of his arms - THAT'S why he's an ex-cop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.