Stand Your Ground

Post by **Leisher** » Tue May 15, 2012 9:46 am

Woman gets 20 years.

20 years for firing a warning shot. Not trying to hit anyone, but intentionally firing into the ceiling as a warning to her attacker (her abusive husband).

20 years.

The average time a convicted murderer spends in jail? 7 years.

20 years for defending herself.

That is one severely fucked up law.

She would have served less time if she had shot and killed him. The joke there is that it's not a joke.

Post by **GORDON** » Tue May 15, 2012 9:49 am

Obama has a great opportunity here to make a phone call or sign his name or whatever and keep an innocent woman from having her life destroyed.

Tell him she's gay, he's all about gay this week.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Tue May 15, 2012 9:54 am

I think it's stupid too, but most gun-carrying wisdom does say "never fire a warning shot." I guess the logic is that if you're in danger enough to shoot, then you need to shoot the attacker.

As for the article itself:

Marissa Alexander was sentenced last week after a Florida judge rejected her defense citing the "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows people to use deadly force in a case where a person is attacked or believes his life or safety is in danger.

That's a little misleading: the "Stand Your Ground" law just says that you don't have a "duty to retreat" before using deadly force. Duty to retreat means that if you CAN run away, you must. I guarantee you that use of deadly force if your life is in danger has probably ALWAYS been legal in Florida. (Is there anywhere in the US that it's NOT legal?)

Post by **Leisher** » Tue May 15, 2012 10:13 am

(Is there anywhere in the US that it's NOT legal?)

That part always bugged me as well.

I'm pretty sure that you can use deadly force in any state if someone is trying to use it against you (as long as you didn't start it...). So why the need for the "Stand Your Ground" law?

As for this case, if someone goes outside at midnight on New Year's Eve and shoots their shotgun into the air (a common New Year's tradition), is that 20 years?

Post by **GORDON** » Tue May 15, 2012 11:07 am

Leisher wrote:As for this case, if someone goes outside at midnight on New Year's Eve and shoots their shotgun into the air (a common New Year's tradition), is that 20 years?

Should be, those rounds come down, somewhere.

Post by **Leisher** » Tue May 15, 2012 11:20 am

Say they fire buckshot, into their swimming pool...

If we start prosecuting for "mights", then shouldn't drunk driving be 20 years? Odds are far greater that a drunk driver will kill someone before a bullet fired into the air/ceiling will.

Setting off fireworks? 20 years. Sorry, but those are explosives. Not only could you incite panic in folks thinking terrorists are attacking, but what happens if those fireworks start a fire and kill someone? Or what if one doesn't explode, and then a baby picks it up, puts it in his/her mouth, and then it explodes? That's murder! (By law, not really, but neither is shooting a ceiling.)

Post by **TPRJones** » Tue May 15, 2012 11:29 am

I guess running a red light is also worth twenty years, then. You could have killed a pedestrian!

Post by **Cakedaddy** » Tue May 15, 2012 1:12 pm

Saw a program where a dude used deadly force protecting himself from someone at a park. Character witnesses said the shooter was an awesome dude and a real pillar of the community. The dead guy was a dick to everyone and anyone that knew him all said the same thing "I've always said he was either going to end up killed or killing someone". This was on the stand so the jury heard it. They convicted him because:
1. He used hollow point bullets. Seemed excessive to them.
2. THEY wouldn't have shot the guy, so he shouldn't have.
3. Used a 45. Which is bigger than what cops carry for crying out loud. Excessive.
4. Three round burst. Excessive. One is enough.
5. Some other incredibly stupid reasons.

Also, as soon as the shooter stopped him, he immediately performed first aid and went for help. But, he did a three round burst with hollow point ammo. So, he's in jail now.

Really, your only option is to let someone beat the shit out of you and hope they don't kill you. Because if you defend yourself, there's a high probability that YOU will end up being the one in jail.

Edited By Cakedaddy on 1337102059

Post by **thibodeaux** » Tue May 15, 2012 1:49 pm

Depends on the state and the jury. In NC, in concealed carry training, they covered a case where a guy shot some people IN THE BACK, and was not convicted. Of course, the point was not "it's ok to shoot people in the back," the point was "you better not do this, because you WILL most likely go to jail."

Nowadays, I hate to say it, but the biggest factor is probably race, especially if the race of the defendant doesn't match the race of most of the jurors. Except for liberal white people; they will do the opposite.