Law Ohio passes Stand Your Ground legislation

PolishHeadlock said:
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.
Click to expand...

What I quoted was from the "except as otherwise provided in subsections (4) and (5)". The law says there's a duty to retreat outside the home or dwelling.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
What I quoted was from the "except as otherwise provided in subsections (4) and (5)". The law says there's a duty to retreat outside the home or dwelling.
Click to expand...

Those subsections read to me like you can't instigate the altercation and claim self defense later on, use it against law enforcement when they are giving lawful demands or stealing from another person and they confront you or entering their residence unwelcomed.

So again, I gotta see some case law examples of a self defense claim failing somebody
 
Gutter Chris said:
From the cases I have seen in the news I was not aware that they did

Maybe they need to be stronger

Im generally pro gun but I am also really pro throwing the book at you if you do something dumb with it and I would like to see the law reflect that more.

Zim Zam and the popcorn shooter both really put a bad taste in my mouth about syg laws
Click to expand...
Zim Zam wasn't a stand your ground case.
 
The ScorpioN said:
I’m in Cleveland doing my masters and it seems like every week we get university alerts about youfs mugging some girl for her phone, breaking into cars, and the other day an undergrad student got shot near the campus.

Maybe if a few of them get blasted away, that’ll make the criminals think twice before mugging.
Click to expand...

About 3 weeks ago SWAT was on my campus because a guy had committed a murder over the summer, was on the run, and they got word that he was sighted living in the dorms. Campus life can be dangerous, universities are largely open to the public. I feel your pain.
 
Stand your ground laws should be a thing everywhere. You shouldn't have a duty to retreat from an attacker no matter where you are. It's not even referring to guns. If you're legally allowed to be somewhere, you don't have to leave because some dickhead wants you to. Pretty simple imo
 
I think it would put the public at more risk having potentially two idiots escalating a situation.

I only agree with situations where your life truly depended on your actions or reactions to an incident.

Two guys getting into a pissing contest I don't think ends well for anyone.
 
A victim should never be required to run or retreat from a criminal.

That is all stand your ground does, that is all.

You still have to prove the use of deadly force was justified.

You have to be in fear of death or great bodily harm to justified the use of deadly force.

You can muder someone that insults you and claim syg just like you can rape and claim it was consensual sex. You can claim anything but proving it is something different. Just because someone claims something that is not true to try and get away with something doesn't make the law bad.
 
Gutter Chris said:
it was self defense cuz he was getting his ass whipped is what you are going to tell me right ?
Click to expand...

Yes the claim was the other person was on top banning his head into the sidewalk. Zim was trying to disengage by crying out for help and the shot to defend himself. He claimed fear of death or great bodily harm. So it was a straight up justified use of deadly force not syg.
 
Better than in some parts of world were you get in trouble for defending your home from intruders
 
oldshadow said:
Yes the claim was the other person was on top banning his head into the sidewalk. Zim was trying to disengage by crying out for help and the shot to defend himself. He claimed fear of death or great bodily harm. So it was a straight up justified use of deadly force not syg.
Click to expand...



my problem is when you carry a weapon you need to be more responsible than those who dont and he created the whole situation in the first place. Yea he was getting his ass beat..... For acting like a complete moron . getting beat when you pick fights than shooting someone isnt something I am ever going to be for

So yea he found the loophole and got off for murdering a young man in a situation that was 100 percent his fault cuz you can defend yourself if you think your going to die. But its all bullshit because it was his doing in the first place

maybe one day gun guys wont feel the need to defend every coward who shoots someone because they see it as a political issue and they gotta support the second amendment


so if you want to say it wasnt syg fine but it was the same set of behaviors that the bad syg shootings suffer from with some dope with a gun thinking hes a superhero and doing something they had no business doing in the first place and it leading to the unarmed person they were messing with getting killed
 
Gutter Chris said:
my problem is when you carry a weapon you need to be more responsible than those who dont and he created the whole situation in the first place. Yea he was getting his ass beat..... For acting like a complete moron . getting beat when you pick fights than shooting someone isnt something I am ever going to be for

So yea he found the loophole and got off for murdering a young man in a situation that was 100 percent his fault cuz you can defend yourself if you think your going to die. But its all bullshit because it was his doing in the first place

maybe one day gun guys wont feel the need to defend every coward who shoots someone because they see it as a political issue and they gotta support the second amendment


so if you want to say it wasnt syg fine but it was the same set of behaviors that the bad syg shootings suffer from with some dope with a gun thinking hes a superhero and doing something they had no business doing in the first place and it leading to the unarmed person they were messing with getting killed
Click to expand...

First Zim is an ass hole, now that's out of the way.

What I was explaining was the Zim case was not SYG it was a self-defense case.

Zim said he was attacked for following the guy and was getting badly beating and feared for his life, a plea of self-defense.

The was self-defense and deadly force law is written yes you could "start" something and still be justified in the use of deadly force. If you try and disengage and the person moves up the force to a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.

I agree that's is stupid to start shit when you carry. I try to avoid shit when I do but I'm still not going to let someone abuse me or my family because I don't want to have to shoot anyone.

Again Zim is an ass hole but his case had nothing to do with SYG .
 
The typical case against SYG.

Goes something like a person was threatening someone for money or something and the person shoots them fearing death or great bodily harm . The antis say the victim shouod have run or just given them what they wanted.

Fuck that you don't want to get shot don't threaten and rob people.
 
PolishHeadlock said:
Those subsections read to me like you can't instigate the altercation and claim self defense later on, use it against law enforcement when they are giving lawful demands or stealing from another person and they confront you or entering their residence unwelcomed.
Click to expand...

That's true.

Those subsections cover a few things. One of which is that out in public you have a duty to retreat when possible. Take another look.


(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
Click to expand...

@Lord Coke, am I misreading the Hawaii statute? Can you clarify the duty to retreat (or not) in public self-defense situations, as per this link?

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

Somewhere between the Wild, Wild, West and common sense we have the highly-regulated reality of firearms law. This is a great channel and here's discussion of a bill pertaining to your jurisdiction. Lots of (seemingly insignificant) legislature can put someone inside or outside of the law when it comes to self-defense.


 
A law for sensitive pussies just like C&C etc
 
nosnea.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,466
Messages
55,421,095
Members
174,766
Latest member
durbanik916

Share this page

Back
Top