Skip to comments.Group asks NC lawmakers to repeal 'shoot first' law
Posted on 05/24/2012 11:30:08 AM PDT by neverdem
A national group opposed to what it calls shoot first gun laws today sent a letter to all members of the General Assembly, and to legislators in 25 other states, calling on them to repeal or reform their laws.
Shoot-first laws take away the obligation to retreat from a confrontation, other than in your home, in order to avoid the use of deadly force.
Trayvon Martins killing in Florida has focused public attention on the consequences of these reckless laws,
Ginny Simmons, director of Second Chance on Shoot First, said in a news release. Experience has now shown that these laws encourage vigilantism, sow confusion among police, and stymie prosecutors.
North Carolina has had a castle doctrine law on the books for some time, allowing deadly force against someone intruding in a home. Last year, the General Assembly expanded it to justify use of force in a motor vehicle or workplace.
The law says a person does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder. That defense isnt available to someone who provokes a confrontation, except under limited circumstances.
Second Chance on Shoot First describes itself as a coalitioni of civil rights leaders, politicians, law enforcement and others.
Second Chance from their new website:
In partnership with: Mike Bloomberg, NAACP, National Urban League, NAN-Colorofchange.org, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, and VoteVets.org.
We have enough racist propaganda on this site. Admin should delete this thread.
My description: a group of criminal coddling fools that are more interested in protecting their precious criminals than they are about law abiding citizens.
(Of course you could say the same about any “gun control” group and the morons that follow them.)
Yeah...by hysterical hoplophobes in the media with a severe anti-gun agenda.
What a crock of horse $h!+.
Fitting that liberals expect that the requirement is to runaway and die a coward. It explains a lot.
Why do these people--those taking this initiative--always take the side (support the interests) of the criminal predator , over that of the law abiding citizen seeking to protect what is rightfully his?
That, of course, is a rhetorical question. We know perfectly well. This is the result of three generations of Marxist influenced ("Mipip") assaults on reason, in some of our leading Academies.
Experience has now shown that these laws encourage vigilantism, sow confusion among police, and stymie prosecutors.
Not a single word in this sentence by any evidence whatsoever. Furthermore, the stand-your-ground law had NOTHING to do with the Trayvon Martin case. If the race baiters version is true the law would not apply to help Zimmerman and if Zimmerman’s version is true it was classic self-defense.
Interpretation: 8 liberal elites sitting in a room and sharing similar group-think with the mentions uber liberal groups...The so-called press would 'catch' 8 conservatives attempting to speak for millions of people. But they 'miss' liberal groups doing it... it's such a mystery...
More from Doomberg, Rev Al et al.
Liberal prosecutors who aggressively charged and prosecuted crime victims for defending themselves were the people responsible for “castle doctrine” and “shoot first” laws in the first place. Even still to this day, “homeowner-shoots-burglar” newspaper stories routinely include a closing line to the effect of, “Police declined to comment on whether the homeowner will be charged in the shooting.”
So now the scumbag liberals are whining about these laws? Screw them. They reaped what they sowed and now they can drop dead.
Fortunately, the likelihood that any of these laws will ever be repealed is slim to none, and Slim left town.
Yet the have the Cojones to call themselves 'national'.
This is another example of the media not doing its job - accepting put-up credentials and dubious provenance for fact when, in fact, it is a bunch of fringe racists masquerading as a more-prevalent representative of prevailing sentiment. Pure racsist BS.
I know after seeing the TV of whats happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size.
Soros, in conjunction with Van Jones and the Obama Administration.
I’d like one of these a-holes to explain to me how you’re supposed to “retreat” from some young thug in a hoodie when you’re in your seventies, in a wheelchair, on crutches, or a slow tiny woman.
[eyeroll] Why don't they just be honest and just say they favor a "die first" policy on self-defense??
I wonder what there are more of - vigilante deaths or ramdom black on white deaths.
Trayvon Martins killing in Florida has focused public attention on the consequences of these reckless laws
It may have, but that’s only because someone, somewhere lied. From what we know from witness testimony and medical evidence Zimmerman had no ability to retreat and therefore is asserting regular, old self-defense rather than Stand Your Ground/Shoot First/whatever.
Shoot-first laws take away the obligation to retreat from a confrontation...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Lets just say that you refrain from confronting me and I will refrain from thinking I may be forced to shoot you.
I also have become such a cheap SOB and shoot so well my motto is
‘One shot, One kill’, no sense wasting ammo.
They don’t like Anti-Thug Laws.
Kinda hard to retreat when you’re lying on your back with someon a lot bigger sitting on you bashing your head in....Only way to retreat is to remove the person...
In George’s case, he removed Martin with a small chunk of lead...
Excellent results too, I might add....
Used to run into NewYork Knowitalls all the time when I was living in N.C. The answer is the same today as it has been for 100 years,
I don’t give a damn how you do it in NewYork, this ain’t NewYork. Now go the hell home and leave us alone!
“Fitting that liberals expect that the requirement is to runaway and die a coward. It explains a lot. “
Or you can trying talking it over with the attacker/rapist /s
The MSM isn't going to 'expose' these groups - they help them to pull off the illusions. One way is with tight-in camera shots making 12 people look like a crowd. Another way is to cover the words of many of these sham groups in the same way they would cover a group with thousands of members. But the impact is less and less as many are catching on to tricks used by liberals and their bully enforcers in the MSM...
I'll never understand why the MSM threw away their credibility for so little....
Hmmmm..... I wonder what kind of spin they're trying to put on this? /sarc
And in other news; the governor of Oklahoma just signed a law authorizing open carry. Now my problem is deciding between Safariland and SERPA and Level II and Level III.
You overlooked the implications, however of this clause. Just think how George Washington frustrated the British Prosecutors that would otherwise have been sent over to secure the hanging of those farmers from Lexington & Concord, who fired those shots heard across the ocean.
What sort of an American wants to prosecute law abiding citizens for protecting their natural rights? This effort to pretend there is equivalency between the interests of the law abiding & the predatory criminal, is the most vicious of the many insane notions behind the Collectivist Egalitarianism, which always leads to The Greatest Mischief Ever Wrought.
And in other news; the governor of Oklahoma signed the open carry law. Now my problem is to decided between Safariland and SERPA and Level II and Level III.
These bastards will never, never, never stop will they?
They might if some of them woke up dead.
Oh, I understand that. I was just commenting on all these unvetted ‘groups’ that seek to use the media to put across agendas that are really driven by other factors.
The group in question is affiliated with groups that are primarily racist in my opinion (at least racism in the other direction). I’m tired of media not doing its job.
Every day on the radio, Americans hear local pap stories from their drive time radios about his ‘study’ or this ‘research’ that pushes all sorts of agendas. When one takes the time to research the origins (if enough cryptic information is given in the story), he/she finds agendas that are usually either financially or ideologically driven.
That is so in the case of this Second Chance story, and my comment about removing the racist article probably should have had a ‘sarc’ tag on it, because crap like this won’t stop until the media has removed itself of its ideologues.