Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
wateva
jurors were given instructions about SYG, they acquited him based on that
AND, even besides this case, SYG gets used in FL all the time and murderers go free
Reading is fundamental.
ROUGHLY HALF OF THE STATES HAVE SOME VERSION OF A SYG LAW. ARE YOU GOING TO BOYCOTT ALL OF THEM? WHY ARE YOU SINGLING OUT FLORIDA?
Can you tell Harrier what exactly you find offensive about this law?
im not gon get it into other states laws' cuz this is off topic, all im gon say is:
"The force used by the defendant must not be significantly greater than and must be proportionate to the unlawful force threatened or used against the defendant."
This is how the law is in many states and should be everywhere. Pretty straightforward and def reasonable.
FL seems to have the most fd up, retarded version of SYG
Explain to us specifically what it is about the law that you don't like.
Here - I'll even make it easy for you, so you don't have to take the time to find the law yourself:
"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
So what text do you specifically have a problem with? Why? Surely you've thought this through, or you wouldn't have started a thread about it, right? So let's have it - inquiring minds want to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stechkin
AND it is used all the time to justify murders
Which "murders"? Cite specific cases or incidents.
(I'm going to throw you a bone, here - "murder" is a legal term. Careful how you answer that last question, lest you look very, very foolish).
Explain to us specifically what it is about the law that you don't like.
Here - I'll even make it easy for you, so you don't have to take the time to find the law yourself:
"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
So what text do you specifically have a problem with? Why? Surely you've thought this through, or you wouldn't have started a thread about it, right? So let's have it - inquiring minds want to know.
Which "murders"? Cite specific cases or incidents.
(I'm going to throw you a bone, here - "murder" is a legal term. Careful how you answer that last question, lest you look very, very foolish).
all the wording is stupid
it leaves too much murkiness, anyone can feel threatened by anyth and this law encourages you to do someth u might have not done otherwise jus cuz u have a weapon plus u dont have to try to evade conflict or get away from trouble, which is dumb, this is not wild west
i cited all articles b4, enjoy the reads
im not gon get it into other states laws' cuz this is off topic...
Fair enough.
Here then is Florida's law.
Quote:
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
As someone who lives in Florida and is fairly happy with the SYG law that we have, please boycott. If you really dislike common sense self defense legislation enough to threaten a boycott, I really don't want to take the chance of having to deal with your stupidity face-to-face.
The woman in that case left her house to get her gun and then came back in and fired it at her husband. She did not "stand her ground." She fled the scene and then returned with the intention of doing him harm.
Brilliant, I tell you... brilliant. I need my sunglasses with all this glare.
The woman in that case left her house to get her gun and then came back in and fired it at her husband. She did not "stand her ground." She fled the scene and then returned with the intention of doing him harm.
Brilliant, I tell you... brilliant. I need my sunglasses with all this glare.
i kno rite
she's not very smart, she was better off following him, stalking him and killing him, that way she would be free (if she wasnt black, of course)
she would have credible defense too, since the dude put her in the hospital before
20 yrs for a warning shot towards someone who had a confirmed history of assaulting you and at the end nobody hurt is completely fair, moral and logical, while u can kill someone for nothing and be free...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
