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: Riddle me this NRA... [View all]Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)10. Stand your ground is not " I'm allowed to kill anybody"
Gee, the law pretty much says I can, as long as I honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
Actually, it says PRECISELY that.
Here is the SYG law in Michigan
SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 309 of 2006
780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2.
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
Act 309 of 2006
780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions.
Sec. 2.
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:
(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
I am eating my waffle and drinking my coffee, dillgently NOT COMMITTING A CRIME. My possession of a firearm is quite legal, as is the weapon of the guy walking in.
We BOTH "honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual."
The language of the law is plain. Now the pinkos-Al Qaeda lovers at the police are going to argue about the word" "reasonably" in the law, but that is where I expect the NRA to fight to the death (someone's else's, of course).
Also, we are both white, all the dead bystanders were Black, and we are both FBI agents.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
66 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
NRA types always care what multinational foreign governments have agreed to.
IronLionZion
Jun 2014
#4
The mere thought that they may be deprived of their liberty for any reason
IronLionZion
Jun 2014
#52
Add to your scenario, the idiot, I mean Patriot, with the rifle has it in a ready position....
Hassin Bin Sober
Jun 2014
#12
"Gee" ...I'm always in awe of that, both argumentative, and childish at the same time.
NM_Birder
Jun 2014
#62
The NRA considers these peoples loss as a small price to pay for the gun nuts to carry and shoot
liberal N proud
Jun 2014
#6
Again, make a list of "left wing anti-gun advocates who commit murder with a firearm"
Kelvin Mace
Jun 2014
#59