Posted on 04/25/2012 3:03:45 AM PDT by richardb72
Call them what you will: “Stand Your Ground” or “Castle Doctrine” laws. Mayor Bloomberg and members of Congress, speaking on the House floor, go so far as to label them “shoot first” laws.
This is a gross exaggeration — a slander, in fact, against legislation designed to reform a flaw in our treatment of self-defense. Earlier statutes affirmatively required potential victims to retreat as much as possible before using deadly force to protect themselves, sometimes putting their lives in jeopardy.
The supposedly infamous laws passed in Florida and elsewhere, in contrast, use a “reasonable person” standard for determining when it is proper to defend oneself — requiring that a reasonable person would believe that another individual intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death on them.
Pundits who’ve had a field day ripping apart Stand Your Ground laws repeatedly fail to mention that crucial “reasonable person” standard.
The wild speculation that the laws give broad license for vigilantes to go around recklessly shooting people are a totally irresponsible caricature. Ultimately, it is judges or jurors who determine what constitutes a reasonable fear under such a law, not the person who fires the gun. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
The anti-gunners don’t like stand your ground because it re-empowers the citizenry to fight back, (legally), and that means their, (the antis), are less powerful as their natural allies are the criminals amongst us.
Maybe Bloomberg and Congress should pass a “Take Your Beating” law. We should all rely on the benevolence of thugs and muggers. They only beat victims half to death.
“Stand your ground” doesn’t quite cover it.
I’d like to see a law saying that you can pursue with deadly force. The police sure won’t help you.
Four months ago, my daughter had her home broken into and all her valuables (cash, computers, TVs, guns, a few pieces of furniture, etc.) taken. She got there in time to see the thief’s pickup truck pulling away and followed the thief back to his home, where she called the cops and the cops told her that since nobody was hurt, it was an insurance problem not a police problem and she should just file an insurance claim. (Nevada)
BANG!
The only "retreat" I'll use is to put my right foot back slightly to assume the proper stance to absorb the recoil of my Mossberg.
Unbelievable! And if you don't have insurance during the Great Recession, then you're SOL?
To suggest anything less is to falsely assume that criminals willing to initiate force against you would respect weakness more than a showing of strength.
Incredibly succinct, Corpse.
Love steam punk, BTW.
Thanks!
Fighting for the right to vote, the right to eat in any restaurant, to have equal pay for equal work - those were good - honorable challenges. Fighting for the the right to be a thin-skinned jerk, an in your face thug, a criminal with attitude is NOT honorable..
The movement's jumped the shark with Trayvon - and the lynch mob circus Black Panthers tried to stir up. Citizens have the right to defend themselves when someone is bashing their head against concrete...
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.