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]NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)42. I kind of got a laugh out of it.
I will be hanging out in the wild west tonight. Going to Clearwater Beach for a beer and fresh Grouper sandwich. There will be over a thousand people on the beach and strip. People from all backgrounds and ethnicities. Chances are very good that the only guns that will be seen will be on the hips of law enforcement. One or two drunks might get into a scuffle.
Can't wait to get off work, put on my jeans and chaps, mount my horse, and ride down to the beach with my rifle loaded.
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