Fla. House Approves Bill on Self-Defense

[Rose Siding]

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - People who feel threatened anywhere they have a legal right to be — even on the street or at a baseball game — could "meet force with force" to defend themselves without fear of prosecution or liability under a bill passed overwhelmingly Tuesday by the Florida House.

The measure essentially extends a right Floridians already have in their home or car. Under present law, however, people attacked anywhere else are supposed to do what they can to avoid escalating the situation and can use deadly force only after they've tried to retreat.

"I'm sorry, people, but if I'm attacked I shouldn't have a duty to retreat," said the bill's sponsor, state Rep. Dennis Baxley. "That's a good way to get shot in the back."

The measure passed 94-20. It had already passed the Senate and now heads to Gov. Jeb Bush, who has not said whether he will sign it. It was the top priority of the National Rifle Association in Florida this year.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050405/ap_on_re_us/deadly_force

[sui generis]

1. oh goody

now they'll be shooting drag queens because they were "threatened" by a man in heels.

Welcome back to the wild wild west.

[Sentath]

2. Look, I don't own a gun

Heck, I live so far back in the closet that it'd have to be a rifle w/ scope to be any good to me anyway.

But, do they realize that this opens opportunities for the Pink Pistols too?

[Rose Siding]

3. I was wondering if the bill includes protection for aggressive police

Suppose an innocent citizen feels threatened by a cop and shoots :shrug:

[0007]

6. View the video, Rose and see where you'll go and be treated for

shooting a cop. Well worth your time watching and learning about how wonderful our system is indeed.

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article8451.htm

[icymist]

42. You're right sui generis. This is a bad law.

Some redneck might say that the way you act and dress is a threat to them. I've seen this happen in Illinois where a cross-dresser was told by police that if someone were to beat them up that it would be the transvestite that would be arrested for causing a public disturbance. Nope. A law like this only gives every wacko out there a self-righteous justification to take the law into their own hands. These nut-jobs also believe abortion to be violence. What retaliation would be let loosed in that case? Not a good law and a bad precedence.

[tubbacheez]

4. I don't suppose anyone did a study on how many crime victims...

... actually claimed they allowed themselves to be attacked out of "fear of legal repercussions" if they did anything else.

[The White Tree]

5. Lovely. I was just in Florida for my step-brothers wedding

The day after the wedding one of the guests who was some relation to my step-mom (a cousin I think) came over to my Dad's house to drop off my other step-brother.

My Dad and I were watching basketball at the time and the guy comes up to my dad. opens his coat and says, "Hey, I hope your not offended that I brought my gun in your house".

Good to think this guy will be walking around with even less restraint on what he does with his gun.

[seasat]

7. This is a scary bill...

It leaves open the interpretation of what constitutes a threat. Imagine the escalation in road rage incidences. Someone feels that tail gater is threatening their life, blam.

Someone gets to arguing after a few drinks, there's some pushing, cussing, and shoving, blam.

A parent corners a rebelious child. He threatens the child, the child pulls out a pistol, blam.

I'm not for banning firearms (it won't do much good) but this bill basically turns FL into a stereotypical movie version of the Wild West. I don't believe in carrying a weapon on my person so does anyone know of a good supplier for bullet proof vests in S. FL?

[Up2Late]

39. A bullet proof vest won't do any good with a Law like this...

...that "allows people to 'stand their ground'" and shoot your fellow Human point blank in the face.:hide:

This Bill is totally insane.

But, hey, it makes sense to Jebby, who grew up in Texas, where some of the Bars actually have signs, when you walk in, that say "No Guns Allowed.":crazy:

[Tempest]

8. Will this bill legalize school shootings?

All a student has to do is claim he was being bullied and met force with force.

[tubbacheez]

9. "legalize" isn't the right word. It expands an existing defense.

Every shooter could CLAIM self-defense against some perceived threat, even prior to this law being proposed.

Previously, that claim was only allowed in certain situations... like being at home. This new bill adds more situations where the claim would be considered.




But people should know that, even if the claim is made, it still must be proven in court.

Merely claiming this defense doesn't automatically make your shooting a justified one.



Of course, this puts the burden of determining what is and isn't a justifiable shooting in the hands of a jury, instead of writing it explicitly into "black letter" law.

And juries can be manipulated much more easily than judges can be influenced to reinterpret law.

[primavera]

38. It helps if the only one who can refute your account is dead

That should make getting through court a little easier at least.

[tubbacheez]

79. Yes, if there were no other witnesses, then yes one could commit

The Perfect Crime (tm).




But then again, if there really were no witnesses, that has long been the case.

[Toots]

78. No in America supposedly you don't have to prove anything

The prosecution has to prove you were wrong. You don't have to prove a damn thing.... Innocent until proved guilty used to be the American way until the Patriot Act anyway....

[tubbacheez]

80. That's overly simplistic. Yes, the prosecution must prove...

that 1). a crime was committed, and 2). that you committed the crime. The law spells out a laundry list of "elements" that must be satisfied to get a conviction.

The prosecution does its presentation and then the jury decides on questions of fact, while the judge decides on questions of law.





In the shoes of the defendant, you're right, you do not have to prove your innocence.

(The law doesn't really care about innocence, actually. It only cares about proving guilt. That's the presumption of innocence in action.)



However, if you claim self-defense as justification for shooting someone, then you've just admitted that 1). the crime was committed, and 2). you committed it.

The prosecution has proved its case, and with your help.

Having done that, the burden of proof now shifts to you to show that your situation fits one of the lawful exceptions, specifically the self-defense defense.





It is a mistake to assume a defendant never has to do anything. In certain simple cases, yes, that's true.

But there are plenty of situations where the defense must actively deny one or more elements of the prosecution's case. Sometimes the goal is to establish reasonable doubt. Sometimes the goal is to claim a lawful exception to the general law.

Etc.

[patcox2]

87. The burden never actually shifts.

And you don't have to admit the crime to argue either excuse or justification. In the event you are charged with murder, for example, the prosecution bears the burden of proving each of the elements of the crime.

However, you can put on a defense of self-defense without conceding the murder charge. Your self-defense argument does not excuse the prosecution of having to prove the murder, and your self-defense arguments cannot be used against you. In fact, you are allowed to use alternative arguments,, i.e., I didn't murder anyone, and if someone died, it was self-defense.

With regard to proving the elements of self-defense, the defendant does not have to prove them. Their is an initial burden on the defendant to raise a sufficient question as to whether there is a valid claim of self-defense, and then the burden shifts to the prosecution to disprove self-defense as part of the prosecution case.

[tubbacheez]

89. Thank you for the better info.

"Their is an initial burden on the defendant to raise a sufficient question as to whether there is a valid claim of self-defense..."


That's the part I was originally trying to cover.

Thanks for the straight dope on this.

[Up2Late]

10. (New Florida) Law Expands Right to Kill in Self-Defense (Reuters)

(This is totally Insane!)

Law Expands Right to Kill in Self-Defense

Tue Apr 5, 2005 01:58 PM ET

By Michael Peltier

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (Reuters) - People in Florida will be allowed to kill in self-defense on the street without trying to flee under a new law passed by state politicians on Tuesday that critics say will bring a Wild West mentality and innocent deaths. The Florida House of Representatives, citing the need to allow people to "stand their ground," voted 94-20 to codify and expand court rulings that already allow people to use deadly force to protect themselves in their homes without first trying to escape.

The new bill goes further by allowing citizens to use deadly force in a public place if they have a reasonable belief they are in danger of death or great bodily harm. It applies to all means of force that may result in death, although the legislative debate focused on guns. The "Stand Your Ground" bill passed the Senate last week on a 39-0 vote and now goes to Republican Gov. Jeb Bush, who indicated he will sign it. "This is about meeting force with force," said House sponsor Republican state Rep. Dennis Baxley of Ocala. "If I'm attacked, I should not have to retreat."

Critics have few objections to allowing people to protect themselves from intruders in their homes but said the provision making it easier to use deadly force in public gives gun owners a license to kill. "For a House that talks about the culture of life it's ironic that we would be devaluing life in this bill," said Democratic state Rep. Dan Gelber of Miami Beach. "That's exactly what we're doing."

Like many states, Florida courts have ruled that people have a right to defend themselves in their homes. Florida courts have expanded that "Castle Doctrine" to include employees in their workplaces and drivers who are attacked in their automobiles. Outside the home, however, courts have ruled that most victims must at least attempt to escape before using deadly force, a provision gun advocates say puts victims at greater risk. The proposal removes that requirement if a person has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Critics say the measure could lead to racially motivated killings and promote deadly escalations of arguments. "All this bill will do is sell more guns and possibly turn Florida into the OK Corral," said Democratic state Rep. Irv Slosberg of Boca Raton.

© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.

[bluestateguy]

11. I would have voted for the bill

People who are attacked should not have to fear persecution by some mousy prosecutor for defending themselves when they have been assaulted by a criminal.

This law will protect women who are abused by violent husbands and boyfriends. This law will protect gay people being attacked by Confederate flag waving, "Christian" fundamentalists who attack them.

[cprise]

13. Only if juries

...think of husbands and fundies as life-threatening. More likely, this will just intensify the bias against blacks in the court system... effectively making it open-season on "that black guy running towards me".

[MrBenchley]

15. When the GOP says "self defense"

they mean open season on dark-skinned people.

[Dark]

21. The problem is it is too vague: 'Reasonable suspicion' is too

broad. I understand the heart of the law, and it is well-intentioned.

But it is too dangerous to say that 'if you feel you're in danger, you can kill someone.'

If you don't believe that people say they're in immediate danger to justify killing. . .

just look at Iraq.

[salin]

35. Wonder what about gang violence and drive bys?

"I drove by the crowd, and saw some dude (or dudette) from a rival gang who looked me in the eye and reached for his/her pocket... I had to shoot (from the moving car) first...."

Having lived in an area and an era where drivebys common - and where a former student's dad was murdered by one (they were gunning for my former student and shot at the house... caught the dad by mistake...)

Just wondering how this might work in such cases?

[zanne]

84. Are you sure about the domestic violence angle?

I wondered about that, but I hadn't heard anything. I'm inclined to think it wouldn't protect women at home--just a hunch.

[zipplewrath]

86. I have

Domestic violence doesn't just happen in a home, and it doesn't just happen to wives. This is going to "protect" folks who are being attacked by their spouses, anywhere. This could be a good thing, as right now many men are fighting up hill battles because they are perceived to have used excessive force in responding. They are basically expected to take flight. I am a bit concerned however that it will be used in reverse and protect an aggressor, especially if they are successful in actually killing the spouse, as there will be little testimony to determine who started what and the vast benefit of the doubt will go to the one left alive.

[slackmaster]

12. Tempest in a teapot

I'll be very surprised if the number of self-defense actions in Florida changes at all as a result of this minor change in the law.

They're actually made it look more like California law. Pretty much every reference to use of deadly force in our Penal Code has an exception for self-defense, which has been held by the courts to mean any situation in which you reasonably fear for your life or your safety.

[ClintonTyree]

19. I used to live there............

and believe me, there is an element in Florida (and a quite LARGE element) that will see this an endorsement of vigilantly justice. Florida is already like the wild west. There is no license needed for a handgun in Florida, if you take a 2 hour course you can carry a concealed weapon, EVERYONE has a handgun in their glove-box. Up until now, the thought of a lengthy trial or imprisonment was the only deterrent to keeping things somewhat civil down there. This has removed he final obstacle for anyone thinking twice about shooting someone. In essence, in many Floridians eyes, they have just legalized murder. It'll become a "he said, she said" situation, with "she said" laying in a pool of blood.
I'll never set foot in that state gain.

[Up2Late]

23. Yup, Hey, You "eye balling" me Boy?

:hide:

[Baclava]

24. Concealed carry license is most certainly required in FL

LMAO! Wild West?

http://www.packing.org/state/index.jsp/florida

How do I apply for a Permit/License?


Request an application by mail or from state's website.
Application packet contains detailed instructions including return envelope. State has 90 days to process application.

Documents required

790.06 License to Carry Concealed Weapon or Firearm.

Application form (2 pages)which requires notarized signature
$117 cashier's check/money order/certified check/Personal Check(new)
Training documentation; eight different records can be accepted such as DD214, NRA/State training course, hunter safety, etc.
Fingerprint card
One passport sized photo

[slackmaster]

27. Anyone who treats it as legalized murder is in for a nasty surprise

Like California law it seems pretty clear to me what defines a valid self-defense situation.

There is no license needed for a handgun in Florida, if you take a 2 hour course you can carry a concealed weapon...

I haven't seen the Florida CCW class, but if it's like any of the others I've seen it should put a strong emphasis on what is and is not legal to do.

This has removed he final obstacle for anyone thinking twice about shooting someone.

The rule taught in every self-defense class I've taken is that if you have to think twice you are almost certainly in a no-shoot situation.

It'll become a "he said, she said" situation, with "she said" laying in a pool of blood.

That's not materially different than things were before the law. If the state sees reason to prosecute, they'll prosecute. There will still be a heavy burden on the shooter to establish in court that the shooting was justified. "He said/she said" generally doesn't cut it even in Texas.

[MrBenchley]

14. Pandering to a handful of armed neurotics

Worth noting that not so long ago one of the permit holders shot a kid who rang his doorbell....

Remember too....that the CCW law has been an utter failure in cutting crime, which is how it was peddled to the public by the gun lobby.

[ClintonTyree]

20. Oh, it's MUCH more than a handful.....

believe me. EVERYBODY owns a handgun down there, at least in the north and sounth of the state, I'm not sure about the middle.

[MrBenchley]

48. One more great reason to avoid Florida...

By the way, although the state modified its law to hand out pistol permits like candy, I see no provision here that the shooter has to have a permit...

[Baclava]

26. Just like ye olde days in the Gungeon?

;)

[MrBenchley]

49. Yup...

A handful of trigger happy loonies pimping for something that is appalling to decent sane people....

[ixion]

16. 'preemptive self-defense' coming to a town near you!

The Beat Farmers have a song 'Gun Sale at the Church' which seems more and more appropriate each passing day.

[POAS]

28. Damn, you took the words out of my mouth

[mbperrin]

17. Good to see the "culture of life"

being expanded! /delusion

[Malikshah]

18. Shades of South Park

And the 1st season hunting episode...


"He's Coming Right at us!! Shoot!!!!"

*going out to get kevlar suit"

[hedda_foil]

22. That's gonna do wonders for tourism.

[Synnical]

25. Please DU this poll

South Florida Sun Sentinel

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/
(Middle right side of page)

Legislators have passed a bill allowing people to "meet force with force" if they feel threatened and ending the requirement that people first try to avoid a fight. Should Gov. Bush sign it?

-Yes. People should have an absolute right to defend themselves.

-No. The bill encourages violent behavior instead of peaceful solutions to conflicts.

-I'm not sure.

Currently:

Yes 61.6%
No 31.3%
Not Sure 7.1%

[slackmaster]

29. Be sure to vote in the Marlins poll as well

How about them Marlins?

:D

[bear425]

32. Freeped. What has this world come to?

Legislators have passed a bill allowing people to "meet force with force" if they feel threatened and ending the requirement that people first try to avoid a fight. Should Gov. Bush sign it?

67.7%
Yes. People should have an absolute right to defend themselves. (2728 responses)

26.4%
No. The bill encourages violent behavior instead of peaceful solutions to conflicts. (1063 responses)

5.9%
I'm not sure. (238 responses)

4029 total responses

[Synnical]

34. Totally Freeped - this is the Blue Part of the State!

[bear425]

36. I know! I live here, too. Crazy.

And, btw, you missed our S.Fl meetup. Hope you're feeling better?! Here's us being silly:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=145x4231

[Synnical]

37. Thanks for noticing

Had a relapse. Needed to just sleep. Visited my doc today. And what a tale that is!

She all of a sudden wants me to undergo all shades of tests! Had a Student Doctor with her, and informed me that my insurance carrier (Aetna) demands that I see her regularly. I've been her patient on and off since 1991. She knows me. She knows I'm very healthy.

I still have a red throat, and she usually prescribes me amoxicillain. Today, she gave me a script for Cipro. That's still patented, isn't it?

I intend to call her tommorrow, away, from the "Student Doctor".

:-)

[Up2Late]

41. I live in Central FL 1989-94, do you remember the German Tourists...

...that were Shot and Killed at a Rest Stop along I-4 around 1990-91?

Did they ever find the criminals that did that?:shrug:

[democrat in Tallahassee]

90. Yes -Young and Stupid Black Kids

One of them they tried four times till they convicted him...

I assume they will be in jail forever..

[NYC]

45. The poll is poorly worded.

Given the option of shooting someone or running away, I would run away. I believe I have a right and a responsibility to defend myself.

I could answer both yes and no, but yes doesn't mean I should shoot someone if I have the option of running away.

It's a poorly worded poll, so it doesn't require Freeping to give poor results.

[Up2Late]

40. It's getting worse

Legislators have passed a bill allowing people to "meet force with force" if they feel threatened and ending the requirement that people first try to avoid a fight. Should Gov. Bush sign it?

72.4%
Yes. People should have an absolute right to defend themselves. (3834 responses)

22.7%
No. The bill encourages violent behavior instead of peaceful solutions to conflicts. (1204 responses)

4.9%
I'm not sure. (258 responses)

5296 total responses
10:40pm EDT

[teryang]

30. 10-20-life: do so at your own risk

The facts of life are these in Florida: you can all the laws you want, if you are chosen to be prosecuted by the State Attorneys office you have a big, big, big legal problem regardless of the justification you have for using a firearm in the commission of a charged crime.

These bills are political grandstanding for the most part. Anyone that has really studied violence and self defense KNOWS that retreat is almost always the best course of action where it is available. Standing your ground is usually foolish and is a sterotypical John Wayne response that usually gets you into serious legal trouble.

[slackmaster]

31. Agree 100%+ on all counts

Yes, it's political grandstanding.

Anyone that has really studied violence and self defense KNOWS that retreat is almost always the best course of action where it is available. Standing your ground is usually foolish and is a sterotypical John Wayne response that usually gets you into serious legal trouble.

One instructor made everything clear for me - Use deadly force only to protect something you would be willing to die for.

Even if you are morally and legally right in your use of force (the "first fight"), you have to be prepared to face the second and third fights - Criminal charges, then lawsuits and all the other crap that may come down on you. If you happened to shoot the errant son of a politically connected person or someone prominent in your community you are in deep, deep shit even if you get cleared on criminal and civil matters.

[Placebo]

91. This is pretty sad.

[Catt03]

33. This state is f****** sick, sick, sick

four years ago, while protesting at the vote count center for Palm Beach County recount, we were threatened by Delay imports and had to have police escort to leave the site.

So, if this bill were valid then, we could have shot them because we were threatened with harm...right?

You know, if I were a person of sound mind, I would never give this state tourist dollars. If I were an employer of a large corporation, I would move all my employees and their families out, just to protect them.

:banghead:

[NickB79]

43. Anyone else tired of the "Wild West" predictions yet?

I remember when that was predicted in the late 80's when Florida became the first state to offer widely available conceal-carry permits. I remember hearing this said when other states followed Florida and relaxed their CCW laws as well. Today there are something like 33+ states that have eased their CCW laws.

Despite all of this, murder rates are far lower today than they were in the 80's and early 90's. Can we come up with a new scary phrase please, this one is getting tired.

[Malikshah]

44. Get some rest,-- because this IS different

CCW is one thing.

Being given a blank check to shoot first with CCW or otherwise and ask questions later is something completely different.

I could carry a gun all day with the proper licensing-- big whoop-- it's when it's used that makes the difference.

As a floridian, this is just sick.

BTW-- is the asswipe who put this through the same one who's trying to give students the right to sue their profs for "untolerated beliefs" etc.???

Boy-- looks like someone is bucking for governor in 2006....

[icymist]

46. Yeah, Imagine all those wack-jobs at the Terri Schiavo circus

packing guns?

[NickB79]

47. The bill says it would be legal to "meet force with force"

Implying that you CANNOT shoot first, ask questions later. You must first come under threat before you can fire in self-defense.

That said, I do not agree with the law as it is written. I felt the previous requirement, that you exhaust all other avenues of escape before it becomes ok to shoot in self-defense, was reasonable. Shooting in self-defense should be your last option, not your first.

[Malikshah]

92. The problem remains that "force" is not defined

in either case-- it's a poorly written law that will lead to disaster.

[MrBenchley]

50. Not since they came true....

"I remember when that was predicted in the late 80's when Florida became the first state to offer widely available conceal-carry permits."
And the plain fact is that despite the idiotic claims fo the trigger happy that handing out pistol permits would cut crime, violent crime went up 31% between 1987 when the law was passed, and 1993, when nationwide gun control passed. It then declined in Florida but at a much slower rate than it did in states with sane gun laws.

"Today there are something like 33+ states that have eased their CCW laws."
It's truly wonderful what blood money and the GOP can do....and not even the citizens of Missouri rejecting such a bill in a referendum stopped the Republicans from ramming it through there anyway. And the US suffers gun violence at a rate unseen pretty much everywhere in the civilized world.

"murder rates are far lower today than they were in the 80's and early 90's."
Thank the Brady Bill.

"Can we come up with a new scary phrase please, this one is getting tired."
What's really getting tired is gun lobby propaganda.

[ryban]

51. Bill allowing people to "meet force with force" heads to governor (Bush)

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Tuesday he intends to sign a bill that would allow people who feel threatened on the street, in a bar, at a ball game - or just about anywhere - to "meet force with force" to defend themselves without fear of being prosecuted.

The measure (SB 436), the top priority of the National Rifle Association in Florida this year, passed 94-20 in the House. It had already passed the Senate.

The bill essentially extends and codifies a right Floridians already have in their home or car, saying that there's no need to retreat before fighting back. People attacked in their homes generally don't have to back off. But in public spaces, deadly force can only be used after trying to retreat.

"I'm sorry people, but if I'm attacked I shouldn't have a duty to retreat," said the bill's sponsor, Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala. "That's a good way to get shot in the back."

<snip>

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/apnews/stories/040505/D899FN9O0.shtml

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

52. Time to oil up the .40.

[renaissanceguy]

53. So if a bunch of homophobes are gay bashing me,

I have the right to shoot them?

Cool!

[icymist]

59. Watch out there Tex, they could turn that around on you.

Some redneck might say that the way you act and dress is a threat to them. I've seen this happen in Illinois where a cross-dresser was told by police that if someone were to beat them up that it would be the transvestite that would be arrested for causing a public disturbance. Nope. A law like this only gives every wacko out there a self-righteous justification to take the law into their own hands. These nut-jobs also believe abortion to be violence. What retaliation would be let loosed in that case? Not a good law and a bad precedence.

[roguevalley]

54. another reason to vacation some place else. tell me, how many

men in Florida are actually pencil dicks or is this a fluke with these guys?

[Rose Siding]

55. some discussion of that story here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1369973&mesg_id=1369973

[satya]

56. Well, this is an interesting interpretation of "Turn the other cheek".

Don't think I'll be going to Disneyworld.:scared:

[Erika]

57. The GOP Culture of Life

John Paul II is saying he should have spent more time here.

[mcscajun]

58. Does Florida have an lax 'carry' law?

I know some states do.

Damn, can Florida GET much scarier?

[Massacure]

61. What do carry laws have to do with it?

If someone shoots at you, you shoot back at the son of a bitch. There isn't anything wrong with that as long as there is accountability in place.

[mcscajun]

62. Here's what carry laws have to do with it:

In some states, very few citizens have the right to carry a weapon in the streets. Obviously, criminals don't give a rat's ass about the law and carry them anyway.

Some states have "open carry" laws, like Virginia. You have the right to carry a gun, so long as it's not concealed.

I ask about the "carry" law in Florida, 'cause I'd like to know what folks are up against with this new development. Will they know who's carrying and who isn't?

For myself, there's almost Nothing On This Earth that would get me to visit Florida; so it doesn't matter to me on a personal level. But I still am concerned, okay?

[liberalmuse]

60. Who was that wuss who said,...

'Turn the other cheek?' I guess it's back to the thousands of years-old tribal law of an eye for an eye. Next thing you know, the debtor's prisons, stocks in the public square and child labor will be back. I think the Bush cabal reincarnated from the Dark Ages and that's where they're going to drag us all.

[bunny planet]

82. Is noone going to mention that innocent bystanders can also be harmed

if people feel they've been given broader license to shoot first in a public place. There are others to be considered in a situation besides the aggressor and the aggresee. My family lives in Florida. This just scares the sh*t out of me.

[kskiska]

63. WP: Lawmakers In Fla. Back Public Use of Deadly Force

TALLAHASSEE, April 5 -- People in Florida will be allowed to kill in self-defense on the street without trying to flee under a new measure passed Tuesday that critics say will bring a Wild West mentality and innocent deaths.

The Florida House, citing the need to allow people to "stand their ground," voted 94 to 20 to codify and expand court rulings that allow people to use deadly force to protect themselves in their homes without first trying to escape.

The new bill goes further by allowing citizens to use deadly force in a public place if they have a reasonable belief they are in danger of death or great bodily harm. It applies to all means of force that may result in death, although the legislative debate focused on guns.

(snip)

Critics have few objections to allowing people to protect themselves from intruders in their homes but said the provision making it easier to use deadly force in public gives gun owners a license to kill. They added that the measure could lead to racially motivated killings and promote deadly escalations of arguments.

"For a House that talks about the culture of life, it's ironic that we would be devaluing life in this bill," Rep. Dan Gelber (D-Miami Beach) said. "That's exactly what we're doing.

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28337-2005Apr5.html

[imaginary girl]

64. Coming soon to a state near you: preemptive self defense n/t

[tinrobot]

65. I thought Jeb embraced the Culture of Life.

I guess shooting people is OK as long as they don't have feeding tubes.

[Tux]

66. True

Is it just me or are they giving permission to the Evangelcials to kill anyone they want?

[Benson]

67. I actually support this.

This is a refinement of existing law. It benefits the lawfull gun owner, not the crook. Legalizing concealed weapons hasn't increased violence in any state that allowed it...This won't increase violence either.

Knee jerk, anti-gun reactions do not dismiss the fact that violent criminals are out there. The police are NOT there to protect you. The police are best AFTER a crime when they can peice together the evidence and catch the crook.

You are on your own for the 5 to 15 minutes it takes for the police to respond to your call. A lot can happen in that time. This law protects a person defending himself...A little more freedom this this reguard hurts no one but the bad guy.

[w4rma]

68. I'm pro-gun and I do *not* support this. This type of BS is going to allow

folks to murder one another on the streets without legal punishment. Think about how this bill can be abused.

[drdtroit]

71. ?

[scurvy_n_disastrous]

73. madmadmad!!!!

and learn to spell before shooting your *** off!

[vpigrad]

69. Florida has completely gone off the deep end!

It's now dangerous to go out in public. This will hurt their tourism industry.

[madrchsod]

70. ok let`s just strap on some six shooters!

what the fuck is this concealed bullshit? ain`t man or woman enough to show what ya got? just like the fictional old west-single or double holster -count to three and draw...really is there any dumber state than florida? thank god all the dumb asses moved down there....

[LoZoccolo]

72. If I was in a situation where I thought I might get killed...

...the last thing I'd want to think about is whether or not I'm doing everything necessary to have an airtight alibi regarding trying to flee.

[wellst0nev0ter]

74. I Can Picture It Now, The Perfect Crime.

Just invite some schmoe into your house, kill him, plant a gun break a few windows and give a sob story to the police of how the guy tried to break into your house.





ijits :eyes:

[radfringe]

75. bibbity bobbity BANG BANG

add bullet proof vests (or ears?) to your packing list if you're going to Florida..

does this mean that Cinderella can shoot her wicked stepmother/sisters and get away with it?


meanwhile -- Fee Fie Foe Foon, I smell a new cartoon.... (am working on it...)

[colonel odis]

76. i suspect this means criminals will just make sure they're armed

when they commit a street crime. and since they'll have the element of surprise more often than not, there will probably be an increase in victims shot on the street.

just because a gun owner now has the "right" to shoot someone who confronts him doesn't mean that gun owner will know diddly shit about how to use a handgun. sounds like just another way for the nra to make sure lots and lots and lots of guns are sold.

putzes.

[wakeme2008]

77. Make Drive by Shooting legal law

If gang A drives by gang B they can blow them away and it would be legal under this law as long as

A) It was legal for them to have a gun in the first place.

B) They can "claim" they feared for their life....

[bunny planet]

81. Welcome to 'Deadwood'

This is INSANE.

[JamboGuide]

83. MORE Hurricanes!!

Then maybe some more of these ppl wil DIEEEEEEE>.........!!!!!!!!!!

[LoganW]

85. I saw them damn bloods

and I know they always be packin heat and I felt scared, so I took em out before they could take me out....

Gangs are gonna love this one.

[truthisfreedom]

88. this is the photo of jeb they're running with this story

what a goofball.

[maddezmom]

93. he takes after his momma

Remove the tie and add a pearl necklace.:scared:

[orleans]

94. "Culture of life".......my ass!

yee-haw!

wild, wild south!

giddy-up, platypus!


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1557282,00.html

"Irv Slosberg, Democrat representative of Boca Raton, said: "All this Bill will do is sell more guns and possibly turn Florida into the OK Corral." "

"pro-life" ... my ass!