Stand-your-ground law

[MikeK]

I'm standing my ground whether or not it's the law. If the perp is dead, he can't claim I didn't try to run away.

Police investigators often diagram scenes where deadly force incidents took place. If you have a duty to retreat from a threat but you use deadly defensive force instead, and that can be shown, you can be prosecuted and/or sued.

 

[MikeK]

Until recently, here in Pennsylvania you had to retreat first if it was daylight, you didn't have to at night.

Now all that's changed. When you're on your property and you're being attacked, you don't have to retreat, you can "Stand Your Ground".

Why is that?

Well, have you ever heard of Property Rights?

New Jersey is still a Duty-To-Retreat state -- as well as having some of the most repressive gun-laws in the U.S.

In New Jersey, a BB-gun is considered a firearm. So is a slingshot.

 

[PredFan]

I'm standing my ground whether or not it's the law. If the perp is dead, he can't claim I didn't try to run away.

Police investigators often diagram scenes where deadly force incidents took place. If you have a duty to retreat from a threat but you use deadly defensive force instead, and that can be shown, you can be prosecuted and/or sued.

Except that I will claim I tried to. He won't be alive to disagree.

 

[sealybobo]

Stand-your-ground law ​

A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity to criminal charges and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as an affirmative defense, permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justifies the accused's conduct.

More than half of the states in the United States have adopted the Castle doctrine, stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations. "Stand Your Ground", "Line In The Sand" or "No Duty To Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist; such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly.

Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

 

[MikeK]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

 

[anotherlife]

The stand your ground law is common sense. Why don't all states have it? And why does it have a precondition that the attacker has to be threatening enough for that?

For example, if a little unthreatening attacker burglarizes your house, you can't shoot him in the act until his gigantic big bully brother arrives and breaks in too? Why not?

 

[sealybobo]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

You didnt see any video of treyvon and Zimmerman but a jury believed George was in fear for his life

 

[MikeK]

You didnt see any video of treyvon and Zimmerman but a jury believed George was in fear for his life

How do you know what I believed?

 

[SavannahMann]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

You didnt see any video of treyvon and Zimmerman but a jury believed George was in fear for his life

Zimmerman did not invoke stand your ground. It would have been inapplicable since he had pursued Trayvon. Zimmerman's entire defense was the argument of self defense. A right which existed prior to stand your ground.

 

[sealybobo]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

You didnt see any video of treyvon and Zimmerman but a jury believed George was in fear for his life

Zimmerman did not invoke stand your ground. It would have been inapplicable since he had pursued Trayvon. Zimmerman's entire defense was the argument of self defense. A right which existed prior to stand your ground.

I remember what Zimmerman's lawyers did. They didn't use stand your ground as their defense but did use its arguments in the trial.

My point is that the reporter who was body slammed could have shot the politician who did it

 

[American_Jihad]

Stand-your-ground law ​

A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity to criminal charges and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as an affirmative defense, permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justifies the accused's conduct.

More than half of the states in the United States have adopted the Castle doctrine, stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations. "Stand Your Ground", "Line In The Sand" or "No Duty To Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist; such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly.

Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

And vice versa, I heard they both went to the ground, dismissal...

 

[sealybobo]

Stand-your-ground law ​

A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity to criminal charges and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as an affirmative defense, permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justifies the accused's conduct.

More than half of the states in the United States have adopted the Castle doctrine, stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations. "Stand Your Ground", "Line In The Sand" or "No Duty To Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist; such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly.

Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

And vice versa, I heard they both went to the ground, dismissal...

Treyvon and Zimmerman both went to the ground but Zimmerman was able to murder his attacker.

There were witnesses. Technically you all know the reporter could have shot the politician and walked, based on your own Alec legislation.

 

[American_Jihad]

Stand-your-ground law ​

A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity to criminal charges and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as an affirmative defense, permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justifies the accused's conduct.

More than half of the states in the United States have adopted the Castle doctrine, stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations. "Stand Your Ground", "Line In The Sand" or "No Duty To Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist; such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly.

Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

And vice versa, I heard they both went to the ground, dismissal...

Treyvon and Zimmerman both went to the ground but Zimmerman was able to murder his attacker.

There were witnesses. Technically you all know the reporter could have shot the politician and walked, based on your own Alec legislation.

Poor boo boo, technically by salunsky's rules your a moron...

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Texas has Castle Law and it extends to your auto and business. Two times I came close but the perp both times ran off.

I favor these laws and believe every state should have it.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

I can't run or walk fast. So I carry a gun if it is not to heavy and I don't stand well, so don't talk to me on a bad day or I'll stand or sit my ground. Just remember two or more people can kill you with their bear hands. This is just cause.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

Its a little behind the event to make that sort of decision don't you think?

 

[sealybobo]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

Its a little behind the event to make that sort of decision don't you think?

My point is if I'm a reporter I'd have one hand on the mic and one on my gun and I'd ask the tough questions and technically the reporter could have shot that politician for fear for his life.

 

[American_Jihad]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

Its a little behind the event to make that sort of decision don't you think?

My point is if I'm a reporter I'd have one hand on the mic and one on my gun and I'd ask the tough questions and technically the reporter could have shot that politician for fear for his life.

Bobo, as usual you have no point unless it' yo head, by the way thank the folks in Michigan for the Trump vote...

 

[sealybobo]

Do you think the reporter would have been justified if he pulled out a gun and shot Greg Gianforte? I do.

I haven't seen any video of the attack. But I'm assuming justification for using deadly force would depend on whether the attack was sufficiently violent as to pose a serious threat of injury or death.

I've heard two things; "body slam" and "grabbed by the throat" but I haven't seen any video.

Its a little behind the event to make that sort of decision don't you think?

My point is if I'm a reporter I'd have one hand on the mic and one on my gun and I'd ask the tough questions and technically the reporter could have shot that politician for fear for his life.

Bobo, as usual you have no point unless it' yo head, by the way thank the folks in Michigan for the Trump vote...

I would thank my neighbor but he blew his brains out on inauguration day.

Weird because he was so happy.

Turns out he was struggling with his homosexuality.

Trump supporters are fucked in the head.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Until recently, here in Pennsylvania you had to retreat first if it was daylight, you didn't have to at night.

Now all that's changed. When you're on your property and you're being attacked, you don't have to retreat, you can "Stand Your Ground".

Why is that?

Well, have you ever heard of Property Rights?

/---- Gosh your Honor. I tried to retreat by taking one step back but thought the now dead mugger had an accomplice behind me.