Florida legislature to review SYG

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by oragator1, Aug 3, 2013.

  1. oragator1

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,459
    Likes Received:
    600
    Trophy Points:
    113
    gatorjjh likes this.
  2. OB1

    OB1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    Messages:
    642
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I wish the government would review many laws/legislation. Many have unintended consequences that need correction more than the issue that was to be corrected by the law in the first place!

    It's Great to be a Florida Gator!
  3. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    SYG being one of them with unintended (or intended, but bad) consequences.

    But you are correct. Too often laws, even well intended ones, are not corrected at all or quickly enough for the damage they do. And sometimes all it takes is a little tweaking, not even wholesale repeal.

    100:1 crack cocaine sentencing disparity is another classic example, or more generally, the 1986 and 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse Acts.
  4. MichiGator2002

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,168
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We did this dance before the trial too and SYG got the thumbs up, and will and should again. Nobody has produced any example of a clear failure of the law, i.e. that either the immunity or trial defense has prevailed to excuse an unjustifiable homicide. Nor has anyone produced any coherent argument in favor of the now-minority common law duty to retreat.
  5. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Getting two thumbs up doesn't speak well of the Florida legislature.

    Depends on what you mean by clear. Was there clear evidence that it needed to be passed in the first place? No. It would stand that it doesn't need clear evidence to be repealed, though some evidence definitely strengthens the case. Logic and reason are part of the debate, as you well know. D

    But as for evidence, I think the Tampa Tribunes rundown of the problems that have arisen is a pretty decent one. I haven't seen any actual peer-reviewed studies though...yet.
  6. Lawdog88

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    31,196
    Likes Received:
    727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    As we all discussed in the earlier threads, especially MOI, I think that if anything, the CCP component of the equation should be examined, tweaked if legally possible / necessary, and linked to JUDF. Perhaps additional, especial, pre-cautions / warnings about CCP folks interjecting themselves into circumstances that turn south, and the use of the firearm that is then provoked by the circumstances, could be required.

    However, the meld of that idea with the much more fundamental rights that we all share, whether articulated and specified by constitution, statute, or code - or not - such as but not limited to, the right to inquire, the right to be aware, the right to protect property, the right to question, the right to be pro-active in our environment and not passive, and certainly the right to reasonably use deadly force when necessary . . . seems to be problematic, at best.

    A clash, more likely.
  7. bludigal

    bludigal New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,973
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think we keep SYG and lose concealed carry laws. Put the gun on your hip. Then if you are able to pick a fight with someone and they are dumb enough to get baited into the fight with the gun obviously on your hip and their hip obviously naked, then by all means get them out the gene pool.

    No one should have to shoot someone, the reason our nukes work is as a deterrent, maybe we should let our pistols be a deterrent as well. Never knew why we are forced to hide them????
  8. MichiGator2002

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,168
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I could see a very qualified duty by CCPs to give reasonable warning -- i.e. if a reasonable person would not consider the warning itself to put them in danger, to warn anyone they suspect presents a threat of force that they are armed.

    Eh, I don't know. I can't think of something other than the status quo that is manageable and doesn't put someone who may have to defend themselves in a worse position.
  9. PIMking

    PIMking New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    10,528
    Likes Received:
    894
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tuscaloosa, AL (Ft. Myers)
    if you cant ask someone that is looking suspicious what the hell they're doing because you have a A CCP then the only thing you're doing is saying it's okay to break the law.

    Sorry, if I were to witness someone breaking into the house next door to mine i'm not going to just sit there. I'm going to ask them what the hell they're doing. if that retard comes at me then he is about to take a little bit of hot lead.

    I can understand if the guy picks a fight and then ends up using his gun (baiting) then it should be murder.

    But basically nutering everyone to look the other way or be thrown in jail is a joke.

    If more buglars, drugged out crackheads that only want to break the law and commit violent crimes keep getting shot and killed they will eventually stop doing it.
    DarthG8RV3 likes this.
  10. Lawdog88

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    31,196
    Likes Received:
    727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL

    It's a thorny issue, i.e., to be forced to disclose CCP when an "incident" is brewing.

    As in the recent Texas SYG case (which had multiple problems, granted), the dude indicating he had a firearm and giving warnings, and all that, actually exacerbated the problem, IMO.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0hzt1saKsY
  11. whitelakegator

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That guy shot three people over NOISE? And someone is going to try to tell me he is a responsible gun owner? Give me a break. And the way he kept saying he was in fear of his life...very staged...do they teach you to say that at gun classes, I wonder?

    He should go to jail for a long time. And he will.
  12. Lawdog88

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    31,196
    Likes Received:
    727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL

    He was convicted, and got 20, I believe.

    His problem was he went to the situation, filming, with a provocative attitude.

    Nevertheless, I do think that the initial bum-rush by the occupants could easily have been interpreted as sufficiently aggressive as to put him in fear for his life. Point is, though, and I would guess the jury thought so as well, that he put himself in that position, with provocation.

    Unlike the GZ / TM case, as we all know.
    DarthG8RV3 likes this.
  13. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Guns and stupidity don't mix.
    DarthG8RV3 likes this.
  14. MichaelJoeWilliamson

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I support this. Once one has a CCP and then one decides to carry, then that imparts a special responsibility on that decision.

    Not sure how the law would read though.
  15. whitelakegator

    whitelakegator New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Too bad Zimmerman didn't film his incident.
  16. MichiGator2002

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    17,168
    Likes Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think he got 40 years. I don't think that case speaks to the value of warning or announcing a gun one way or another, because the issue with him is that he was basically fabricating a situation in which he induced an altercation and then claimed, with no credibility, that he believed his life was in danger.

    If not for the fact that he was convicted over and above his ploy, he would be the archetype "fake SYG" hypo.

    I don't know if an announce/warn rule would be good, because, I just don't know how manageable it would be. Adding layers to already really fact specific legal scenarios is probably not productive.
  17. DaveFla

    DaveFla VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,672
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Neither does voting and stupidity, but no one better dare even suggesting the voting laws be changed...
  18. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Both sides of the political divide have too much to lose.

Share This Page