Stand Your Ground Law

This is the place where all heated debates shall reside. Non-tech topics allowed. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. "Enter at your own Risk".

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Stand Your Ground Law

Postby c327 » Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:12 am

The stand your ground law has recently come to focus in Florida. I know some states don't have it but as time goes by it seems to becoming more popular.

In Florida (a gun friendly state) there are documented statistics that shows violent crime has decreased since adopting this law. No law or person is perfect and as a result unwanted issues may come about. The second amendment says Americans have the right to keep and bare arms but there are some states that blatantly do everything they can to infringe upon that right, and New Jersey is one of them (my state). In New Jersey you can't even legally carry a simple pocketknife its that bad.

Florida is the last place a criminal would even think of breaking into a persons home because of so many folks legally carrying hand guns (CCW license).

Yes I do have a CCW license here in Florida (my winter home) and carry a S&W model 36 38 cal. snub nosed revolver from time to time. There is a huge reponsability that goes along with this privilage and folks that carry had better make themselves aware of the various state laws. Just because you have a permit to carry doesn't mean you can use it.

My interest here is are there stand your ground laws in your state and how they may differ from Florida ????

The 2011 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter

CHAPTER 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.
776.031 Use of force in defense of others.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.
776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
776.06 Deadly force.
776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.
776.08 Forcible felony.
776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27.
776.031 Use of force in defense of others.—A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1189, ch. 97-102; s. 3, ch. 2005-27.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.—A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The officer is justified in the use of any force:
(1) Which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or herself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest;
(2) When necessarily committed in retaking felons who have escaped; or
(3) When necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice. However, this subsection shall not constitute a defense in any civil action for damages brought for the wrongful use of deadly force unless the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by such flight and, when feasible, some warning had been given, and:
(a) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others; or
(b) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm to another person.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1, ch. 75-64; s. 1, ch. 87-147; s. 54, ch. 88-381; s. 1191, ch. 97-102.
776.051 Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.—(1) A person is not justified in the use of force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer.
(2) A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, is not justified in the use of force if the arrest or execution of a legal duty is unlawful and known by him or her to be unlawful.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1192, ch. 97-102; s. 1, ch. 2008-67.
776.06 Deadly force.—(1) The term “deadly force” means force that is likely to cause death or great bodily harm and includes, but is not limited to:
(a) The firing of a firearm in the direction of the person to be arrested, even though no intent exists to kill or inflict great bodily harm; and
(b) The firing of a firearm at a vehicle in which the person to be arrested is riding.
(2)(a) The term “deadly force” does not include the discharge of a firearm by a law enforcement officer or correctional officer during and within the scope of his or her official duties which is loaded with a less-lethal munition. As used in this subsection, the term “less-lethal munition” means a projectile that is designed to stun, temporarily incapacitate, or cause temporary discomfort to a person without penetrating the person’s body.
(b) A law enforcement officer or a correctional officer is not liable in any civil or criminal action arising out of the use of any less-lethal munition in good faith during and within the scope of his or her official duties.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1, ch. 99-272.
776.07 Use of force to prevent escape.—(1) A law enforcement officer or other person who has an arrested person in his or her custody is justified in the use of any force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent the escape of the arrested person from custody.
(2) A correctional officer or other law enforcement officer is justified in the use of force, including deadly force, which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to prevent the escape from a penal institution of a person whom the officer reasonably believes to be lawfully detained in such institution under sentence for an offense or awaiting trial or commitment for an offense.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 95-283; s. 1193, ch. 97-102.
776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 4, ch. 75-298; s. 289, ch. 79-400; s. 5, ch. 93-212; s. 10, ch. 95-195.
776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.—(1) It shall be a defense to any action for damages for personal injury or wrongful death, or for injury to property, that such action arose from injury sustained by a participant during the commission or attempted commission of a forcible felony. The defense authorized by this section shall be established by evidence that the participant has been convicted of such forcible felony or attempted forcible felony, or by proof of the commission of such crime or attempted crime by a preponderance of the evidence.
(2) For the purposes of this section, the term “forcible felony” shall have the same meaning as in s. 776.08.
(3) Any civil action in which the defense recognized by this section is raised shall be stayed by the court on the motion of the civil defendant during the pendency of any criminal action which forms the basis for the defense, unless the court finds that a conviction in the criminal action would not form a valid defense under this section.
(4) In any civil action where a party prevails based on the defense created by this section:
(a) The losing party, if convicted of and incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, shall, as determined by the court, lose any privileges provided by the correctional facility, including, but not limited to:
1. Canteen purchases;
2. Telephone access;
3. Outdoor exercise;
4. Use of the library; and
5. Visitation.
(b) The court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney; however, the losing party’s attorney is not personally responsible if he or she has acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client. If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime and has insufficient assets to cover payment of the costs of the action and the award of fees pursuant to this paragraph, the party shall, as determined by the court, be required to pay by deduction from any payments the prisoner receives while incarcerated.
(c) If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, the court shall issue a written order containing its findings and ruling pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) and shall direct that a certified copy be forwarded to the appropriate correctional institution or facility.
“Respect cannot be learned, purchased or acquired - it can only be earned” "Pay It Forward"
c327
Black Belt 4th Degree
Black Belt 4th Degree
 
Posts: 4039
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 1:01 am
Location: Saint Augustine Florida

Postby Karlsweldt » Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:52 am

Many statutes are written and adopted.. some with faults that do not become evident for years. Some foresight is required to 'cover all bases' is the rule.
But no person has the right to take the life of another, or any other creature, without just cause or reason! If a person's life is truly threatened, then removing that threat by bodily harm may be justified. But it is up to the courts to decide the incident and prove or disprove liability for the action. In any such instance, it should be mandated that the person [assumed innocent until proven guilty] be held in confinement until such court actions are completed.. by investigation and trial, if indicated. For those persons on active military duty (where an act of war is involved) or law enforcement officers, different rules may apply.
This incident in Florida may well cause the "stand your ground" law to be abolished, changed.. or amended. There may not be another viable witness to the incident, and only the testimony of one person may reveal the true happenings. But will the truth be revealed?
There are all too many instances of robberies and muggings of stores and people.. by desperate thugs. They (the perpetrators) usually have illegal weapons.. and the victim(s) must protect their property and life.. with whatever means available, legally.

There should be one statute across all states.. a Federal Firearms Act, wherein a person has a permit for [any] type of firearm or weapon which certifies the weapon is legal, registered, and the user has completed a safety course of not less than 30 days under the supervision of a trained firearms/weapon instructor. Any person who does not have the required permit.. or an illegal weapon.. should be held in confinement until a court of law decides the legality of the person's action or that of the weapon.
The same rules should apply to game hunters, regardless of age.
F@H.. to solve mankind's maladies.. in our lifetimes!
Karlsweldt
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 19200
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:57 am
Location: 07438

Postby Spark » Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:03 pm

Karlsweldt wrote:Many statutes are written and adopted.. some with faults that do not become evident for years. Some foresight is required to 'cover all bases' is the rule.
But no person has the right to take the life of another, or any other creature, without just cause or reason! If a person's life is truly threatened, then removing that threat by bodily harm may be justified. But it is up to the courts to decide the incident and prove or disprove liability for the action. In any such instance, it should be mandated that the person [assumed innocent until proven guilty] be held in confinement until such court actions are completed.. by investigation and trial, if indicated. For those persons on active military duty (where an act of war is involved) or law enforcement officers, different rules may apply.
This incident in Florida may well cause the "stand your ground" law to be abolished, changed.. or amended. There may not be another viable witness to the incident, and only the testimony of one person may reveal the true happenings. But will the truth be revealed?
There are all too many instances of robberies and muggings of stores and people.. by desperate thugs. They (the perpetrators) usually have illegal weapons.. and the victim(s) must protect their property and life.. with whatever means available, legally.

There should be one statute across all states.. a Federal Firearms Act, wherein a person has a permit for [any] type of firearm or weapon which certifies the weapon is legal, registered, and the user has completed a safety course of not less than 30 days under the supervision of a trained firearms/weapon instructor. Any person who does not have the required permit.. or an illegal weapon.. should be held in confinement until a court of law decides the legality of the person's action or that of the weapon.
The same rules should apply to game hunters, regardless of age.


I disagree with some of the things you say.. People are not put in confinement/jail until they are proven guilty of an offence that requires jail time. Your in the wrong country.

Firearms are not required to be registered in all if not many states. Its a state by stae thingy.Your misinformed and in the dark about much of what you say. Guns don't kill people, people do.

Criminals don't worry about if a firearm is legal or not, they will have theirs.. With stand your ground laws the playing field is leveled better. The guy in Florida will be found innocent, you wait and see. The child in Florida was killed when he picked on the wrong guy. This so called child was over 6 feet tall and was beating on the other guy.. The only reason Zimmerman is in jail is because of the black demonstrations and political pressure from our elected officals.

What you are asking for is to lose your right to properly defend ones self. The next thing to lose would be the first amendment. Me personally.... I would rather be alive and worry about jail than dead and burried by some criminal.

You don't put people in confinement while under investigation in the USA, Russia and Iran yes. I hope you are never confronted by a person who wants to do you serious harm, because you are going to have yourself one serious problem on your hands.

The trick is to know before hand when to use deadly force....because once you pull the trigger you can't call the bullet back.
Spark
Anti-Static Strap
Anti-Static Strap
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:36 pm

Postby Karlsweldt » Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:43 pm

Firearms are not required to be registered in all if not many states. Its a state by state thingy.Your misinformed and in the dark about much of what you say. Guns don't kill people, people do.

Quite true. Some states have a very low populace per area, others are "over" populated. Yet all states require a person to be licensed for motor vehicle use, after a qualified instruction course. Should be the same with any type of firearm or other weapon. Yes, some states allow youths of 10 years or so to be out hunting, as long as they have a valid hunting license. But are they qualified to properly use that weapon? Do they know how far an arrow, buckshot or a bullet will travel? Is that supposed target in the distance a true game species or some unwary hiker?
Almost every city in the U.S.A. and many other countries have very strict laws about guns and other weapons.. more stringent than state laws. If any person causes the death of another, it should be by law that such person is placed in confinement for their safety as well as the safety of others. Mob reaction can be deadly!
Let the legal system and courts decide what actually happened. If found truly innocent of charges, then forgiveness is granted.
F@H.. to solve mankind's maladies.. in our lifetimes!
Karlsweldt
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 19200
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:57 am
Location: 07438

Postby cw4cam » Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:27 pm

Karl, motor vehicle operating is a privilege not a right. You have to pay for a privilege to drive a vehicle, which is a means of government to fleece the citizens. Some states have no concealed carry permits, Vermont and Alaska are two that come to mind. The issue of concealed carry permits is just another government intrusion on a right. The second amendment does not give you the right to bear arms, it is an amendment to stop the government from taking that right from you. If you abuse that right then you should pay the penalty, what ever that is. Some states have passed laws that if you are attempted to be car jacked, you can shoot the 'jacker. Guess what, car jacking in that state ( Mississippi) I think has been reduced by a huge amount.
Gun control is a huge issue in this country and has come to the fore front During the Obama admin. It is all about CONTROLLING the citizenry with their views. They think it just can't be possible for the average Joe to have a gun WITHOUT jumping through their designed hoops. Racist views and public pressure without knowing the facts also plays a part. Just my 2.


Buy more guns. They don't ever go down in value. You might need one.
"A pessimist sees a problem with an opportunity. an optimist sees an opportunity with a problem."
Winston Churchill

Civilization is invaded by barbarians every generation. (author unknown)
cw4cam
Brown Belt
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Middlesboro KY


Return to The Hundred Year War

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests