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: “Stand Your Ground” Has Got to F***ing Go. [View all]GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)68. OK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law
Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895)
Laws or rulings implementing features of Stand Your Ground have a long history within the United States.
In Runyon v. State, a 1877 Indiana court case, the court said "The tendency of the American mind seems to be very strongly against the enforcement of any rule which requires a person to flee when assailed, to avoid chastisement or even to save a human life . . . [Therefore,] [t]he weight of modern authority . . establishes the doctrine that when a person, being without fault and in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel force by force, and if, in reasonable exercise of his right of self-defence, his assailant is killed, he is justifiable."[35]
Other early cases invoking a "no duty to retreat" argument include People v. Lewis, 48 P. 1088 (Cal. 1897); Boykin v. People, 49 P. 419 (Colo. 1896); Ragland v. State, 36 S.E. 682 (Ga. 1900); Page v. State, 40 N.E. 745 (Ind. 1894); State v. Hatch, 46 P. 708 (Kan. 1896); and State v. Partlow, 4 S.W. 14 (Mo. 1887).
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".[36]
As you can see, SYG isn't new at all. And those Justices above didn't invent it then either. Ultimately it goes back to English Common Law.
Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895)
Laws or rulings implementing features of Stand Your Ground have a long history within the United States.
In Runyon v. State, a 1877 Indiana court case, the court said "The tendency of the American mind seems to be very strongly against the enforcement of any rule which requires a person to flee when assailed, to avoid chastisement or even to save a human life . . . [Therefore,] [t]he weight of modern authority . . establishes the doctrine that when a person, being without fault and in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel force by force, and if, in reasonable exercise of his right of self-defence, his assailant is killed, he is justifiable."[35]
Other early cases invoking a "no duty to retreat" argument include People v. Lewis, 48 P. 1088 (Cal. 1897); Boykin v. People, 49 P. 419 (Colo. 1896); Ragland v. State, 36 S.E. 682 (Ga. 1900); Page v. State, 40 N.E. 745 (Ind. 1894); State v. Hatch, 46 P. 708 (Kan. 1896); and State v. Partlow, 4 S.W. 14 (Mo. 1887).
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".[36]
As you can see, SYG isn't new at all. And those Justices above didn't invent it then either. Ultimately it goes back to English Common Law.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
86 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
or easier to look at twisted data to look at facts...PS...the posters data is twisted.
uponit7771
Jul 2013
#37
So you think there's NO disparity?! NONE at all? You live in the US?! regards
uponit7771
Jul 2013
#38
The number of whites allowed to claim self far far out number those of blacks by the hundreds of %
uponit7771
Jul 2013
#66
The jury got the instructions they needed to acquit and they were SYG instructions.
mountain grammy
Jul 2013
#21
As I said, that is the point. Where there are no such boundaries, no ROE is possible.
riqster
Jul 2013
#42
Yes, I was backed into the doorway of a closed building. So disengagement was not possible.
riqster
Jul 2013
#57
California does not have a law with that title, but all juries in homicide cases that assert SD
X_Digger
Jul 2013
#76
I can't run. I have a disability. I can walk, but at a moderate pace. N/T
GreenStormCloud
Jul 2013
#85