it's not really about the 2nd Amendment.

[callmeslick]

.....it's the stupid crap that has sprouted up out of some warped sense of entitlement for gun owners, such as Stand Your Ground laws:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/florida ... at-dennys/

now, one can hope this one is prosecuted successfully, but how the hell can you have a law that could even be suggested to excuse this? I mean, was his 'ground' defined as the ladies room in a public restaurant? Seriously. I don't really think the 2nd confers ANYONE the right to public carry unless for specific, professional security purposes. But, to justify cold blooded murder because you are 'standing your ground' is abhorrant.

[Spidey]

Nah…just some fool trying to use a law (that doesn’t apply here) to get away with murder.

Happens all of the time…moving on…

[Grendel]

Yeah, DB is trying to weasel his way out.

Under Section 776.013(3), the “no duty of retreat” rule will not apply to a person who is engaged in an unlawful activity or is in a place where he or she has no right to be. Other provisions preclude a defendant from raising a self-defense claim altogether. Under Section 776.041, the justifications for the use of force do not apply if the accused is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of a forcible felony.

The justifications for use of force will also not apply where the evidence establishes that the defendant initially provoked violence against him- or herself. To claim self-defense in such a scenario, Section 776.041 requires the defendant to demonstrate that he or she used every reasonable means short of deadly force to extricate him- or herself from the situation, and that the degree of force used by the other person (the initial non-aggressor) led the defendant to reasonably believe that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. Alternatively, a defendant who is an initial aggressor may claim self-defense if: (1) in good faith, he or she withdrew from physical contact, (2) clearly indicated to the other person that he or she desired to withdraw and terminate the use of force, and (3) despite the communication and withdrawal, the other person continued or resumed the use of force. See Section 776.041(2)(b), Florida Statutes.

[woodchip]

.....it's the stupid crap that has sprouted up out of some warped sense of entitlement for gun owners, such as Stand Your Ground laws:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/florida ... at-dennys/

now, one can hope this one is prosecuted successfully, but how the hell can you have a law that could even be suggested to excuse this? I mean, was his 'ground' defined as the ladies room in a public restaurant? Seriously. I don't really think the 2nd confers ANYONE the right to public carry unless for specific, professional security purposes. But, to justify cold blooded murder because you are 'standing your ground' is abhorrant.

Stop calling the law stupid and crap as you are just trolling your anti-2nd amendment stance. The guy can claim anything he wants, doesn't mean the court will find in his favor. Stop posting really inane BS as tho it has some bearing on something. You can do better than troll like vision or TG do.

[callmeslick]

Woody, you act as if this is the first specious use of that sewer of garbage called a Stand Your Ground Law. It isn't, and it's high time folks realized that to pass such a bill is to invite murder by handgun. It's that simple. Of course, the more handgun murders you have, the more guns you sell to the scared, stupid sheep out there.