General Discussion

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

37. And another canard..

Sun Feb 9, 2014, 04:59 PM

Feb 2014

It's not whether or not you 'feel threatened', it's whether or not a reasonable person would fear death or grievous bodily harm.

'Reasonable person' -- your next google exercise.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

107 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Are SYG laws weapon agnostic? [View all] PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 OP

Pretty sure knives are included. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #1

Just as she would be without SYG Major Nikon Feb 2014 #4

The burden of proof would be on her. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #7

NRA/ALEC fantasyworld nonsense Major Nikon Feb 2014 #9

Congrats on the first Godwin style loss of the thread. nt NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #10

Congrats on the God-lose Major Nikon Feb 2014 #12

I'm familiar with it. You still lost. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #14

I lost because you don't agree Major Nikon Feb 2014 #16

LOL. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #30

Genius! Major Nikon Feb 2014 #33

Are you always this dense? NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #38

So you said "Godwin" but what you really meant was "Association fallacy" Major Nikon Feb 2014 #46

I said Godwin style. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #47

This keeps getting better and better Major Nikon Feb 2014 #63

You just keep heaping on the FAIL! NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #70

Impressive word salad Major Nikon Feb 2014 #71

You should take your own advice. nt NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #72

I like you Major Nikon Feb 2014 #74

Often misunderstood, as you demonstrated just now. Allow me to clarify it some for you. Electric Monk Feb 2014 #18

*yawn* NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #29

No need for the ad hominem link NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #43

Zimmy didn't get off using SYG. LAGC Feb 2014 #25

More right wing fantasyworld mythology Major Nikon Feb 2014 #28

Wrong. LAGC Feb 2014 #36

If you really want to see cognitive dissonance, show them the california jury instructions.. X_Digger Feb 2014 #39

Exactly. LAGC Feb 2014 #41

Never mind the actual criminal defense attorneys at DU who said it was straight self-defense. X_Digger Feb 2014 #42

Actual self defense attorneys at DU? kcr Feb 2014 #49

Did you mis-read my statement? We have a few criminal defense attorneys who post here. X_Digger Feb 2014 #50

Nope, didn't misread kcr Feb 2014 #51

When you have questions about law, do you prefer a reporter or a lawyer? X_Digger Feb 2014 #52

You know where I don't seek the advice and opinions of lawyers? kcr Feb 2014 #53

You know where I don't seek legal advice? From reporters / bloggers / talking heads. X_Digger Feb 2014 #55

Well, if you don't seek them there kcr Feb 2014 #56

I spoke to quite a few. I have family in the business, as well as friends and friends-of-friends. X_Digger Feb 2014 #57

Big surprise. People you choose to associate with kcr Feb 2014 #60

Don't take my word for it, ask a defense attorney yourself. X_Digger Feb 2014 #62

I don't have to ask a defense attorney kcr Feb 2014 #67

She could have said she liked the color of his eyes.. X_Digger Feb 2014 #73

Except that she said it did. kcr Feb 2014 #78

So do you think california's jury instructions make similar cases there "SYG"? X_Digger Feb 2014 #81

Yes, I do kcr Feb 2014 #83

Lol, except california doesn't have SYG. Quite a quandry, eh? n/t X_Digger Feb 2014 #86

lol, omgz!1 kcr Feb 2014 #88

Worked yourself right into a corner, lol. X_Digger Feb 2014 #90

I admitted no such thing. I'm saying the opposite, in fact. kcr Feb 2014 #92

...anonymously Major Nikon Feb 2014 #69

And here I thought you were a Major. Imagine my disappointment. X_Digger Feb 2014 #76

In the mean time...... here's three shovels....... rdharma Feb 2014 #80

Have anything actually substantive to contribute, or are you just going to snark in passing? X_Digger Feb 2014 #82

Take your pick! nt rdharma Feb 2014 #93

So how about it? Anything substantive? X_Digger Feb 2014 #95

Something substantive? I see you decided to take a pick. rdharma Feb 2014 #98

As I expected. Snark without substance. *sigh* I had such high hopes this time. n/t X_Digger Feb 2014 #100

Get a "strong holster" for your pick and keep it safely stored. nt rdharma Feb 2014 #101

I just rang up the Almighty on the red phone Major Nikon Feb 2014 #85

Swing and a miss! Oh so close. X_Digger Feb 2014 #87

Did you not read what the attorney wrote? Major Nikon Feb 2014 #97

I read it, and it doesn't apply to this case. X_Digger Feb 2014 #99

Aww, where'd ya go? X_Digger Feb 2014 #103

Once again, the revelation of inconvenient truths has caused the ill-prepared to flee friendly_iconoclast Feb 2014 #106

Bias: Major Nikon Feb 2014 #45

He got off because the SYG law changed the definition of self-defense in Florida. Hoyt Feb 2014 #102

Burden of proof is fucked up? MattBaggins Feb 2014 #35

In making a rape victim justify her efforts to escape - yes. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #40

Sure. Iggo Feb 2014 #2

"exist so you can..." cherokeeprogressive Feb 2014 #3

You have a better explanation? Major Nikon Feb 2014 #5

How about this PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #6

Good lord man NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #8

Now, now: blueridge3210 Feb 2014 #11

You can't just finish someone off - it's murder PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #15

A gun doesn't always kill. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #21

Maybe I missed it, but I read the FL SYG statute and it does not seem to say that deadly AlinPA Feb 2014 #20

It's buried in 0776.012 and 0776.041. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #23

Thanks, I'll look for that. AlinPA Feb 2014 #24

Under florida's law you can start a fight and then kill your opponent if you are getting your ass Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #22

There are two types of force - NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #26

nontheless, you can start a fight and then legally kill the person you attacked. Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #31

Only if you were in imminent risk of death and could not escape. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #32

yes. Some people (here included) conflate syg laws with rkba - but they are separate. Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #13

Agree. It's not a RKBA issue at all. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #17

Yes PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #19

Yes, it is.. X_Digger Feb 2014 #27

It is not flame bait PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #34

And another canard.. X_Digger Feb 2014 #37

I can't legally carry a sword, folding baton, etc. But any yahoo can get a gun toting permit. Hoyt Feb 2014 #44

Only a nutjob would openly carry a sword in public..... claiming it was for "self defense". rdharma Feb 2014 #84

That's the way I feel about gunz. People claim self-defense, but it's usually something else Hoyt Feb 2014 #91

I'm not sure about drowning someone or throwing them off a building ... spin Feb 2014 #48

I'm confused. What does "agnostic" have to do with this thread? lob1 Feb 2014 #54

agnostic PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #58

Thanks, PowertothePeople. I never heard the word used that way. lob1 Feb 2014 #61

I'm interested in the answers to this question: freshwest Feb 2014 #59

I am a fan of the burning alive SYG PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #64

I'm a Wham and Zoolander fan (a little) but I don't see a SYG there... n/t freshwest Feb 2014 #66

True, but the idea is PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #68

Teabaggers would love that option, the whole world is a violent riot in their eyes. Too much TV! n/t freshwest Feb 2014 #75

Yup, that is what RKBA and SYG have created; PowerToThePeople Feb 2014 #77

Honestly, the media has accomplished this just as well. NutmegYankee Feb 2014 #79

I believe most such laws simply specify the "use of lethal force." Lizzie Poppet Feb 2014 #65

I've always liked the M-79 w/ M-576 rounds for self-defense....... rdharma Feb 2014 #89

Uh-huh... Lizzie Poppet Feb 2014 #94

Oh, darned! I thought I could get me some luv from serious gun enthusiasts....... rdharma Feb 2014 #96

I believe the concept is, if you have a right to be where you are, Skip Intro Feb 2014 #104

Doesn't specify specific weapons madville Feb 2014 #105

What? And ruin a perfectly good anti-gun rant in GD? Eleanors38 Feb 2014 #107