http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/1985 ... and-killed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Seems from what was presented, why stand your ground was created. Man walking his dog, confronted by angry neighbor who pulls a knife. Man takes two steps back, man with knife closes distance and is killed.
Another Stand your Ground case in Florida
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
- Jumping Frog
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5488
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:13 am
- Location: Klein, TX (Houston NW suburb)
Re: Another Stand your Ground case in Florida
I don't see where this has anything to do with "stand your ground". The man attempted retreat but was charged by a man with a knife. Defended himself.
If the facts are as presented (a big "if"), this would be straightforward self defense even in states without a SYG statute.
If the facts are as presented (a big "if"), this would be straightforward self defense even in states without a SYG statute.
-Just call me Bob . . . Texas Firearms Coalition, NRA Life member, TSRA Life member, and OFCC Patron member
This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ
This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ
Re: Another Stand your Ground case in Florida
It doesn't....it just the way the antis attempt to discredit the law, by characterizing any and every shooting that isn't related to gang bangers as a SYG shooting. Just because the article claims the "authorities" suggested the possibility doesn't mean it's true. 1. the "reporter" could be lying; or 2) the reporter found someone he could call an "authority" to express that particular opinion; or 3) the authority quoted is an anti; or 4) an editor rewrote it to read that way. There is a hoplophobe inserting a liberal meme somewhere in the process of publishing the article --bet on it.Jumping Frog wrote:I don't see where this has anything to do with "stand your ground". The man attempted retreat but was charged by a man with a knife. Defended himself.
If the facts are as presented (a big "if"), this would be straightforward self defense even in states without a SYG statute.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."
From the WeaponsMan blog, weaponsman.com
From the WeaponsMan blog, weaponsman.com
Re: Another Stand your Ground case in Florida
Near as I can tell, stand your ground, gives you the right to use deadly force to defend yourself against someone attacking you without requirement of being cornered and with no other options. For example in your house you would have to be in a closet or a locked bathroom and the attacker attempting to break into your final refuge before you could use deadly force, if there was not a stand your ground law.
- Jumping Frog
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5488
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:13 am
- Location: Klein, TX (Houston NW suburb)
Re: Another Stand your Ground case in Florida
Prior to the advent of the so-called "Stand Your Ground" laws, there was a three part test that first evolved in common & case law and later became codified in many states as an affirmative defense.
To be valid self defense, traditionally there was a three-pronged test for the affirmative defense:
The other aspect of the law now in many states has been shifting the burden of proof.
A traditional affirmative defense starts with "Yes, I committed the homicide, but I was forced to do so for these reasons." Legally, this meant two things. First, a defendant had to start their case by admitting the crime ("Yes, I committed the homicide".) Then, the burden of proof was on the defendant to show that it was justified, which is like "guilty until proven innocent".
In many states now (including Texas), the burden of proof has been shifted to the prosecutor. The "stand your ground" law basically says a person is justified in shooting under certain conditions and the prosecutor now has to prove that an exception to that rule applies. That is why PC §9.32 now includes the language "The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if .... certain conditions apply." Now the prosecutor must prove the belief was not reasonable instead of the defendant having to prove the belief was reasonable.
Anyway, back to this Florida case. If the facts are as presented (a big "if" -- errors are common), this would be straightforward self defense even in states with the traditional self defense statutes. SYG has nothing to do with it.
To be valid self defense, traditionally there was a three-pronged test for the affirmative defense:
- Defendant Is Not At Fault. In other words, didn't start the trouble. The defendant cannot be the first aggressor or initiator.
- Reasonable and honest belief one was in danger of death or serious bodily injury.
- Duty to Retreat or otherwise try to avoid the situation when you can do so safely.
The other aspect of the law now in many states has been shifting the burden of proof.
A traditional affirmative defense starts with "Yes, I committed the homicide, but I was forced to do so for these reasons." Legally, this meant two things. First, a defendant had to start their case by admitting the crime ("Yes, I committed the homicide".) Then, the burden of proof was on the defendant to show that it was justified, which is like "guilty until proven innocent".
In many states now (including Texas), the burden of proof has been shifted to the prosecutor. The "stand your ground" law basically says a person is justified in shooting under certain conditions and the prosecutor now has to prove that an exception to that rule applies. That is why PC §9.32 now includes the language "The actor's belief under Subsection (a)(2) that the deadly force was immediately necessary as described by that subdivision is presumed to be reasonable if .... certain conditions apply." Now the prosecutor must prove the belief was not reasonable instead of the defendant having to prove the belief was reasonable.
Anyway, back to this Florida case. If the facts are as presented (a big "if" -- errors are common), this would be straightforward self defense even in states with the traditional self defense statutes. SYG has nothing to do with it.
-Just call me Bob . . . Texas Firearms Coalition, NRA Life member, TSRA Life member, and OFCC Patron member
This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ
This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ