Law Ohio passes Stand Your Ground legislation

Wish there was a protect your persimmon law in Cali.
 
Great. More pussies can pick fights and when they are getting their ass kicked pull out their gun and stand their ground like a real man.
 
In theory, I am a big supporter of self defense laws. But in reality, I find myself believing there are quite a few unjustified murders are excused by the law. I also think it gives some people a false sense of confidence to start shit, knowing they can kill somebody if they are attacked. I think that being a coward should not give you the right to kill someone.

What happened with that man who killed the guy in the parking lot? He was giving some guy's wife crap, so the guy pushed him down, and the man sat up and shot him. To me, that's a blatant murder. I don't know how that one turned out though.
 
What happened with that man who killed the guy in the parking lot? He was giving some guy's wife crap, so the guy pushed him down, and the man sat up and shot him. To me, that's a blatant murder. I don't know how that one turned out though.

Arrested for murder.

SYG isn't carte blanche.
 
Do you know of any cases where SYG was needed because self defense alone wouldn't have sufficed?

Laws aren't consistent from state to state. For example, here in Hawaii I'm pretty sure I have to try to run away or something if attacked in public. What SYG does is eliminate the need to prove you couldn't get away by eliminating it as a prerequisite to legally defending yourself with lethal force. Outside the home, of course. Castle law addresses home defense. So take any case in a SYG jurisdiction and if the shooter maybe could have possibly got away they might have been up on charges without the legal protection.

Mostly the specific cases we discuss around here that come to mind where someone claimed SYG the shooter was brought up on charges.
 
Great. More pussies can pick fights and when they are getting their ass kicked pull out their gun and stand their ground like a real man.

So, my 75 year old father, who can barely walk is going to go picking fights? Or perhaps he is supposed to defend himself via fisticuffs?
 
Or perhaps he is supposed to defend himself via fisticuffs?

It's always the physically weak who resort to street violence, so clearly the majority of us are in a great position to defend ourselves, regardless of any fighting experience or training.
 
Stand your ground Is worthless without other eye witnesses.

Who’s to say some dick doesn’t start shit and kill the other person and all you hear is his/her testimony.

This happened in Florida for instance. There happened to be a recording tho
 
Laws aren't consistent from state to state. For example, here in Hawaii I'm pretty sure I have to try to run away or something if attacked in public. What SYG does is eliminate the need to prove you couldn't get away by eliminating it as a prerequisite to legally defending yourself with lethal force. Outside the home, of course. Castle law addresses home defense. So take any case in a SYG jurisdiction and if the shooter maybe could have possibly got away they might have been up on charges without the legal protection.

Mostly the specific cases we discuss around here that come to mind where someone claimed SYG the shooter was brought up on charges.

Yeah I've heard of this "duty to flee" discussed here but I've never heard or seen a real life example of it.

That's why I was asking if you know of any specific real life examples.

I'm not really against SYG I just think it's kind of meaningless legislation used for virtue signaling to the pro gun crowd.
 
Yeah I've heard of this "duty to flee" discussed here but I've never heard or seen a real life example of it.

That's why I was asking if you know of any specific real life examples.

I'm not really against SYG I just think it's kind of meaningless legislation used for virtue signaling to the pro gun crowd.

Granted, I tend to only tune into the controversial cases. The cut & dried shit doesn't draw the same headlines. But going back to Hawaii as an example, it was only recently they affirmed castle doctrine (i.e. being able to defend your home without having to make an attempt to retreat). So SYG is about the same thing, except for applying to situations out in public. In that regard I don't think it's meaningless at all. It takes a fuckton of guesswork out of it when a jury doesn't have to decide if so-and-so did everything they could to get away before resorting to lethal force. One less moving piece. With SYG you can then just focus on the severity of the threat to determine if lethal self-defense was justified.
 
Granted, I tend to only tune into the controversial cases. The cut & dried shit doesn't draw the same headlines. But going back to Hawaii as an example, it was only recently they affirmed castle doctrine (i.e. being able to defend your home without having to make an attempt to retreat). So SYG is about the same thing, except for applying to situations out in public. In that regard I don't think it's meaningless at all. It takes a fuckton of guesswork out of it when a jury doesn't have to decide if so-and-so did everything they could to get away before resorting to lethal force. One less moving piece. With SYG you can then just focus on the severity of the threat to determine if lethal self-defense was justified.

The thing I don't by is that people have an obligation to make an attempt to retreat without Castle Doctrine or SYG.

So I was looking for examples where somebody was convicted based on that obligation or at least prosecuted based on that standard.
 
This is the story I was referring to. It was supposed to go to court this October, but I can't find any updates. This man should be locked up for the rest of his life for murder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...prosecutors-disagreed/?utm_term=.21f982ddf476

This type of thing is infuriating for me to watch. It's a cold blooded murder committed by a complete coward. If he somehow stays out of jail, the law is absolute garbage.
 
Last edited:
The thing I don't by is that people have an obligation to make an attempt to retreat without Castle Doctrine or SYG.

So I was looking for examples where somebody was convicted based on that obligation or at least prosecuted based on that standard.

https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol14_Ch0701-0853/HRS0703/HRS_0703-0304.htm

(5) The use of deadly force is not justifiable under this section if:

(a) The actor, with the intent of causing death or serious bodily injury, provoked the use of force against himself in the same encounter; or

(b) The actor knows that he can avoid the necessity of using such force with complete safety by retreating or by surrendering possession of a thing to a person asserting a claim of right thereto or by complying with a demand that he abstain from any action which he has no duty to take, except that:

(i) The actor is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling or place of work, unless he was the initial aggressor or is assailed in his place of work by another person whose place of work the actor knows it to be; and

(ii) A public officer justified in using force in the performance of his duties, or a person justified in using force in his assistance or a person justified in using force in making an arrest or preventing an escape, is not obliged to desist from efforts to perform his duty, effect the arrest, or prevent the escape because of resistance or threatened resistance by or on behalf of the person against whom the action is directed.
 
Every state needs this. It isn’t murder. These thugs that go around harming innocent people should be killed anyways.
 
What's fucked up in these situations, is that you're judged more for a physical ass kicking in response to a threat, than you are a lethal one.

Say somebody did shove you and threaten you, and you got up and beat the absolute piss out of the guy. Double legged him, knocked him out, stomped on his spine, etc, etc. People would think you're a complete fucking lunatic, who completely overreacted. Oh', but if you pull a gun out and blow the guy's head off, there's this strange grey area, and people start justifying it because you just didn't know what kind of threat the other guy posed.

"Oh', but maybe he did fear for his life? You never know..."

It's so fucking odd. Like a life ending bullet is somehow better than a guy snapping and smashing the shit out someone.
 

But this is also in there.

(3) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (4) and (5) of this section, a person employing protective force may estimate the necessity thereof under the circumstances as he believes them to be when the force is used without retreating, surrendering possession, doing any other act which he has no legal duty to do, or abstaining from any lawful action.

I think that's why I need to see actual cases to determine is this was an actual problem that we needed SYG to address or if it was more of a virtue signal to the base.
 
This is the story I was referring to. It was supposed to go to court this October, but I can't find any updates. This man should be locked up for the rest of his life for murder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...prosecutors-disagreed/?utm_term=.21f982ddf476

This type of thing is infuriating for me to watch. It's a cold blooded murder committed by a complete coward. If he somehow stays out of jail, the law is absolute garbage.
I've read up on this case and I hope Florida gets this right and the individual spends a good amount of time in jail. This was outright murder and the people who work at the store said the guy was always causing trouble with other patrons

The problem I have with SYG is two people could get into an argument in a parking lot which leads to a physical altercation where one of the individuals is pushed which then leads to the other individual pulling out a hand gun shooting the other person and claiming SYG
 
Last edited:
Back
Top