If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law means you cannot be prosecuted for using deadly force against an attacker-unless you're a woman who fires a warning shot to stop your husband's attack-then you get 20 years   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 448
    More: Asinine, warning shot, fires  
•       •       •

15084 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 May 2012 at 8:55 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



448 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-02 10:35:05 AM  

Cythraul: I didn't know firing a warning shot was illegal. Maybe some sort of violation of firearms code where you're not allowed to fire a weapon within city limits? But 20 years, for that? This just doesn't make any sense.


Yes, it's illegal. Whether you shoot your TV like that guy did in the 80's, or you shoot into the ceiling like this woman did, it's still some variety of reckless discharge of a weapon. If she had shot AT her husband, it would be different. Luckily she was in her house at the time, but the point of these laws is that what goes up(a bullet) is going to come back down to earth at some point, traveling very fast, and innocent people die from this more often than you think.

You also shouldn't say 'Stop, or I will shoot you.', because that can be seen as assault, a verbal threat of harm. Your best bet is to pull the gun and fire, preferably multiple times, and then act as scared and freaked as you can when the police show up, it helps sell the 'I had no choice' thing, and as a result, keeps you out of jail, as long as the self defense claim is legit.
 
2012-05-02 10:35:22 AM  

Giltric: Mavent: moothemagiccow: The hell does the warning shot communicate? That you're not going to kill him? In this scenario you die either way

The point that a lot of you Internet Toughguy/Sociopath Wannabes tend to forget is that normal, sane human beings tend to not want to kill other human beings. I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!" In real life, most people don't want to have the death of another person on their hands. But I guess understanding that that would take a level of maturity and humanity that some of you will never aspire to.

Sometimes taking a life is neccessary even though you don't want to do it....it is no different then when your mom tells you to take out the garbage.


Did you just equate taking someone's life with taking out the garbage? I don't know if I should fear you or worship you.
 
2012-05-02 10:35:36 AM  

Mavent: moothemagiccow: The hell does the warning shot communicate? That you're not going to kill him? In this scenario you die either way

The point that a lot of you Internet Toughguy/Sociopath Wannabes tend to forget is that normal, sane human beings tend to not want to kill other human beings. I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!" In real life, most people don't want to have the death of another person on their hands. But I guess understanding that that would take a level of maturity and humanity that some of you will never aspire to.


It has nothing to do with anything you said.

It has to do with the law. The legal system does not approve of warning shots. For a variety of reasons, some kinda stupid (the whole "well OBVIOUSLY you didn't need to use deadly force because you weren't really in fear of your life or you would've actually shot the guy" argument) and some totally valid (warning shots into the air come down somewhere).
 
2012-05-02 10:36:46 AM  

Cythraul: Never fire a warning shot? Okay, quick scenario:

Guy with a butcher knife is coming towards me, threatening my life. I have a gun in my hand, but I think maybe if I just scare the shiat out of him, taking his life will not be necessary. If I can't fire a warning shot in the air, or the ground, do I menacingly show him my weapon without pointing it at him, or something?


Your best bet is to shoot, aim for center mass, and hope for the best outcome, it will keep you out of the most trouble.
 
2012-05-02 10:36:49 AM  
If she had shouted "stop, I have a gun" and then shot the attacker non-fatally, would she be in the same trouble? What is the time standard for evaluating a life-threatening situation?


/mandatory minimums suck
//reckless discharge of a firearm sucks; guns are for killing
 
2012-05-02 10:37:06 AM  

rudemix: Isn't a persons perception of fear absolutely opinion and feeling though? 14ish feet and matters of seconds are really the litmus this rests upon to decide if someone truly was scared for their life? And I've done a bit of googling (which I'm not good at) and have found no 'law' that states 'a warning shot fired removes the fear of life from being a defense'. I'm assuming there's been rulings that support it, but was there some evidential basis besides 'opinion and feeling' from experts who testified to it? I'm talking tests and hard data, not just how I feel or a jury at some point felt. Until there is hard data it truly is only opinion and feeling that at some point, or points, was sold to a jury that it wasn't fear of life anymore once a warning shot was fired


Yes, but that's why we look over a situation. I never said my post was inclusive, merely pointing out - as others have (and better than me, TBH) - if you have time to fire a warning shot, your life probably wasn't in imminent danger. But, that's why an entire chain of events is examined, not just an individual action.

Look at it this way: you fire a warning shot, get attacked, and you're rescued. You're not going to be charged with a crime because you fired a warning shot, because it's obvious from subsequent events (the attack) that you were in imminent danger. It may be possible you didn't react properly, but there it is.

You can fix most things, but death is forever. The larger point about not firing warning shots is that you should never, EVER unholster a firearm unless it's a situation that requires the death of someone else to prevent your own death (or the death of an innocent). If you're at the point where you've drawn a weapon and fired a warning shot, you have almost certainly failed at judgement and have instead become a danger to others rather than someone legitimately defending themselves. TFA we're discussing is a perfect example of this - she fired a warning shot by this guy. She could easily have hit an innocent person. She's no longer defending herself - she's endangering others.

/I don't carry, FWIW
 
2012-05-02 10:37:24 AM  

Pumpernickel bread: It has nothing to do with conservative/liberal and everything to do with the facts. I am far from conservative and can see the difference. Zimmerman was on his back getting his face caved in when he shot and her husband was nowhere near her when she decided to shoot....intentionally in the direction of children. I would say it is you that cannot see things for what they are. I think 20 years is harsh, but the idiocy of mandatory sentencing is an entirely different discussion


This.
 
2012-05-02 10:41:21 AM  

Carth: Any report on what is going to happen to the kids? With the mom in jail and the dad an abusive jerk where will they go?


To dad, obviously, so they can be treated like shiat by a newly unrestrained man who just got a lot angrier due to having to be in court. I don't think their chances of survival are good.
Given that everything else went to hell, this likely will too.
 
2012-05-02 10:42:11 AM  

Voiceofreason01: a gun is not a precision weapon


Just a pointless quibble.... the record distance for a confirmed sniper kill is over 1.5 miles. That's some pretty fine precision for a weapon you can carry around with you and doesn't have half a million dollars of lasers and electronics guiding it or the ability to zoom in on a target using precision GPS from orbiting satellites.

So... most guns are not precision weapons.

/ Yes, I have nothing of value to really add to this discussion
 
2012-05-02 10:42:51 AM  

Mavent: moothemagiccow: The hell does the warning shot communicate? That you're not going to kill him? In this scenario you die either way

The point that a lot of you Internet Toughguy/Sociopath Wannabes tend to forget is that normal, sane human beings tend to not want to kill other human beings. I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!" In real life, most people don't want to have the death of another person on their hands. But I guess understanding that that would take a level of maturity and humanity that some of you will never aspire to.


Why are you trying so hard to justify the very, very dangerous warning shot?

Unless you are a naval vessel, you do not ever need to fire one.

If you are incapable of using a gun for it's intended purpose in a life or death situation, do not pick it up in the first place, or put it away from you.

Do NOT begin firing in random directions and endangering innocent people because of your principles. You may be willing to die for them, others are not.

And certainly not by your hand.

If you hold life so dear that you are not willing to end the life of someone putting you in mortal danger, why are you so quick to possibly injure or kill someone else?
 
2012-05-02 10:43:59 AM  

TheSilverKey: If she had shouted "stop, I have a gun" and then shot the attacker non-fatally, would she be in the same trouble? What is the time standard for evaluating a life-threatening situation?

/mandatory minimums suck
//reckless discharge of a firearm sucks; guns are for killing


Depends.

As for "deadly force" that just means you used force that had the potential to kill somebody. Whether you actually killed them or just hurt them doesn't matter. Which is usually the outcome since most people that are shot don't die. In fact, the cops arresting the bad guy at the ER when he shows up for treatment is pretty common.
 
2012-05-02 10:45:10 AM  
Stand our ground circumvents our court system.

What now? Guilty until proven dead?

How it is supposed to work:

1. BACK THE FARK OFF!!!!!!
2. Call the Police
3. File charges
4. Prove your case
5. Receive justice

And not:

1. Pull a gun for perceived wrong
2. Shoot the guy
3. Claim self-defense
 
2012-05-02 10:45:28 AM  

Silly Jesus: What an actual African-American might look like...

[www.bff.tv image 400x400]

I don't understand the widespread misuse of this term.


She's South African.
 
2012-05-02 10:45:49 AM  

probesport: Warning shot is the issue. If you can fire just a warning then you are no longer in fear for your life.

This is not rocket surgery.


I have to disagree, most people don't want to kill another person and would rather just scare them away. If a person was coming towards me I had good reason to believe was going to hurt me (but maybe was not CERTAIN of it), I might fire a shot just to scare him away. Loud noises scare people, just ask a dog. If he is still coming at me after that, I could be certain he deserved it.

If what the posts here say are correct about the woman firing towards her kids and getting back with the guy who was supposedly endangering her life, then I have no sympathy for her plight.
 
2012-05-02 10:46:21 AM  
I was told never to aim or fire a gun at anything you don't intend to kill or destroy. I guess this lady never heard that one.
 
2012-05-02 10:47:01 AM  

Mavent: The point that a lot of you Internet Toughguy/Sociopath Wannabes tend to forget is that normal, sane human beings tend to not want to kill other human beings.


Because being willing to kill human beings to protect your own life or the life of your friends and family is exactly the same as wanting to kill human beings.

/keep farking that chicken
 
2012-05-02 10:47:10 AM  

Carth: This text is now purple: Silly Jesus: Carth: Silly Jesus: What an actual African-American might look like...

[www.bff.tv image 400x400]

I don't understand the widespread misuse of this term.

Technically I think African American is supposed to refer to American citizens descended from the native population of Sub-Saharan Africa

What does that make Charlize Theron then?

Boer, technically.

The difficulty with the above definition is that it excludes the Nubians, who are a supra-Saharan tribe.

Cool, learned a new term. I never knew they had a word specifically for the descents of the Dutch farmers in South Africa.


If you want to be really clever, you can call her an Afrikaan-American.
 
2012-05-02 10:47:35 AM  

hitlersbrain: probesport: Warning shot is the issue. If you can fire just a warning then you are no longer in fear for your life.

This is not rocket surgery.

I have to disagree, most people don't want to kill another person and would rather just scare them away. If a person was coming towards me I had good reason to believe was going to hurt me (but maybe was not CERTAIN of it), I might fire a shot just to scare him away. Loud noises scare people, just ask a dog. If he is still coming at me after that, I could be certain he deserved it.

If what the posts here say are correct about the woman firing towards her kids and getting back with the guy who was supposedly endangering her life, then I have no sympathy for her plight.


Please do not ever own a gun for self defense.
 
2012-05-02 10:50:11 AM  

RminusQ: Wow, I feel so much safer now that I know that if someone with a gun feels threatened by me, the only legally defensible action they can take is to shoot me in the face...


In States other than Florida you're fine(usually, laws vary between States) unless you're breaking into somebody's house.

/you just identified why there is so much concern about Florida's "stand your ground" law
 
2012-05-02 10:51:46 AM  

TheSilverKey: If she had shouted "stop, I have a gun" and then shot the attacker non-fatally, would she be in the same trouble? What is the time standard for evaluating a life-threatening situation?


/mandatory minimums suck
//reckless discharge of a firearm sucks; guns are for killing


Then it could be assault with a deadly weapon for threatening to use the gun. People talk trash about CCW holders, but these are the things we learn. 'Stop or I will shoot' is assault, warning shots are reckless discharge of a weapon, and ANY violent act in front of police responding to a Domestic Violence call(Even if it's you throwing a coffee cup to the ground) results in an arrest and a mandatory sentence that removes your right to carry a gun.

Fun, isn't it?
 
2012-05-02 10:53:55 AM  

maliklockett: Let that be a lesson to you. If you are going to use a gun, SHOOT THE S. O. B.

You fire a warning shot, you give them a chance to call the cops and spin their own story

Shoot him in the face, and then it is your word against the corpse. And the last I heard, corpses don't do much talking


Yeah, it sort of happened to my brother no guns involved though. His X attacked him and he pushed her down. She then called the cops on him and he got the domestic.
 
2012-05-02 10:54:05 AM  

Evil Mackerel: Silly Jesus: What an actual African-American might look like...

[www.bff.tv image 400x400]

I don't understand the widespread misuse of this term.

She's South African.


She has dual citizenship.
 
2012-05-02 10:55:08 AM  

hitlersbrain: I have to disagree, most people don't want to kill another person and would rather just scare them away. If a person was coming towards me I had good reason to believe was going to hurt me (but maybe was not CERTAIN of it), I might fire a shot just to scare him away. Loud noises scare people, just ask a dog. If he is still coming at me after that, I could be certain he deserved it.


You would go to jail.

You used deadly force (you fired a gun) when you weren't certain the person was going to hurt you. That's illegal. Especially since you weren't "certain".

Let's look at Florida's actual law

Use of force in defense of person.-A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1)He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony


Note the words "imminent". You used deadly force against a threat that wasn't imminent. Obviously, since you weren't "certain" the guy was actually going to hurt you. Thus, you're going to jail.

Also, you used the word "hurt". "Hurt" doesn't work. If you're just going to be "hurt" using unlawful force then you can only use force to defend yourself proportionally to that. The only way you can use deadly force is to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm. In your example, none of those appear to be present.

You'd be going to jail for everything from unlawful discharge of a firearm to attempted murder of the guy in question. And you also randomly fired a gun. Where'd that bullet go after it passed by Mr. Might Me a Threat?
 
2012-05-02 10:57:33 AM  

Voiceofreason01: RminusQ: Wow, I feel so much safer now that I know that if someone with a gun feels threatened by me, the only legally defensible action they can take is to shoot me in the face...

In States other than Florida you're fine(usually, laws vary between States) unless you're breaking into somebody's house.

/you just identified why there is so much concern about Florida's "stand your ground" law


Except, of course, that's not how SYG laws work at all.

He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony

It isn't enough to just "feel threatened".
 
2012-05-02 10:57:55 AM  

Mavent: I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!"


Actually, you're hearing that from the grownups here who have decided to: A.) Carry a gun at some point, and B.) Become educated on the laws. It's not an internet toughguy thing, it's called keeping your ass out of jail. You CAN'T fire warning shots, whether it's because you can't claim self defense, or if you get busted for unlawfully discharging a firearm. In residential areas(These are places where there are houses and such), you can't fire a gun unless you are left with no choice. Firing into the air means that you had time to make that choice, so you can't claim that you had no choice. Same goes with aiming for the leg. They can and will prosecute you if you imply that you had time for all kinds of decisions, because that means that you had time to be somewhere else.

Jesus, I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this. Basically, if someone broke into my house and I followed YoUR "advice", I could easily be in jail far longer than the guy who broke into my house, and this would be true even if video games had never existed.
 
2012-05-02 10:59:23 AM  

corn-bread: The article has a link to the husband's story here.

That story contains this tidbit from Marissa's ex-husband (her ally):
He also said that Marissa Alexander retrieved the firearm from the glove compartment of her vehicle parked in the garage of her home at some point during the argument.


So she left the argument, retrieved a gun, and then *came back* to a dangerous situation.
Stand your ground does not apply.


Great find.
 
2012-05-02 11:02:18 AM  

Mavent: moothemagiccow: The hell does the warning shot communicate? That you're not going to kill him? In this scenario you die either way

The point that a lot of you Internet Toughguy/Sociopath Wannabes tend to forget is that normal, sane human beings tend to not want to kill other human beings. I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!" In real life, most people don't want to have the death of another person on their hands. But I guess understanding that that would take a level of maturity and humanity that some of you will never aspire to.


Then you shouldn't be employing weapons for self defense. In reality, you have to make a decision between your life and the attacker's life if you reasonably believe there is an imminent risk to yourself. It's not about 'wanting' to kill people, but it's something you have to come to terms with beforehand, not when you're under attack. As has been stated, the shoot to kill and no warning shots stuff is to increase your own survival and not risk innocent bystanders, not to mention the legal problems (whether you agree with them or not).
 
2012-05-02 11:03:37 AM  
Gee, this is even better than a Zimmerman thread. In this thread you all can talk about how you'd handle a crisis situation, how you'd shoot people yourself, how you'd handle your weapon, and how people who try not to kill people are giant pussies. Maybe you should go out and buy some more ammo after you post. The world looks mighty dangerous from you're sitting.
 
2012-05-02 11:04:15 AM  

Silly Jesus: What does that make Charlize Theron then?


A European South African.
 
2012-05-02 11:06:42 AM  

Mikey1969: Mavent: I love all the thirteen-year-old Halo addicts in these threads who run around screaming "Shoot to kill! No warning shots! Fire until your clip runs dry! HORK HORK HORK!"

Actually, you're hearing that from the grownups here who have decided to: A.) Carry a gun at some point, and B.) Become educated on the laws. It's not an internet toughguy thing, it's called keeping your ass out of jail. You CAN'T fire warning shots, whether it's because you can't claim self defense, or if you get busted for unlawfully discharging a firearm. In residential areas(These are places where there are houses and such), you can't fire a gun unless you are left with no choice. Firing into the air means that you had time to make that choice, so you can't claim that you had no choice. Same goes with aiming for the leg. They can and will prosecute you if you imply that you had time for all kinds of decisions, because that means that you had time to be somewhere else.

Jesus, I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this. Basically, if someone broke into my house and I followed YoUR "advice", I could easily be in jail far longer than the guy who broke into my house, and this would be true even if video games had never existed.


Or you're dead because you didn't scare away the attacker, and you killed your wife who was hiding in a closet upstairs with your oh-so-humane warning shot.
 
2012-05-02 11:07:49 AM  

jbuist: Cythraul: I didn't know firing a warning shot was illegal. Maybe some sort of violation of firearms code where you're not allowed to fire a weapon within city limits? But 20 years, for that? This just doesn't make any sense.

The "warning shot" was in the general direction of the abusive husband and children. Not up into the ceiling which is what they initially told police.

If you shoot at children, lie about it, then hook back up with the abusive husband after the trial starts despite being told not to by the court... well, yeah, the jury ain't gonna be nice to you.

Make a little more sense now?


The fact that she hooked back up with the husband is irrelevant to the situation at hand. Did she fear for her life? Then she had every right to do what she did.
 
2012-05-02 11:08:08 AM  
For everyone decrying the abusive government prosecutor in this case while at the same time lauding the brave and righteous prosecutor that had the guts to bring charges against George Zimmerman...it is the same biatch.
 
2012-05-02 11:11:32 AM  

SweetSilverBlues: Unless you are a naval vessel, you do not ever need to fire one.


Sweet, because I am, in fact, a naval vessel... I can fire all the warning shots across the bow I want.

/After typing that I now see all kinds of 'full of seamen' jokes running through this thread. Oh well. Carry on :-)
 
2012-05-02 11:11:33 AM  

s2s2s2: Silly Jesus: What does that make Charlize Theron then?

A European South African.


A European South African American.
 
2012-05-02 11:11:54 AM  

Cythraul: I didn't know firing a warning shot was illegal. Maybe some sort of violation of firearms code where you're not allowed to fire a weapon within city limits? But 20 years, for that? This just doesn't make any sense.


Three counts of aggravated assault. So, she was charged with threatening the lives of her husband and two children with a deadly weapon.
 
2012-05-02 11:12:32 AM  

cryinoutloud: Gee, this is even better than a Zimmerman thread. In this thread you all can talk about how you'd handle a crisis situation, how you'd shoot people yourself, how you'd handle your weapon, and how people who try not to kill people are giant pussies. Maybe you should go out and buy some more ammo after you post. The world looks mighty dangerous from you're sitting.


You still don't understand. It's not about people who don't want to kill being weak. It is about the fact that lethal force should be employed only in situations where it is necessary, and it should be used correctly and responsibly. If you are not prepared to do that, do not bring lethal force into the mix. In other words, do not own a gun for self defense if you are morally against taking another life. Do not draw a gun in a conflict where you do not feel like your life is in danger.

If you draw a firearm, be prepared to use it, and use it correctly. If you cannot do that, do not draw (or own) a gun. It is too dangerous otherwise.

What you interpret as bloodlust are people who have made the decision to use firearms as a form of self defense re-enforcing their decisions and re-stating to themselves and others what they would do when presented with a life threatening situation so that when the situation does occur, they will not hesitate. It may sound like bravado to you, but it is really just conditioning so that when necessary, we will shoot, and shoot to kill. But only when it is necessary.
 
2012-05-02 11:13:13 AM  

Sweaty Dynamite: For everyone decrying the abusive government prosecutor in this case while at the same time lauding the brave and righteous prosecutor that had the guts to bring charges against George Zimmerman...it is the same biatch.


She's also charging a 12 year old as an adult in another case. I think she's Corky.
 
2012-05-02 11:13:48 AM  

SweetSilverBlues: Or you're dead because you didn't scare away the attacker, and you killed your wife who was hiding in a closet upstairs with your oh-so-humane warning shot.


Thank God for Hydro Shock rounds. If I miss and my bullet goes through a wall, I stand a decent chance of it not killing on the other side of the wall. God, wouldn't that suck though? I couldn't imagine living with myself after killing a loved one that way.
 
2012-05-02 11:14:07 AM  

Splinshints: Voiceofreason01: a gun is not a precision weapon

Just a pointless quibble.... the record distance for a confirmed sniper kill is over 1.5 miles. That's some pretty fine precision for a weapon you can carry around with you and doesn't have half a million dollars of lasers and electronics guiding it or the ability to zoom in on a target using precision GPS from orbiting satellites.

So... most guns are not precision weapons.

/ Yes, I have nothing of value to really add to this discussion


Most long range sniper kills involve the sniper firing multiple shots and I guarantee that even from that range the round went right through the target and hit something behind it. In a war zone that may not be a problem but in an urban environment there are a lot of things that could be behind your target that you don't want that bullet to hit.

/there is a lot of energy behind that little metal slug and it can and will richochet, pass through your target, fragment and generally do things you might not expect. Guns are not precision weapons.
 
2012-05-02 11:14:20 AM  

Silly Jesus: A European South African American.


We have a deal.
 
2012-05-02 11:15:03 AM  

Silly Jesus: I think she's Corky.


She can prosecute to Potato?
 
2012-05-02 11:15:15 AM  

jbuist: Cythraul: I didn't know firing a warning shot was illegal. Maybe some sort of violation of firearms code where you're not allowed to fire a weapon within city limits? But 20 years, for that? This just doesn't make any sense.

The "warning shot" was in the general direction of the abusive husband and children. Not up into the ceiling which is what they initially told police.

If you shoot at children, lie about it, then hook back up with the abusive husband after the trial starts despite being told not to by the court... well, yeah, the jury ain't gonna be nice to you.

Make a little more sense now?


So, I did a little research, and as I suspected, your summary didn't include anything relevant in trial. This isn't meant to be an attack on the credibility (didn't look it up) or whether or not it should have made a difference (legally, this doesn't matter). I only wanted to determine what happened. See below. I've linked source also.

Like Zimmerman, Alexander sought protection under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, which states that a person assailed where she has a right to be "has no duty to retreat" and may "meet force with force." Yet unlike Zimmerman, Alexander found her request for immunity denied. Judge Elizabeth Senterfitt maintained that she could have fled back through the house instead of confronting her husband. She stood trial for assault on March 16, 2012 and was pronounced guilty.

So, in other words, the judge said she had a duty to retreat (and had no right to stand her ground).

Source: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/04/25/trayvon_martin_marissa _alexander_and_stand_your_ground_is_the_law_equally_applied_.html
 
2012-05-02 11:15:46 AM  

maliklockett: Let that be a lesson to you. If you are going to use a gun, SHOOT THE S. O. B.

You fire a warning shot, you give them a chance to call the cops and spin their own story

Shoot him in the face, and then it is your word against the corpse. And the last I heard, corpses don't do much talking



No, always go for mass-center. Head shots are too hard for the casual shooter.
 
2012-05-02 11:16:13 AM  

cryinoutloud: Gee, this is even better than a Zimmerman thread. In this thread you all can talk about how you'd handle a crisis situation, how you'd shoot people yourself, how you'd handle your weapon, and how people who try not to kill people are giant pussies. Maybe you should go out and buy some more ammo after you post. The world looks mighty dangerous from you're sitting.


Actually, in this thread. the people who have gone through training for a CCW are pointing out the ignorance of armchair lawyers who only learn what they know by watching CSI: Miami. We've learned the law as a requirement to get the permit, and others have studied it on their own because we want to know how we're covered if we DO shoot some jackass who breaks in. It's not paranoia, it's called 'education', something you seem to be avoiding like the plague.
 
2012-05-02 11:16:45 AM  
Center mass.
Center mass ONLY!

/that is all.
/anti-gun laws are farked up, but everyone knows that.
 
2012-05-02 11:16:50 AM  

BurnShrike: 20 years for firing a shot that didn't hit anyone?! The US penal system has become a farce. That's just ridiculous.

You could rape and murder someone and be back on the streets faster than that.


It's three years for threatening an adult and two children with a gun. It's a very weird application of the law, though, I agree.

Funny thing - in the state of Georgia - she could have been charged with kidnapping a minor and would be required to register as a sexual offender.
 
2012-05-02 11:18:15 AM  

KangTheMad: jbuist: Cythraul: I didn't know firing a warning shot was illegal. Maybe some sort of violation of firearms code where you're not allowed to fire a weapon within city limits? But 20 years, for that? This just doesn't make any sense.

The "warning shot" was in the general direction of the abusive husband and children. Not up into the ceiling which is what they initially told police.

If you shoot at children, lie about it, then hook back up with the abusive husband after the trial starts despite being told not to by the court... well, yeah, the jury ain't gonna be nice to you.

Make a little more sense now?

Yeah, I wouldn't have done anything different if I was on the jury. Fark her.


Was any of this information even entered into the official trial? I highly doubt it (and if it were - her attorney was terrible).
 
2012-05-02 11:18:53 AM  

Mikey1969: Sweet, because I am, in fact, a naval vessel... I can fire all the warning shots across the bow I want.



Ahmad Shariff Rakim El Bey? Is that you?
 
2012-05-02 11:19:23 AM  

Mikey1969: SweetSilverBlues: Unless you are a naval vessel, you do not ever need to fire one.

Sweet, because I am, in fact, a naval vessel... I can fire all the warning shots across the bow I want.

/After typing that I now see all kinds of 'full of seamen' jokes running through this thread. Oh well. Carry on :-)


You totally made me giggle.

/totally
 
2012-05-02 11:20:32 AM  

Mikey1969: SweetSilverBlues: Or you're dead because you didn't scare away the attacker, and you killed your wife who was hiding in a closet upstairs with your oh-so-humane warning shot.

Thank God for Hydro Shock rounds. If I miss and my bullet goes through a wall, I stand a decent chance of it not killing on the other side of the wall. God, wouldn't that suck though? I couldn't imagine living with myself after killing a loved one that way.


This doesn't cover Hydroshocks specifically, but it does point out that even a handgun round can penetrate through dry wall a lot more than we would expect.

The box of truth
 
Displayed 50 of 448 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report