Florida's 'No Retreat' Home Invasion Law

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,828
1,790
Being misrepresented by the gun control lobby, no surprise there.

http://www.michnews.com/artman/publish/article_9716.shtml

Jim Kouri

Brady Anti-Gun Group Lies to Foreign Tourists
By Jim Kouri, CPP
MichNews.com
Oct 1, 2005



The Brady Campaign to Control Gun Violence is warning foreign tourists that they may be in danger if they visit Florida. The politically active gun-control group is warning Europeans that a new Florida gun law will increase the likelihood that tourists will be shot in the streets if Americans believe their safety is being threatened. The Brady group is spending big bucks in their attempt to hurt Florida's economy. And they are lying to do it.

Sarah Brady, who heads the campaign, said: "We think people visiting Florida should be aware of this law, and act accordingly. Visitors should be very careful about getting into an aggressive argument with anyone during their stay." She claims her group is only trying to protect tourists visiting Florida and they are not trying to hurt the state's economy, which is another lie.

According to the London-based International Television News, 1.5 million British tourists travel to Florida every year, and starting next week, they will be handed leaflets from the gun-control fanatics as they arrive at Miami and Orlando airports.

The Brady organization is out-and-out lying about the new Florida law. First of all, the law addresses use of deadly force in the home not in the streets. The statute allows citizens to use physical deadly force against a person who enters their premises and is a threat to their safety. If a person within a residence feels an intruder will kill or cause serious injury to him or her, or that the intruder will kill or cause serious injury to someone else in that dwelling, that person may use deadly physical force against the intruder to stop the attack.

The law does not apply to incidents outside of the gunowner's home and Sarah Brady and her bunch know it. The previous statute regarding the use deadly physical force by a private citizen stated that if a person could escape from his or her premises and others in that person's home could escape, then they could not claim justifiable homicide. The new law changes that, and rightly so. Why should a person have to retreat from someone invading their home? Only a Liberal would advocate that people should run from their homes when threatened even if they have the means to defend themselves, their families and their home.

Sarah Brady and her bunch of gun-grabbers hope to inflict as much damage as possible on Florida, its economy and it's citizens. And she doesn't care if she has to lie to do it.

------------------------------------
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri's own website is located at http://jimkouri.us
 
thtis is why my father always told me ....shot to kill....make sure they are dead....drag them inside...then call the police
 
Sarah Brady, who heads the campaign, said: "We think people visiting Florida should be aware of this law, and act accordingly. Visitors should be very careful about getting into an aggressive argument with anyone during their stay." She claims her group is only trying to protect tourists visiting Florida and they are not trying to hurt the state's economy, which is another lie.
wtf ever. she needs to get laid of something to cear that head up
 
I love it when liberals claim they're just interested in the economics of the matter. BullSHIT. Liberals are NEVER interested in economics, unles it's screwing them up. Mark my words, people: the free flow of goods, services and capital is NOT a liberal concern in the slightest. Nope. No. Nyet. Not. Negative.

Florida's on the right track here. Its economy will probably benefit, actually.
 
Sarah Brady, who heads the campaign, said: "We think people visiting Florida should be aware of this law, and act accordingly. Visitors should be very careful about getting into an aggressive argument with anyone during their stay."

Excellent advice for anyone in any state, Sarah Brady. That is one of the wonderful benefits that states with concealed carry laws reap.....fewer aggressive jerks trying to get in your face and push their agenda on you.

As for this specific law in Florida... well, welcome to common sense, Floridians. It's about time.
 
TMW04-06-05.jpg
 
The NRA needs to hand out leaflets of their own. Simply put what the law actually says, with the part about protecting the home highlighted.
 
Florida isn't the only state with a law like this. Indiana has a similar law, in fact I don't think the burgler has to get all the way into a persons home, just on the property.
 
Trigg said:
Florida isn't the only state with a law like this. Indiana has a similar law, in fact I don't think the burgler has to get all the way into a persons home, just on the property.
Yeah, but WHO wants to vacation in Indiana? LOL
 
I think the NRA would jump light-years in a lot of peoples books if they were more vocal about responsible gun use and eliminating the illegal gun trade. To a lot of people not involved with them they come off as a group of people who want their guns and don't really care about the consequences to that freedom.

Wouldn't it be nice to see the NRA lobbying for stricter illegal gun punishments?
 
This law leaves open too many possibilities for wackos to kill people and get away with it.

Imagine you're in Florida and your car breaks down so you walk onto somebody's lawn to ask for help and they shoot and kill you because they say you were threatening them. That's stupid. The right to self defense is a given, but no property right is worth more than somebody's life.

The second amendment is meant to protect the citizen's rights to defend themselves against the government, not to kill people over stealing a car stereo.
 
Hagbard Celine said:
This law leaves open too many possibilities for wackos to kill people and get away with it.

Imagine you're in Florida and your car breaks down so you walk onto somebody's lawn to ask for help and they shoot and kill you because they say you were threatening them. That's stupid. The right to self defense is a given, but no property right is worth more than somebody's life.
Imagine using a cell or pay phone to call for help.
 
Well, what if you don't have a cell or your phone goes dead. Your wife just got her cellphone. There are plenty of people out there who don't have cells. And that's just one hypothetical situation. There is an infinite number of others. The law is flawed.
 
The ClayTaurus said:
I think the NRA would jump light-years in a lot of peoples books if they were more vocal about responsible gun use and eliminating the illegal gun trade. To a lot of people not involved with them they come off as a group of people who want their guns and don't really care about the consequences to that freedom.

Wouldn't it be nice to see the NRA lobbying for stricter illegal gun punishments?

There would be no illegal guns if I could buy any gun that I wanted legally. How am I supposed to keep up with criminals or the oppressive government and have a well armed militia if I cannot get the best weapons without breaking the law?

And, no, it wouldn't.
 
The ClayTaurus said:
I think the NRA would jump light-years in a lot of peoples books if they were more vocal about responsible gun use and eliminating the illegal gun trade. To a lot of people not involved with them they come off as a group of people who want their guns and don't really care about the consequences to that freedom.

Wouldn't it be nice to see the NRA lobbying for stricter illegal gun punishments?


The NRA lobbies for laws protecting "Legal" possession of firearms...They give classes on responsible ownership of same...as for stricter laws on "illegal"possession...well ya better address this to congress....however there are very strict laws on the books for "illegal" posession of same... so I do not really see your point on this!
 
Hagbard Celine said:
Well, what if you don't have a cell or your phone goes dead. Your wife just got her cellphone. There are plenty of people out there who don't have cells. And that's just one hypothetical situation. There is an infinite number of others. The law is flawed.
Keep up..that wasn't my wife that just got a cell..
Show me the flaws..Tread on private property, last I checked that's called a trespass..That's illegal. Common since kid..Have you ever lived in a high crime area? This law is a means for many to fight back. My guess is crime will decrease, just as it did in Miami when they started issuing carry permits.
 
elephant said:
There would be no illegal guns if I could buy any gun that I wanted legally. How am I supposed to keep up with criminals or the oppressive government and have a well armed militia if I cannot get the best weapons without breaking the law?

And, no, it wouldn't.

Sorry, I didn't mean illegal in that sense, I meant illegal as in "doesn't have a permit for it."
 

Forum List

Back
Top