States With Stand Your Ground Laws See More Homicides

[bodecea]

nine posts in and Jose plays the race card

He's not "playing the race card". A man in Florida shot an unarmed 17 year old in a car with his friends after an argument over loud music.

Florida man shoots and kills 17-year-old teen after argument over loud music at gas station - NY Daily News

I hope this guy dies in prison.

Wow....that's cold blooded murder right there.

 

[Dragonlady]

Wow....that's cold blooded murder right there.

Yes it is. The thing with Stand Your Ground laws is that there doesn't have to be a real threat, you only have to FEEL threatened. This guy says he "thought" he saw a gun so opened fire. He felt threatened.

 

[Flopper]

If the rise in homicides is because criminals are getting killed during the commission of a crime what the hell is the problem? Maybe idiots will get the message that it isn't healthy to assault other people.

Most criminals do not consider the consequences of a crime before committing it so I don't think guns will offer much of deterrent. You can't expect a kid that needs a fix or an enraged spouse is going to act in a rational manner. It just doesn't work that way. About 75% of all murders are committed by people under the influence of drugs or alcohol. It's not uncommon that after committing a murder, the killer will not even remember doing it.

Last year about 60 kids were shot in schools which includes suicides and accidents. There are many that would put guns in every one of our 100,000 public schools believing that it would be a deterrent. That would be a big mistake.

 

[martybegan]

wanna discuss the black on white homicides ?

I can assure you there are more than two

I'm talking about unarmed black teenagers being attacked by people who claim they felt threatened. The Trayvon Martin case is especially distressing. Martin was targeted BECAUSE he was black.

Would the white man have shot at a carload of white kids?

When unarmed teenagers are being attacked and killed by adults who feel threatened by them, it's time to reconsider Stand Your Ground. These are laws promoted by the NRA for no other reason than to give their lobbyists something to do.

Self-defence is already legal. There has to be some onus on the individual to try to de-escalate situations. Stand Your Ground escalates confrontations leading to more deaths. That's already been proven.

Stand your ground laws were created in reaction to liberal laws that forced a citizen to flee his dwelling because someone broke into their home.

And the result of those laws that allowed the perps to sue the homeowner for using "excessive force." Basically laws requiring you to retreat open you up for liability, as some scumbag lawyer can make a case that you "didnt do your best" to defuse the situation by running away from your own house.

Hence stand your ground, so now without the duty to retreat you wont get sued by some asshat (or thier family if the asshat assumed room temperature via lead poisoning) for defending your own home and/or life.

 

[Avatar4321]

No, it is not a stupid question.

It is when race has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand

It can have a lot to do with the issue at hand.

People of all races and ethnic groups have a right to stand their ground and defend themselves.

 

[LibertyLemming]

It is when race has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand

It can have a lot to do with the issue at hand.

People of all races and ethnic groups have a right to stand their ground and defend themselves.

This. Liberty is diluted when you try to break it down into groups. There are human rights, period. Gay rights, women's rights, gun rights, they are all human rights. Putting labels on different groups just serves to disenfranchise them even more.

 

[Missourian]

If the rise in homicides is because criminals are getting killed during the commission of a crime what the hell is the problem? Maybe idiots will get the message that it isn't healthy to assault other people.

Most criminals do not consider the consequences of a crime before committing it so I don't think guns will offer much of deterrent. You can't expect a kid that needs a fix or an enraged spouse is going to act in a rational manner. It just doesn't work that way. About 75% of all murders are committed by people under the influence of drugs or alcohol. It's not uncommon that after committing a murder, the killer will not even remember doing it.

Last year about 60 kids were shot in schools which includes suicides and accidents. There are many that would put guns in every one of our 100,000 public schools believing that it would be a deterrent. That would be a big mistake.

I'm not sure I agree that the fact that 60 kids were shot in schools constitutes good evidence against arming QUALIFIED personnel.

How many were shot be other kids or themselves, and how many were shot by teachers and law enforcement accidentally?

We have armed personnel in our schools and have for many years with no problems.

A single action semi-automatic with the safety on will NEVER accidentally discharge, even with a round in the chamber.

It is double safe.

It would require FOUR deliberate actions to discharge...remove from holster, disengage the safety, manually cock the hammer and then pull the trigger.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.

These laws lower the cost of using lethal force," says Mark Hoekstra, the economist behind the study. "Our study finds that, as a result, you get more of it. Homicides go up by 7% to 9% in states that pass the laws."

What the study didn't find was "evidence of any [crime] deterrence effect over that same time period."



As to why this is the case, economist Mark Hoekstra told NPR that Stand Your Ground encourages more lethal force by lowering its costs:

“One possibility for the increase in homicide is that perhaps [in cases where] there would have been a fistfight … now, because of stand your ground laws, it’s possible that those escalate into something much more violent and lethal.”
​

.

There should be no cost for self defense.

Just curious about something, why did they rank California as a non stand your ground state? Is it because California has had stand your ground laws since the wild west days?

 

[yidnar]

.

These laws lower the cost of using lethal force," says Mark Hoekstra, the economist behind the study. "Our study finds that, as a result, you get more of it. Homicides go up by 7% to 9% in states that pass the laws."

What the study didn't find was "evidence of any [crime] deterrence effect over that same time period."



As to why this is the case, economist Mark Hoekstra told NPR that Stand Your Ground encourages more lethal force by lowering its costs:

“One possibility for the increase in homicide is that perhaps [in cases where] there would have been a fistfight … now, because of stand your ground laws, it’s possible that those escalate into something much more violent and lethal.”
​

.

well run away or get on your knees and beg ,in hopes that the nice criminal will leave you alone ....as for me i'll stand my ground !!

 

[Dragonlady]

This. Liberty is diluted when you try to break it down into groups. There are human rights, period. Gay rights, women's rights, gun rights, they are all human rights. Putting labels on different groups just serves to disenfranchise them even more.

Ignoring clear racias bias also disenfranchises people. George Zimmerman would NOT have stalked and killed Trayvon Martin if Trayvon had been white. Zimmerman followed Martin BECAUSE he was black. If Martin had been a white kid out for a bag of Skittles, he'd still be alive.

In the case of the kids in the car playing loud music, if the kids in the car had been white, would the white guy have "felt threatened" by them?

 

[Avatar4321]

nine posts in and Jose plays the race card

He's not "playing the race card". A man in Florida shot an unarmed 17 year old in a car with his friends after an argument over loud music.

Florida man shoots and kills 17-year-old teen after argument over loud music at gas station - NY Daily News

I hope this guy dies in prison.

Wow....that's cold blooded murder right there.

Yep, no stand your ground issue at all.

 

[LibertyLemming]

This. Liberty is diluted when you try to break it down into groups. There are human rights, period. Gay rights, women's rights, gun rights, they are all human rights. Putting labels on different groups just serves to disenfranchise them even more.

Ignoring clear racias bias also disenfranchises people. George Zimmerman would NOT have stalked and killed Trayvon Martin if Trayvon had been white. Zimmerman followed Martin BECAUSE he was black. If Martin had been a white kid out for a bag of Skittles, he'd still be alive.

In the case of the kids in the car playing loud music, if the kids in the car had been white, would the white guy have "felt threatened" by them?

I'm not sure what your point is? I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, I'm saying that people should strive to be moral and just as a whole instead of doing it by group.

 

[Avatar4321]

This. Liberty is diluted when you try to break it down into groups. There are human rights, period. Gay rights, women's rights, gun rights, they are all human rights. Putting labels on different groups just serves to disenfranchise them even more.

Ignoring clear racias bias also disenfranchises people. George Zimmerman would NOT have stalked and killed Trayvon Martin if Trayvon had been white. Zimmerman followed Martin BECAUSE he was black. If Martin had been a white kid out for a bag of Skittles, he'd still be alive.

In the case of the kids in the car playing loud music, if the kids in the car had been white, would the white guy have "felt threatened" by them?

Actually, zimmerman wouldn't have killed Trayvon Martin if Trayvon didn't jump him to begin with. And there is absolutely no evidence that Zimmerman started following him simply because he was black to begin with. Which is irrelevant, because once zimmerman started heading back to his car, there was no reason for him to be attacked.

As for the kids in the car, there is no stand the groun issues. Who cares why the guy killed the kids. he should go to jail for doing so since he wasnt in any danger.

 

[g5000]

1) "Homocide" rates include assailants justifiably killed in the commission of crimes. So your statistic is ambiguous at best.

2) Not all stand your ground laws are the same, and not all are like that of Florida.

No doubt there is a certain amount of built in ambiguity, if for no other reason than the cop that makes the report has, what should be a judge's discretion as to whether or not a crime has been committed, or if an arrest should be made, etc. but-----but two separate reports, one by Texas A&M the other by Georgia State University came to about the same conclusion: ""It could be that these are self-defense killings," he said. "On the other hand, the increase could be driven by an escalation of violence by criminals. Or it could be an escalation of violence in otherwise nonviolent situations."

But which is it?

Hoekstra checked to see whether police were listing more cases as "justifiable homicides" in states that passed stand your ground laws. If there were more self-defense killings, this number should have gone up. He also examined whether more criminals were showing up armed.

In both cases, he found nothing. There were small increases in both numbers, but it was hard to tell whether there was really any difference.

So if the numbers on justifiable homicide and criminals using lethal force don't explain the rise in homicide, what's causing the increase?

"One possibility for the increase in homicide is that perhaps [in cases where] there would have been a fistfight ... now, because of stand your ground laws, it's possible that those escalate into something much more violent and lethal," says Hoekstra."

.

First, that last paragraph is a wild assed assumption on Hoekstra's part.

Second, if the number of shooting that would have been fistfights gambit were true, then his numbers would have reflected that. But he clearly said there were small increases in both justified homicides and criminals using lethal force. A shooting that would have been a fistfight would have been in one of those two categories.

"Homicides" are more than just deaths by shooting. Since shooting deaths did not go up enough to match all the new homicides, then clearly the rise in homicides were of those that had nothing to do with guns, and therefore nothing to do with stand your ground laws and guns.

Where is his data for the kinds of homicides that increased?

So he is plainly wrong, and his illogic strongly suggests his data collection is warped by bias. This guy is attempting a shitty post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

1) "Homocide" rates include assailants justifiably killed in the commission of crimes. So your statistic is ambiguous at best.

2) Not all stand your ground laws are the same, and not all are like that of Florida.

No doubt there is a certain amount of built in ambiguity, if for no other reason than the cop that makes the report has, what should be a judge's discretion as to whether or not a crime has been committed, or if an arrest should be made, etc. but-----but two separate reports, one by Texas A&M the other by Georgia State University came to about the same conclusion: ""It could be that these are self-defense killings," he said. "On the other hand, the increase could be driven by an escalation of violence by criminals. Or it could be an escalation of violence in otherwise nonviolent situations."

But which is it?

Hoekstra checked to see whether police were listing more cases as "justifiable homicides" in states that passed stand your ground laws. If there were more self-defense killings, this number should have gone up. He also examined whether more criminals were showing up armed.

In both cases, he found nothing. There were small increases in both numbers, but it was hard to tell whether there was really any difference.

So if the numbers on justifiable homicide and criminals using lethal force don't explain the rise in homicide, what's causing the increase?

"One possibility for the increase in homicide is that perhaps [in cases where] there would have been a fistfight ... now, because of stand your ground laws, it's possible that those escalate into something much more violent and lethal," says Hoekstra."

.

First, that last paragraph is a wild assed assumption on Hoekstra's part.

Second, if the number of shooting that would have been fistfights gambit were true, then his numbers would have reflected that. But he clearly said there were small increases in both justified homicides and criminals using lethal force. A shooting that would have been a fistfight would have been in one of those two categories.

"Homicides" are more than just deaths by shooting. Since shooting deaths did not go up enough to match all the new homicides, then clearly the rise in homicides were of those that had nothing to do with guns, and therefore nothing to do with stand your ground laws and guns.

Where is his data for the kinds of homicides that increased?

So he is plainly wrong, and his illogic strongly suggests his data collection is warped by bias. This guy is attempting a shitty post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

You can't be serious? Do you really expect me to believe that people who are getting the crap beat out of them aren't going to stop and think about how the law allows them to fight back before they defend themselves?

 

[J.E.D]

Well I live in "stand your ground" Florida and believe me I will stand my ground if someone breaks into my house.

My shotgun and I are more than ready to "stand our ground."

Seems I remember when Texas passed the law about carrying guns that folks thought there would victims falling all over the place.

The only thing that happened was the crime rate went down.

Stand your ground?? You bet.

Are you going to "stand your ground" and shoot a black kid whose music is too loud?

You kidding right? If your serious,gotta be dumb post of the week.

Read a newspaper

 

[tjvh]

Are you going to "stand your ground" and shoot a black kid whose music is too loud?

You kidding right? If your serious,gotta be dumb post of the week.

Read a newspaper

The Funny pages does not equate to a Newspaper... Which apparently is where you are getting your information from.

 

[J.E.D]

He's not "playing the race card". A man in Florida shot an unarmed 17 year old in a car with his friends after an argument over loud music.

Florida man shoots and kills 17-year-old teen after argument over loud music at gas station - NY Daily News

I hope this guy dies in prison.

why drag race into it at all?

Because that's what Marxists do when they are losing an argument.

Marxist? Look who has jumped the shark into idiocy. Congrats, I've lost the respect I used to have for you.

 

[J.E.D]

You kidding right? If your serious,gotta be dumb post of the week.

Read a newspaper

The Funny pages does not equate to a Newspaper... Which apparently is where you are getting your information from.

Like I said, read a newspaper.

Florida teen shot to death by man after dispute over loud music, police say - Crimesider - CBS News

(CBS) Jacksonville, Fla. - Police say a 45-year-old man was taken into custody Saturday for fatally shooting a Florida teenager last week at a Jacksonville gas station after an argument that began over loud music.

Davis was sitting in a parked SUV with three other teens, when Dunn parked next to their vehicle and made a comment about the loud music the group was playing.

Dunn claims he fired his weapon because he felt threatened, police say.

 

[NoNukes]

It is when race has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand

It can have a lot to do with the issue at hand.

People of all races and ethnic groups have a right to stand their ground and defend themselves.

Many people are not too happy to see Blacks and other minorities with guns. Stand Your Ground sounds like coon season is open to me.