Stand your ground but choose your battles wisely

[Strato]

I've lived in the Sunshine State most of my life. The summers can be brutal but the winters are nice and legislation here seems to lean in favor of the people and human rights. One piece of legislation in particular that relates to firearms is our "Right to stand your ground" statute. I've heard and read outbursts from several people in other states calling this foolish. Everyone is entitled to their own oppinion. If protecting what I worked for my whole life from some criminal who's never done an honest day's work is foolish then I guess you can call me foolish. Fact is any state that says you can't stand your ground is passing legislation that requires you to comply with a mugger, a car jacker or home invader. Such legislation not only aides criminals against law abiding citizens but also in fact encourages criminal activity by tying the hands of the victims. We must remember that criminals have no respect for the law nor do they follow any rules or guidelines. He will not hesitate to come at you with deadly force if he knows you're not equipped or allowed to defend yourself against him. If someone makes a demand you have the right to say "no." If he points a gun your way you can rest assured your life is in danger. Even if you comply there's a good chance he'll still kill you to reduce the risk of prosecution. There are inexpensive classes available so you can be properly trained as well as a lot of useful information on the internet that can help you be able to make the right decisions at the right time. You can still choose to comply with a criminal but keep in mind that compliance doesn't guarantee your safety. I'm not saying that being armed is any guarantee either, but wouldn't you rather have a chance than not? Having something you don't need is never a problem. Needing something you don't have is a big problem when that something can save the lives of you and your loved ones. Take some classes and arm your mind with decision making ability in an elevated hostile situation. Choose a weapon you can handle with the neccessary effectiveness if it's ever called upon and spend some time on the range getting some practice in. Don't just go out and buy a gun and think it automatically makes you safer. If you don't handle it responsibly you could put yourself or others in danger. I reitterate, take some classes, get some hands on experience and learn the responsibilities. I pray that I never have to use any of my guns for anything other than target practice but there is some piece of mind in knowing I won't be standing there helpless watching my loved ones being murdered just waiting my turn. We all spend our entire life paying a lot for auto insurance that most of us will never need. And auto insurance can't save a life. If you don't feel you can handle a gun responsibly which also includes keeping it out of the wrong hands or being able to make the right decisions to effectively save a life without endangering innocent bystanders then by all means do not get one but don't try to take our right to survival away from those of us who have the knowledge and ability to protect our lives and our loved ones as well as all we've worked for.

 

[flop-shank]

Interesting post. I particularly agree about the right to stand one's ground. Michigan is the same way as Florida. One neat thing about such laws is that if one is able to, and does retreat, and didn't have to, it ought to look very good to a jury, or better yet, make a prosecutor decide not to charge in the first place.

 

[OLDFED]

Hey Strato...wanna run for president?

 

[Strato]

Hey flop-shank thanks for joining the discussion. I completely agree that having the right to stand your ground doesn't mean you have to. Material possessions are not worth dying for but if you see a clear chance to get the upper hand it's good to have that choice. As far as protecting yourself or loved ones most of us would take any risk rather than stand by and let it happen. I'm originally from Michigan. Up near cadillac but moved to Florida in '74 when I was 12.

 

[Strato]

Hey scotsbrae, No I don't wanna run for president..LOL.. I'd lose too much sleep trying to deal with our economic woes while protecting our human rights. Besides I'd probably be assassinated for turning the government upside down. Though getting myself shot by an anti gun activist could make quite a statement.

 

[M29since14]

So what brought all that on?

You're preaching to the choir here, I'm sure you know. There is just no reasonable justification for laws that seek to require you to retreat from aggression when you are in any place where you have a legal right to be, and acting without other fault. We're clear about that here in Indiana, too - but that stuff is only of interest to lawyers. The rest of us know how we feel.

 

[Strato]

M29 I'm not trying to preach to anyone. There are still states that have those unjust laws and a lot of people that express their disgust with laws that allow us to stand our ground. I'm just expressing my view.

 

[M29since14]

...and a lot of people that express their disgust with laws that allow us to stand our ground. I'm just expressing my view.

This is the unfathomable part, and I even know fellow shooters who agree with that rubbish! And who bad-mouth the NRA, yet fail to understand they wouldn't own a single gun by now, were it not for the NRA.

Preach away - and make sure your elected representatives know how you feel.

 

[Velocity]

Castle Doctrine laws that enable one to stand their ground in their home, or car, serve a very useful purpose: enabling one to act fast when fast action is required to save your life. Of course it's not worth killing someone - even if they are a dirt bag - over a stereo, or some cash, but the POSSIBILITY and the ASSUMPTION that someone invading your home has evil on their mind, and could easily turn deadly if confronted makes it imperative that no time is wasted eliminating the threat... but the laws say that you must honestly believe that you are in immediate jeopardy of life or limb to use a firearm. That's sensible. It's why you can't shoot someone who sees your gun and is running away from you. But what the Castle Doctrine really does is that it enables you to respond to the assumption of a deadly threat immediately, before there's time to find out the hard way.

Of course I would never advocate breaking the law... but if someone is in my house, not invited, say in the middle of the night, it's really a no-brainer. My wife's life and mine come first. No questions asked. And none are required.

Of course if this situation ever occurred (thankfully it has not, and I hope it never does), right after the BANG is the phone call to 911 and then to my attorney.

My friends are invited to enjoy the best hospitality in my home at all times, and get handed a drink before they're through the door. Thieves, criminals and other dirt bags are welcome to the hospitality of my S&W, which they would be handed before they are through the window. Just saying.

 

[BarbC]

I believe the spirit of the Castle Doctrine is that you are no longer under the legal onus of the duty to retreat, e.g. climb out the bathroom window when an intruder has entered your home. The Castle Doctrine lessens the likelihood that the intruder's personal injury/wrongful death lawsuit will prevail in the event you felt threatened for your life but did not opt to climb out the aforesaid bathroom window while the intruder shot at you.

 

[elcruisr]

The way it works in FL is on several fronts. For one thing in the case of self defense you are presumed innocent unless they have evidence otherwise. That can save you big bucks.

If they sue you in civil court and you are found innocent, something which happens surprisingly fast here these days, once the innocent ruling is made they owe you all expenses. Not many lawyers are willing to try this any more here as their chances of collecting from perps family is about zero.

You can defend yourself or another against a forcible felony anywhere you have a legal right to be (as long as you are not acting illegaly either!) outside of the usual restrictions of schools, federal property, bars, etc.

That's a biggie. Since my wife is handicapped and completely unable to retreat this one literally may save our bacon if the worst ever happens. I've had some long talks with defense lawyers about this and was I ever glad when they passed expanded castle doctrine here.

Too bad it's not nation wide.

 

[h2coman]

This is an excellent ,well thought out and worded post. thanks

 

[Strato]

I just want to clarify something I said earlier. When I said "If you see a clear chance to get the upper hand, why not protect what's yours" I didn't mean by killing someone over your possessions. I meant if you can get the drop on him he will likely relinquish his weapon. At that point if he forces you to defend yourself with deadly force, that was his choice.

 

[Faulkner]

I just want to clarify something I said earlier. When I said "If you see a clear chance to get the upper hand, why not protect what's yours" I didn't mean by killing someone over your possessions. I meant if you can get the drop on him he will likely relinquish his weapon. At that point if he forces you to defend yourself with deadly force, that was his choice.

Back in the day stealing horses was a hanging offense, and it deterred a lot of would be horse theives from doing so. I'm thinking if stealing carried a little more danger with it today some of that nonesense could be deterred. I'm not proposing we kill folks we catch stealing, but I wouldn't be against it either.

 

[Strato]

Holy Hollowpoint Batman At least knowing he might be confronted by the rightful owner of what he's trying to steal, prepared to defend himself with any means neccessary should be somewhat of a deterence itself.