Posted on 06/29/2014 7:09:10 AM PDT by rktman
I’ve heard more than my fair share of ignorant, biased arguments against Stand Your Ground laws in my time, particularly since the Zimmerman case. The has been a particularly useful tool for low information, anti-gun rights activists because it allows them to blend a combination of straw-men and stereotypes into one toxic mash-up. A typical example along these lines would be; Of course you like SYG laws. That way, when a white person is “threatened” by having too many black faces around they can just gun them down..
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
That's right the perpetrators only need explain the attack was instigated by the victims whiteness, which is extremely offensive and demands an appropriate response.
1000 years of racial oppression in America!
NOT GUILTY... by virtue of Americas current justice system.
they don’t haveto be certain of a threat. the requirements arethat they believe their lives are in mortal danger or that they could receive permanent bodily (grave) harm. they might varying in wording state to state but generally this is it. they have to believe, not know for certain. you’dhave to be shot or attacked to know for certain and then you may be dead or dying.
his first mistake was engaging the group. the daughter wasn’t in danger and neither was he so it wasn’t necessary. although i certainly understand his feelings.
you don’t make yourself a willing participant. when you do you lose self-defense justification.
any criminal is worried qbot getting shot by someone.
but theblacks who do theknockout game look for certain folks to bring down thgat risk. white person walking alone. the kind of look that he’s not tough, probably not a gun owner. maybe older. maybe female.
~~~~~~~
It's simple: the REAL black (and liberal) agenda was to use Zim as an excuse to negate both SYG & SD laws -- so that "repressed" blacks would be free to extend their "right" to "play" their "Whack-a Honky Reparations 'Game'" -- to anyone, any time, any place -- with no legal repercussions.
And, their next agenda step is to extend that to "Kill-a-Honky..." -- again, without legal repercussions...
Both have already happened -- repeatedly -- and the MSM says the reports are "a myth"...
Within 20 feet a knife is as deadly as a gun for a fast mover.
Ever try to hit a moving target with a bullet? Not easy, and not as easy as slashing and stabbing up close.
I have seen training where a “shooter” will fire at a target as fast as they can at a target 20 feet away when he hears the ‘go’ signal from the instructor from a holstered gun. -The same ‘go’ signal starts a runner from the back of the shooter running in the opposite direction, dropping a flag at the gunshot sound.
-unfamiliar shooters will frequently miss the first shot, and the flag will be more than 20 feet away.
“they don’t haveto be certain of a threat. the requirements arethat they believe their lives are in mortal danger or that they could receive permanent bodily (grave) harm. they might varying in wording state to state but generally this is it. they have to believe, not know for certain. you’dhave to be shot or attacked to know for certain and then you may be dead or dying.”
Absolutely, but the ambiguity of when and why you believe your life is in grave danger is exactly the point the left says we should not have that option at that point. The theory goes a hitman can claim self defense if he said he felt his life is in danger.
That is why there are generally three criteria that you should consider when using deadly force;
1). The (target of your defense) has OPPORTUNITY to do you grave harm.
2). The (target of your defense) has the ABILITY to do you grave harm.
3). The (target of your defense) has the INTENT to do you grave harm.
A person with INTENT who is behind bars has no opportunity. An unarmed person with INTENT who is in a wheelchair does not have the ABILITY.
All three together, and you should have no charges filed against you. I am however just an armchair lawyer, repeating what my CCW instructor told me.
That’s the Tueller Drill. And it is for a trained LEO vs. a knife charger. Imagine the Tueller distance for a civilian *not* expecting a charge.
And no hesitation at all in drawing a knife at the first hint of possible trouble. Hiding the blade behind your forearm, it is pretty much invisible, but anybody comes in on you, and snicker-snack.
So your big emphasis is on dodging or parrying their head shot. If you can do that, you win, big time.
Preferred knife, a karambit.
“We were taught im the state police academy that an unarmed assilant can still kill you....and if the knock out game has taught us anything is that what I and other troopers.were taught still holds true....enough force to a person’s skull can kill them or permanently impair tbem for the rest of their life”
Yep. So, because “You were taught in the state police academy” then you have free reign to shoot an unarmed person.
Hey, I agree. Try doing that as one of the proles. I’d go to jail for 20 years or so. If I ever happen to have to shoot someone who is assaulting me can I call you for a witness for the defense?
>>slashing and stabbing up close.<<
Slashing and stabbing is one method to use a knife but when you want to get serious, stick it in to the hilt then twist the blade and yank it hard, up down or sideways. Do not pull it out, keep enlarging the opening. Then reach in for the lungs, liver or heart. Cut any of them deeply and the game is over. Wipe your blade off and go home.
That's the thing. They didn't talk about SYG laws. They talked about their fantasy version of SYG laws, which were totally disconnected from what they really are. Hence the topic of this post.
I tuink at this point, those of us that actually want to retain the US ass a “Free Republic” should come out with counter-videos like the ones everyone has up there on “how to get out of a speeding ticket, refuse a US Border Guard searches” or something like that - but make videos “educating” people on how to respond to an actual confrontation and what to say to police and what not to say to police. Especially if one’s lawyer is not standing there!
There are good people out there trying to do the right thing - and if we have learned anything over the last 6 yrs - there are politicians and justice officials that do nothing to uphold the true meaning of what the US code of law is actually meant to do...
Of course these videos would have to have a “common denouncement/retraction” on “Check your local laws and speak to a lawyer” warning at the beginning and end...
Having been on the “enforcement” side - yes I know what to say and how to say it...and I’ve seen a radical drop in the standards of what is being hired as a police officer....most can’t begin, construct, and finish a sentence - let alone a full investigative report! It’s sad...but true...
Knowing how to react before, during, and after is a hit and miss at the moment...makes me not want to seek public attractions for fear of being wrapped up in some sort of conflict that I didn’t start but was force to react - and have some judge and jury with a “look at me” prosecutor trying to make a name for themselves attempting to hang me...not worth it...
Debunking the stand your ground myth
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2867480/posts
SYG explained by someone who’s not a tard.
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.