Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Wow- a literal interpretation of the self defense law could lead to disastrous consequences [View all]X_Digger
(18,585 posts)28. You might want to actually read the law..
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.041.html
So no, your assertion falls flat on it's face. If you sucker punch me at a bar, and I pull out a knife, back you into a corner and act in such a manner to give a person reasonable belief that I'm going to kill you or do great bodily harm to you, you are justified in using deadly force to stop me.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
So no, your assertion falls flat on it's face. If you sucker punch me at a bar, and I pull out a knife, back you into a corner and act in such a manner to give a person reasonable belief that I'm going to kill you or do great bodily harm to you, you are justified in using deadly force to stop me.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Wow- a literal interpretation of the self defense law could lead to disastrous consequences [View all]
DemocratSinceBirth
Jul 2013
OP
First you say that there is a self-defense law in Florida which can be literally interpreted.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2013
#10
Aren't the words "reasonably believe" open ended with no real definition? And while we are at it
jwirr
Jul 2013
#22
Once double jeopardy attaches, a defendant cannot be tried again even if a jury does not follow the
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2013
#26
The best bar fight I ever saw in a bar and I was a bouncer at that time
DemocratSinceBirth
Jul 2013
#36
See rrneck's responce below. Most states probably have sorts of exemptions. nt
Duckwraps
Jul 2013
#38
I don't think I said "self defense" wouldn't apply in that situation. I didn't address it.
DemocratSinceBirth
Jul 2013
#39
supports the op's argument. initiate a confrontation & then say "but i was scared for my life"
HiPointDem
Jul 2013
#49
Continuing to pound on an aggressor who's tried to disengage would qualify, yes.
X_Digger
Jul 2013
#52
First the state has to prove that the person charged is the aggressor, 'who swung first'..
X_Digger
Jul 2013
#54
Come up with a silly interpretation, then bemoan "disastrous consequences". I get it.
X_Digger
Jul 2013
#65
Well, first the prosecution would have to prove him the aggressor, then yes, as you say. n/t
X_Digger
Jul 2013
#60
Unless he withdrew and literally tried to run way how did the decedent know that was his intention?
DemocratSinceBirth
Jul 2013
#63