Posted on 04/29/2014 8:36:38 PM PDT by nickcarraway
“This case is big. This is Minnesota’s Trayvon Martin case,” prosecutor Pete Orput said before the Byron Smith murder trial.
Except it never really was.
Unlike the Florida case that became a lightning rod on race and the boundaries of self-defense, the Smith case got national attention but never gained the traction some predicted among gun proponents.
Joe Olson thinks he knows why.
Olson is as big of a gun advocate as you will find. The Hamline University law professor has worked on behalf of gun owners at the Capitol for 25 years and written book chapters on self-defense. Olson is president of Academics for the Second Amendment and once served on the board of directors of the National Rifle Association.
But just before the verdict, I asked Olson about those who say Smith’s actions were justified.
“The only one who was really saying that was his lawyer, and he doesn’t really have any alternative,” Olson said. “It was clearly a bad shooting.”
Olson said that “everybody I talk to at the shooting range knows Smith crossed a pretty clear line. [The law] allows a homeowner to stop a felony in the home with deadly force. It does not allow a subsequent murder after the danger has passed. Anyone who has taken a carry permit course in Minnesota knows that.”
So, apparently did the jury, which quickly convicted Smith on all counts for the murders of Haile Kifer and Nick Brady.
Rep. Tony Cornish, R-Vernon Center, the Legislature’s strongest gun rights proponent, agreed that “justice prevailed.”
“It proves we do have a castle doctrine and it does work,” Cornish said. “If somebody tries to claim the doctrine in absurd times, it doesn’t hold.”
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Bad facts make for bad law.
I think there is a lot of money to be made in this country by someone who opens a Journalism school that teaches Journalism.
From the article: “It proves we do have a castle doctrine and it does work,” Cornish said. “If somebody tries to claim the doctrine in absurd times, it doesn’t hold.”
That brings up an interesting side-point. Here’s the thing the rampaging media gets intentionally wrong about castle doctrines and stand your ground laws - even in states where there is a legal duty to retreat, if a violent criminal were to forcibly prevent you from retreating by, for the sake of argument, pinning you to the ground and beating your head against the concrete until you were likely to suffer severe bodily harm or death, then it really doesn’t matter much if there’s a duty to retreat or not as you are physically prevented from doing so.
The Zimmerman verdict would have justifiably been exactly the same in a state without the so-called “stand your ground” laws, as any legal duty Zimmerman may or may not have had to retreat was immaterial in the face of the fact that Martin removed Zimmerman’s ABILITY to retreat.
But then facts never really support the media’s social engineering narrative, so they have to make do with the next best thing: blatant and shameless falsehood. They’ve got a mission and they’ll pursue it regardless of how many lies and baseless accusations they have to rapid-fire at the American consciousness.
Well stated. I had the same problem, and after pulling up the article, still don’t know what the story is. My time is limited, so I give up.
If a cop fears for his life, he gets a pass for killing someone even if he used factually unnecessary force.
If a homeowner is terrorized and loses control because of the terrorism and kills out of unbalanced insanity triggered by the terrorism, he’s given first degree conviction.
Not right.
A couple of teenagers broke into his house. He shot them (probably a good shoot for each) then after they were down and disabled, he executed them. He left them in the basement, and finally called the cops the next day. For the girl, he switched to a handgun and got up close and personal for the execution.
Suspected his neighbor had broken in a few days before. Hid his car to make it look like he wasn’t home. Sat in ambush in the basement and sure enough, one broke in. He recorded himself killing that one. Dragged the body out of sight.
10 min later the female accomplice comes in and he shoots her too. Drags her to the corner. Notices she’s gasping for air, so gets a 22 and administers what he called “a nice clean finishing shot” right under her chin.
Waits till the next day, and tells a neighbor to call the cops.
This is not a home defense hero we need to stand behind here. He’s a psychopath and a threat to gun rights.
Nice recap and accurate and it is for this I am glad this scum wont see the light of day. He also moved his truck out of view, set up an internal sniper pit, had the tape recorder set to record, and lying in wait. This is a guy FReepers in no way should defend. There are fully justified shootings and then there are pure executions. When subdued he even wrapped them in tarp changed guns for the girl and while gasping for breath placed a shot to her dome.
He gets fully what he deserves.
it will be a roll of the dice these days.
Some years ago the relative of a family friend stayed home from work to help his wife care for their 3 young children, the newborn being sick. It was early in the morning and his wife got in the vehicle in the garage and left for the store about the time he usually went to work.
Shortly thereafter 5 males, some or all armed kicked in the door and swarmed in. They had been watching the house for a week and thought that the wife would be home alone with the kids.
They thought that the vehicle leaving was him going to work.
He got in a gunfight with them, killing 2, paralyzing 1 and the other 2 were later caught at the hospital.
He called 911 and used some "inflammatory" language.
The local chapter of a well known "civil rights organization" took to the streets and he was arrested and prosecuted for 1st degree murder.
He was acquitted but...
That's because if brains were dynamite, Jon Tevlin couldn't blow his nose. He's the RedStar Tribune's resident leftist drone.
So, click the link at the upper right and read all about it. The locals, of course, will not need to. Nor will a lot of FReepers, given the number of posts about this case, right after it happened and when the trial got under way.
Man. It would be a shame if someone beat Pete Orput till he puked blood, for being a lying sack of Obama.
that is quite a story......sounds like justice was meted out especially to the ones in the grave...
I remember his defense bill being over $250,000 then. I think donations covered most but still cost them a lot of money, stress and anxiety.
Got a link for this story? Not that I doubt you sounds like interesting reading.
There are definitely higher hurdles under the law for citizens than cops, and that is not right.
I would not call him a psychopath. Have your home broken into several times and see how you feel. I am not justifying his actions; merely saying it is hard to judge someone who has been terrorized over a period of years.
Thank you for the story.
It sure sounds like he got what he deserved. I agree, it sounds like a good shoot until he executed them. Then to hide the bodies? Yep, he got what he deserved.
May he R.i.P. (Rot in peace)
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.