1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Stand Your Ground

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by rocketsjudoka, Mar 22, 2012.

Tags:
  1. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,658
    Likes Received:
    41,544
    'Reasonable person" is means that the reasonable course of action is to retreat, putting deadly forces behind retreat. Obviously in a situation where someone cannot physically retreat deadly force can then be used. As an option it is behind retreat since the first reasonable course of action that is mandated under retreat laws is retreat and if that is not possible you can resort to force. Stand Your Ground turns that on it's head by saying even if retreat is possible you are not mandated to do so. It puts deadly force on par with retreat even if you can.

    Except now you are ignoring the part of a retreat law that says a "reasonable person." In the situation of a person with a fake leg then it would be reasonable to consider that they cannot physically escape and recourse to deadly force is justified. As both of us agree is that even under retreat laws you can still use deadly force provided that there isn't an alternative.

    You are correct that under Stand Your Ground doesn't consider retreat but that is the exact problem as someone who feels they are under threat don't have to legally consider the option of retreat. In other words they can stand their ground. That escalates the situation and under the scenario you describe the homeowner could both confront the scruffy guy, since you have the right to at least verbally confront someone in public, but at the sametime even if they feel the scruffy guy is dangerous they have no obligation to back off from the situation.
     
  2. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    61,251
    Likes Received:
    28,754
    Sounds alot like it is about PRIDE

    I don't wanna look like a p*ssy and back down
    this law allows me to be Mr. Big D*ck with my gun
    Let me nuts hang
    BE THE MAN!!
    all that macho bull****

    There are situation where if one of the parties backs down . . it is done
    but . . . then that REASONABLE person looks like a wimp . . .looks weak
    so
    instead. . .we now have a situation where no one wants to be a 'Punk'
    and so the escalate because neither's pride will make them back down
    and common sense is trumped by pride

    Rocket River
     
  3. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    No, it doesn't, because all of a sudden having nearly triple justifiable homicides sucks.
     
  4. juicystream

    juicystream Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2001
    Messages:
    29,252
    Likes Received:
    5,360
    I don't like the Florida law as written. I wonder how you can prove one way or another how a particular person reasonably felt. Home defense, no problem. Using a gun in a public location because you have a right to be there, or attempting to defend another person's property, is something I don't agree with.
     
  5. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    why? A change in the law leads to more homicides being called justified. Why is that bad. It doesn't mean more people are being killed (like triple the gun related deaths would)
     
  6. amaru

    amaru Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    16,609
    Likes Received:
    9,729
    That law was specifically passed with young black and hispanic men in mind
     
  7. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    So this is the second time you have not understood my post so I will address it. I was comparing three scenarios. The fake leg one was to show that what you said in "once you feel you are under a threat you have to attempt to retreat" is wrong and not the law.

    And you last sentence, "even if they feel the scruffy guy is dangerous they have no obligation to back off from the situation" still has nothing to do with stand your ground because feeling someone is dangerous doesn't justify deadly force.

    Stand your ground eliminates the ability of the prosecution to simply ignore what happened in the altercation and prosecute you with the hope to be able to convince a jury you could have run away.
     
  8. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    It means that things like a guy being ice picked to death in a road rage incident is now called justifiable homicide.

    http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-20/...shooting-deadly-force-shooting-death?_s=PM:US
     
  9. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    And am I supposed to be outraged because it is an ice pick? What exactly is the outrage here? That article is crap, are you seriously using that as evidence to your argument that more justified homicides is horrible?

    It is a change in how they classify homicides. This law doesn't change behavior.
     
  10. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,658
    Likes Received:
    41,544
    I understand what you are saying but I think your argument is incomplete in that it doesn't take into account that retreat laws consider how possible retreat is. In a situation with a guy with a fake leg that would be a consideration in regarding how justified the use of force is. You are making it out to be that under a retreat law that a prosecutor wouldn't consider the physical feasibility of retreat.

    Actually it does since the language is subjective, from the FL statute:
    [rquoter]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...[/rquoter]

    The key here is that the person believes it and "reasonably" is subjective depending on what DA's and jurys believe to be a prevailing view. The reasonable person standard is also in the retreat laws but the difference is that one says that retreat should be considered before deadly force the other says retreat doesn't have to be considered before deadly force.

    The biggest difference between our positions is that you are looking at it from the DA and/or jury angle and your concern seems to be about prosecutions. I am looking at it from the situational standpoint of what people might think about when faced with a self-defense situation. To me Stand Your Ground basically undermines the message that avoidance is the first and best strategy and encourages escalation of potentially dangerous situations.
     
  11. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    You should be horrified because road rage leading to the death of a human being is horrible. Without that law someone would be held accountable for such a stupid horrible thing.

    The outrage is that people are killing others without the due process of law, and it's being let go because of the law.
     
  12. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    you have any evidence of that? If they had enough evidence to prove it was murder or manslaughter Stand your ground doesn't come into play.
     
  13. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    53,658
    Likes Received:
    41,544
    This is a basic problem inherent to all self-defense laws since they are dependent on the "reasonable person" standard. As I stated that is inherently subjective, what might be considered a reasonable threat to someone who is a 3rd degree black belt in martial arts, might be very different than to someone in a wheel chair.

    Unfortunately I don't see any way to make the standards more objective. The problem that I have with Stand Your Ground laws is that they further muddy the idea of self-defense from trying to get out of a situation and / or not putting yourself into a situation to that I should stay and fight it out.

    Even for an expert in martial arts a street is not a Dojo or a ring and a lot of things are unpredictable in a self-defense situation. The best strategy is always to avoid and get out of situations like that.
     
  14. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    61,251
    Likes Received:
    28,754
    As someone pointed out . . .
    . . . This is basically a BLAME THE VICTIM law

    Rocket River
     
  15. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    Yes it absolutely does. If they'd previously had to retreat that could be another person left alive. or at least on trial for killing someone when it wasn't justified. With stand your ground laws they are allowed to use violence to kill them.
     
  16. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    No, I am saying that when you said "once you feel you are under a threat you have to attempt to retreat" is wrong and not the law. We both agree here. It is not the law and never was.

    Feeling a person is dangerous has never, and will never meet the requirement. A reasonable person will never agree with that. All you have to do is look to other states that have defined it more clearly.


    I would like to add that if you begin your avoidance once the situation has turned deadly, your avoidance skills are BAD. I argue that is not avoidance, you didn't avoid anything.
     
  17. Bandwagoner

    Bandwagoner Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    26,719
    Likes Received:
    3,475
    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 the actor:
    (1) knew or had reason to believe that the person against whom the deadly force was used:
    (A) unlawfully and with force entered, or was attempting to enter unlawfully and with force, the actor's occupied habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment;
    (B) unlawfully and with force removed, or was attempting to remove unlawfully and with force, the actor from the actor's habitation, vehicle, or place of business or employment; or
    (C) was committing or attempting to commit an offense described by Subsection (a)(2)(B);
    (2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; and
    (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.
     
  18. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,790
    Likes Received:
    111,508
    Yes it makes a huge difference, the number of homicides has not increased, only the classification, a HUGE difference.
     
  19. Nook

    Nook Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    53,790
    Likes Received:
    111,508
    Really? I am glad you were present when stand your ground law was discussed, drafted and passed ...
     
  20. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,669
    Likes Received:
    17,295
    It doesn't make a huge difference when an increased number of deaths can now be considered justifiable homicide. That's the point. Whether those deaths come from a gun or an ice pick doesn't really matter.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now