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.
It has to be deemed a "reasonable" threat, meaning you have to legitimately fear for your life by common standards.
In my opinion the reins should be tightened on scumbag cops.....
Yes, SYG laws are good laws, to spite all the abuse. The law itself isn't flawed, but the way in which it is sometimes applied is.
They aren't. Not by any measure. They don't save lives. They allow people to engage in vigilante justice and get away with it. We're on the path to recreating what people have romanticized the Wild West to have been -- shootouts @ the OK Corral, where the victors walk away b/c "I was defending myself."
We've already had gang members after a gang shootout avoid even being arrested b/c they successfully invoked SYG. If that isn't the death knell for how retarded the law, even in principle, is, I don't know what it's going to take.
No there doesn't. This has been disproved multiple times by actual cases where people have gotten off on a SYG defense when the "victim" was shot while retreating/fleeing.
Firstly there is no SYG defense, if your state has a SYG law, then it's part of the defense (often a pre-trial hearing to see whether it needs to go to trial).
Secondly could you cite specific cases, that includes the actual evidence of what happened, so that we can examine whether these were reasonable or not. Just because someone is retreating is meaningless if that person clearly intends to retreat to improve their tactical position, or subsequently re-engage to their advantage, if you cannot understand this, then one hopes you've never been involved with the military or police in any role whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good
By the very nature of a cops' job, they are always feeling threatened. Using your logic (by extension of supporting SYG), anytime a cop approaches anything less than a subdued/docile suspect, they should have free reign to shoot to kill.
By the number of news reports we get weekly there is apparently a large number of cops who already appear to be operating under this premise.
Meanwhile do you understand that SYG basically boils down to "you have no duty to retreat", you may still only escalate force under the exact same conditions as standard self defense, the only real difference being you no longer have to prove in court that you were unable to fulfill that duty to retreat.
I wish people would get a clue about this, Self Defense is whats termed an affirmative defense, i.e. you did it, but there were extenuating circumstances for doing it. This places the burden of proof squarely on the defender to PROVE that there was no alternative to acting in the way that they admitted they did (which they have admitted in court to the Judge, Jury and Prosecution by choosing self defense as a plea). If a prosecutor can show that for example there was an means of escape at the time someone acted in self defense (even if the defendant claims they were not aware of it) then the trial can go from being a successful self defense case to a conviction, since the plea of self defense means you've admitted you were there and acted in a way that caused injury (perhaps fatally) someone, and without SYG you have a duty to retreat which you failed to uphold.
If your state recognizes Stand Your Ground laws, then the only thing you no longer have to show is that there was no alternative but to act in the way you did, you still have to prove that acting in the way you did was reasonable given the events and circumstances to a judge and/or jury (depending on whether it's a pre-trial hearing, or a trial).
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good
We've already had gang members after a gang shootout avoid even being arrested b/c they successfully invoked SYG. If that isn't the death knell for how retarded the law, even in principle, is, I don't know what it's going to take.
Are you claiming that gang members are not permitted to defend themselves if threatened with death or serious injury? Do you know the specifics of this case (or cases) can you provide citations to the legal records? If none of the above then how do you know that they were not defending themselves legitimately? Or do you just believe that as they were gang members they clearly were acting illegally? If you can provide citations then we can examine them and determine whether it is reasonable that they acted in this way.
How does ignoring an opportunity to leave a situation w/o killing someone save more lives than killing someone?
By definition of SYG, the thing that differentiates it from standard self-defense laws is that you CHOOSE to not leave. If you can't leave a situation, and have to resort to killing someone, then that falls under standard self-defense, making SYG redundant.
So how is that a good law? And how is a law that gives people a lower threshold than give cops to use lethal force, people that are actually trained to know when a situation actually requires it, a good law?
by saving your own life
read the law first. you are so clueless that there is no ground for discussion.
They aren't. Not by any measure. They don't save lives. They allow people to engage in vigilante justice and get away with it. We're on the path to recreating what people have romanticized the Wild West to have been -- shootouts @ the OK Corral, where the victors walk away b/c "I was defending myself."
We've already had gang members after a gang shootout avoid even being arrested b/c they successfully invoked SYG. If that isn't the death knell for how retarded the law, even in principle, is, I don't know what it's going to take.
what do you have against people defending themselves?
What happened to the narrative that the entire country has changed and wants more government control on firearms and their use?.... Seems to be proving to be a fallacy....
But how was this poll worded. I support standing your ground if someone breaks into your home with the intent to harm your family. I don't support it when you are a neighborhood watch following someone you think is suspicious and then get into trouble that you can't get out of except to kill someone. No, that is not stand your ground to me.
But how was this poll worded. I support standing your ground if someone breaks into your home with the intent to harm your family. I don't support it when you are a neighborhood watch following someone you think is suspicious and then get into trouble that you can't get out of except to kill someone. No, that is not stand your ground to me.
so the ability of a person to be able to defend themselves should be left up to the opinion of native ideologues?
so the ability of a person to be able to defend themselves should be left up to the opinion of native ideologues?
I'm saying you have a right to defend your home. But if you take it upon yourself to follow someone and it gets out of hand then what happens next is on you. That should not be considered..stand your ground. That should be considered...stupid on you
But how was this poll worded. I support standing your ground if someone breaks into your home with the intent to harm your family. I don't support it when you are a neighborhood watch following someone you think is suspicious and then get into trouble that you can't get out of except to kill someone. No, that is not stand your ground to me.
Simple...
Quote:
Some states have a law that says a person is legally entitled to fight back with deadly force if they feel threatened, even if they could retreat instead. Do you support or oppose this law for your state?
Last edited by Gungnir; 08-02-2013 at 08:59 PM..
Reason: Strange quote glitch
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.
