Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumState’s stand-your-ground law intact [NH]
CONCORD The Senate Thursday refused to act on a bill to repeal the states new stand-your-ground bill, effectively killing the effort.
The Senate voted 19-5 to table House Bill 135, which would have repealed the provision that extends the Castle Doctrine allowing people to defend themselves with deadly force without retreating while in their home on their property to any place a person has a right to be.
When the law was written two years ago it was narrowly drawn and did not change the four conditions under which a person is legally justified in using deadly force. Those conditions are very narrow, Bradley said, That is why there have been no problems with stand-your-ground in New Hampshire.
Before 2011 under the old law, a persons first obligation was to retreat from danger if he or she could do so safely, before responding with deadly force. Under stand-your-ground, there is no obligation to retreat safely before using deadly force if a person feels threatened.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)I think it's possible to properly craft such a law. Not all attempts to do so have been successful in various states.
Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #1)
Name removed Message auto-removed
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)You don't know Mr. Martin attacked Mr. Zimmerman. That's speculation.
Also, it's "Trayvon" not Travon.
The officer that investigated (Serra) filed an affidavit recommending he be prosecuted, to the DA (Wolfinger). The DA declined to prosecute, so that bullshit about "The police who investigated determined that no crime had taken place." is a lie.
You smell like troll.
spin
(17,493 posts)in the upcoming trial. (Ref: http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-waives-stand-ground-hearing-heads-trial/t/story?id=19074241)
Obviously standing your ground does not permit a person to chase down another person and confront them. If anything, Trayvon Martin might have actually been legally standing his ground when approached by an aggressive man who might have flashed his weapon in an threatening manner. If that happened, he had good reason to fear for his life.
I have a Florida concealed weapons permit. If I noticed someone acting truly suspicious, I would contact the police and if informed that they were responding would never play a vigilante and pursue. Of course my suspicion would never be caused merely because some young man wearing a hoodie was walking down a street in my neighborhood. There would be nothing unusual about that. It happens all the time especially in the rain or cold weather.
Now if I was simply walking down a street and was attacked by an individual who I had reason to believe wished to seriously injure or kill me and had the capacity to do so, I would make an effort to defend myself which might involve drawing my concealed weapon and shooting him to stop his attack. Of course that would be my final resort. I am an elderly citizen with hip and back problems so running away is not a good option. While I did get some martial arts training years ago it would probably prove useless against a much younger person in good shape. If I was much younger and in good physical condition, I would attempt to resist the attack without using my weapon. If I was overwhelmed and found myself on the ground with my opponent slamming my head into the sidewalk, I would attempt to use my weapon to save my life or health. In this case the stand your ground law might protect me from criminal prosecution or a lawsuit which would deplete my savings. If I initiated the attack, I don't feel stand your ground should apply.
Of course I would expect the authorities to carefully review my actions and determine if they were reasonable in the situation. If there were serious questions, I would be willing to face a jury.
I will agree that the Florida stand your ground law might have been better written. I feel the basic concept is right but apparently in some cases the law has been abused. Hopefully this will eventually be corrected.
While I refuse to declare that Zimmerman is guilty at this point it is because I haven't heard all the evidence that will be presented in his trail. I am not fond of trial by the media. However at this point based on the evidence that I have read, I feel he was largely at fault.
It should be an interesting trial.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)But no, since you did raise it, that law DID factor into the situation. Wolfinger declined to prosecute the night of the shooting. Despite the investigating officer recommending he do so. That would not have been reversed sans incredible public outcry, and political pressure brought to bear on the DA's office.
Without national media attention, there would never have been a trial, because the DA didn't think he could convict. (Predicating on assuming the SYG defense Zimmerman has opted not to use)
That said, I agree with the rest of what you said. I carry as well. I am not a cop and I do not play one on TV. My firearm is in case of immediate jeopardy to the life/safety of myself or another human. Nothing more. I do not apprehend people. I do not chase people. I do not police my or other neighborhoods. Period.
Without eyewitness testimony as to the moment of physical contact between the two, I cannot predict what the Jury will decide.
spin
(17,493 posts)susposedly played that night. However Wolfinger denied that he stopped the police charges.
Prosecutor denies interfering in Florida shooting case
By Daniel Trotta and Barbara Liston
SANFORD, Florida | Mon Apr 2, 2012 7:24pm EDT
(Reuters) - A Florida prosecutor who removed himself from the investigation into the shooting death of black teenager Trayvon Martin denied on Monday that he quashed police intentions to charge the shooter with manslaughter.
State Attorney Norm Wolfinger asked the U.S. Justice Department civil rights division to disregard a letter it received from lawyers for Martin's family which referred to reports that Wolfinger interfered in the police investigation.
The letter contained "outright lies," Wolfinger said.
***snip***
"I am outraged by the outright lies contained in the letter by Benjamin Crump," Wolfinger said. "I encourage the Justice Department to investigate and document that no such meeting or communication occurred."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/02/us-usa-florida-shooting-prosecutor-idUSBRE83116420120402
The truth of exactly what happened that night may be hard to know but I feel the police department should have done a more thorough investigation before releasing Zimmerman.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)that were mentioned at the very beginning but got lost in the political hype.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/cops-witnesses-back-george-zimmermans-version/story?id=16371852#.UayMBlGNPuM
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/trayvon_martin_eyewitness.ph
Of course early reporting is always questionable, and this case has had some interesting turns against both sides. The latest being someone in the DA's office now on administrative leave for deleting texts from Trayvon's phone before turning it over to the defense.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html
I'm sick to death of fear-driven legislation.
premium
(3,731 posts)If I'm reading this right, it looks like Dems. voted with Repubs. to kill this bill.
Riftaxe
(2,693 posts)link to Concord Monitor Article
and thanks for the link.
ileus
(15,396 posts)nor the life of my beloved family...
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)the way the law was in New Hampshire before this law, a person was required to retreat in THEIR OWN HOME?