It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Schumer calls for federal probe of 'Stand Your Ground' laws after Florida shooting

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Stand your ground laws aren't perfect, but the needed tweaks to those laws should be addressed by state legislators and not dictated by DC based gun grabbing traitors like Schumer and Holder. Their opinions are irrelevant here in Florida.




posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
The Federal Government can "probe" all they want... they have NO JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY over Florida's gun laws. Period... end of story. They can conclude whatever they wish, and if the Governor of Florida has any intestinal fortitude about him he will tell the FedGov to pack sand.


I'm guessing that his intestinal fortitude is directly proportional to the amount of federal funding he would lose should he disagree...like all the politicians.

I think the only thing that at this point can stem the tide of the monster that is the federal government is a secession.


Sad but true... as far as secession goes, you'll get no argument from me. I've been calling for that for at least 4 or 5 years. I don't care which state does it first, just as long as one does. That would send a message and hopefully start a domino effect.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by spyder550

I believe with a little research...


You have demonstrated you are clueless and betrayed your bias and agenda with the Koch references - lol. I'll take liberal gun haters for 500.00 Alex.

Point 1 - the "bill" to which you refer is no longer a "bill" but is now law....

Point 2 - If it suits your agenda to use hyperbole more power to you - I stick with the facts.

Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE


776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).


I's sure it’s convenient for you to spout useless analogies including wantonly shooting 80 year old ladies and such but the fact is that the person using force still has to pass the reasonable person standard. If you really think you can get away with gunning down an old lady and meeting that standard even if she was beating you up you are free to try I guess - but I wouldn't bet my life (in jail) on it.

Also, why should I have to run away from someone who threatens me on the street? The bottom line is when you use deadly force you better be ready to bet your life you were right because you will spend the rest of your life behind bars if you are not. This is with or without the clause… If the State thinks the circumstances are shady you will be investigated and in the end if a jury of your peers doesn’t think you should have felt threatened in the situation and circumstances you’ll go down.

To clarify for you – this is after the investigation, which comes after the establishment of probable cause to conduct the same. Even criminals in the US get due process... Unless you are against that too?

Like I said before all these “immunity” clauses do is take the burden of proof from the defendant (shooter) and place it on the State. It lets people feel safe that they will not automatically (like it used to be) end up in a cell right next to their attacker until the smoke clears and all the facts are known. I can live with that - so we wait for the facts.

Finally, with regard to immunity from civil prosecution if you are found to have been justified the family can’t then take you to civil court for all you have just because the victim is of color or young or a good student etc… If you are found to have not been justified they can sue all they want and win. You win you win it all you lose you go to jail and pay – it’s a big bet to make. Better be right.

Here is a shocker – the police have to have probable cause to arrest someone for the use of force in self defense. If it’s good enough to need probable cause before you arrest a person murder then I’d say it’s good enough to have the same standard for the use of self defense.

Or would you rather we just arrest everyone at a scene and sort it all out “down at the station”. God forbid we should think (or shock, conduct some kind of investigation) before we start locking people away.

It is also in the statute that FL has to repay your legal expenses if they bring a case for unjustifiable use and they lose. This is where their burden comes in... They better have a good case or they pay. This protects normal people from overzealous prosecutors wanting to make a name for themselves in the court of public opinion because some young kid got shot while stealing TVs in the night or whatever.

Pretty clear to me you don't want to know the truth. Whatever makes your day I guess…



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Star and flag for you and all my fellow patriots on this thread....

The minute Al Sharpton got into it...I knew where it was going.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


haHa......I am stuck in the miserable state of NY with these nut jobs.

Schemer and his ilk have made a mess here and they want to spread like a plague around the country.

God help us all.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Because the police believe Martin threw the first punch...

That's the mistake he made.

If everyone went under the assumption everyone was armed, there would be a lot less punches thrown .



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Problem is, he is calling for a Fed investigation of FL law...

He'll go after every state if he can



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 


If you make bumper stickers,

I'm in!



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by spyder550
 


I'm afraid you're reading the wrong thing, though I haven't had time to research the Florida law. What I expect to find is that there is no statute titled "Stand Your Ground". Instead, if they are worded like Texas laws, there will be a paragraph within the assault and murder statutes, which will either state something like "it is defense to prosecution" or "an affirmative defense".

I'd bet my last dollar there is nothing that says a person is exempt from investigation. That would be ridiculous. There must always be an investigation to determine if the defenses are applicable. No one can simply invoke the "castle doctrine" or "stand your ground doctrine". The evidence must corroborate the claim.

Please people. Use less emotion and more common sense when looking at this or any other similar incident.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   
If The Dick really wants to push for federal investigation of gun violence and gun laws he should start with Holder and the ATF scandals. Otherwise he should mind what's going on in NY. Do these dumb Bastards we have in DC not understand what a district is or the idea of states rights?

Its really a shame we can't just castrate people like Schumer at birth, there would be a lot less contamination of the gene pool if we did.
edit on 26-3-2012 by Nucleardiver because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by spyder550
 


Americans you just need to look North of the border to see what a mess we have here in Canada . Its has gotten to the point that if your child draws a picture of a gun , the state will ransack your home , strip search you , and remove your child from your home .

The American forefathers were correct in constitutionalizing your right to bear arms. Any touchy feeling Liberal that tries to tell you otherwise, is wrong that simple. Stand your ground laws are a way to ensure you have the right to protect yourself from harm. In a free society the government should fear its citizens , not the other way around !!! When the government loses that fear , injustice, bad laws creep into the system with one goal , that is to remove all freedoms from the individual. the aforementioned issues prevent that from happening , thats my opinion .



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover

I'd bet my last dollar there is nothing that says a person is exempt from investigation. That would be ridiculous. There must always be an investigation to determine if the defenses are applicable. No one can simply invoke the "castle doctrine" or "stand your ground doctrine". The evidence must corroborate the claim.


Actually, you owe us your last dollar when it comes to that.
J/k It does use those words but not as plain as all that in the meaning – one has to use the paragraphs above it to garner the intent. That’s the way laws are written.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—


(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.


What this means is that a person who uses justifiable force as prescribed in the previous paragraphs of this chapter of the statute is immune. It does not make immune anyone who uses force outside the scope of those paragraphs. Which is why the next paragraph says...


(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.


So this means that they can - if they feel they have probable cause i.e. either statements or physical evidence at the scene indicates that this was not a case of justifiable use of force conduct an investigation.

However, it doesn't make every person who makes the claim they used self defense immune from prosecution. It just means they can't just lock you up first and start asking questions later as used to be the case when someone shot another person and claimed self defense.

The best part is where in the next paragraph it says that the State must either convict you for manslaughter or something or pay for the legal bills you incurred to defend yourself. This means the burden of proof is on them - they must have an air tight case or face monetary remedy. This prevents, like I said before the prosecutors from going the route of least public resistance by charging people first based on public outcry and MSM manipulation of race card, the poor card or whatever cards there are....


Originally posted by WTFover
Please people. Use less emotion and more common sense when looking at this or any other similar incident.


Don't see much of that when guns, black kids and deaths at the hands of people of another group are concerned. Thanks to Jesse and Al and even Barry O for stirring up the pot on that account.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   

edit on 26/3/2012 by Golf66 because: What makes this thing double post?



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nucleardiver

Do these dumb Bastards we have in DC not understand what a district is or the idea of states rights?


I honestly don't think they do - it’s almost a lost cause IMO.


Originally posted by Nucleardiver

Its really a shame we can't just castrate people like Schumer at birth, there would be a lot less contamination of the gene pool if we did.


I just can fathom the idiocy of these people - worse are the throngs of idiots who continue to vote them into office. Who votes for these guys. Are the people of NY really that clueless? Rhetorical I guess...



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Actually, it says "immune from prosecution", which is entirely different from "investigation". Even cops are subject to investigation, including by a grand jury, to determine if their application of deadly force falls into the realm of justifiable homicide.

So, I'll be keeping that dollar.

edit on 26-3-2012 by WTFover because: Last line



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover

Actually, it says "immune from prosecution", which is entirely different from "investigation". Even cops are subject to investigation, including by a grand jury, to determine if their application of deadly force falls into the realm of justifiable homicide.


Yep, indeed it does. The point I was trying to make was really for spyder who somehow thinks the law is written as a free pass to kill people. There is no immunity from the police investigating. It just means they can’t arrest you first and ask questions later. I rather like that approach for all law violations actually.

It just makes the State do their homework before over reacting to media hype and public outcry. It does say immune from prosecution which makes people all crazy but really - that is only if you are found (through the investigation) to have been acting within the scope of the law. If they have probable cause at the scene to believe your story is more full of holes than my grandma’s spaghetti colander they can and will arrest you.

Again, as a CCW holder and former Soldier - the decision on when to engage is a tough one and in all cases one had better be sure it's justified. I take that responsibility very seriously and having taken life - sometimes on scale that makes me think twice, it’s not something I relish having to ever do again. I would - I am sure of that but not something I go looking for.

Where I live the Sherriff’s response time is upward of 45 minutes or so for an emergency – I also have a lot of livestock. Never want to see an animal suffer and all that.

It amazes me when like a dude in another thread talked about how he's gotten into some scuffles while carrying concealed... I wonder how adult men even get into fights...I haven't been in a fist fight since I was in High School.

I have totally debased myself to get out of an adult scrape. My pride costs nothing. I could care less what people in a bar think… Then again in a bar why is one armed but I digress. I avoid confrontation primarily because it was always a career ender for an Army Officer to get in a fist fight should it get reported. That and a deep seated fear I might revert to training mode and really hurt someone who while maybe an ass didn't need to die. Avoid confrontation at all costs is my motto. When it can't be avoided - fight to win!

I have scuffled once hand to hand - well my hands to his knife in combat and it lasted all of like three seconds (him slashing me in the forearm with which I blocked my face) before one of my NCO's dropped the guy. I think my eardrums hurt more from being so close to the shot than the 10 stitches did. Doesn't pay sometimes to be the leader at a road block - the one asking the questions always gets attacked first.



Originally posted by WTFover
So, I'll be keeping that dollar.


Fair enough I'll even up the ante and give you my last one when I get to it. Besides a dollar isn't what it used to be.



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
I'm not surprised.
Everyone's focused on race, but this dog and pony show is being used for political agendas left and right- get this law changed, that law changed, gun control, look, there's Obama, he's one of us.

Bleh



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
Trayvon Martin "Stood his Ground" and lost the fight because his attacker had a gun and a false sense of authority.


Where is the confusion here?



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by samhouston1886
 


Lol you give your gun a name? question though why is it a female name?



posted on Mar, 27 2012 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nucleardiver
If The Dick really wants to push for federal investigation of gun violence and gun laws he should start with Holder and the ATF scandals. Otherwise he should mind what's going on in NY. Do these dumb Bastards we have in DC not understand what a district is or the idea of states rights?

Its really a shame we can't just castrate people like Schumer at birth, there would be a lot less contamination of the gene pool if we did.
edit on 26-3-2012 by Nucleardiver because: (no reason given)


I hope the last bit is a joke because the Nazis did that..



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join