|Stay Safe: Cock, Pull, Bang! (I'm Talking About Guns, Pervs)
||[May. 9th, 2005|04:31 pm]
Think Before you Type
|||||System of a Down- Byob||]|
[Protection of Persons/Use of Force;
authorizes person to use
force including deadly force, against intruder or
attacker in dwelling, residence, or vehicle under
specified circumstances; provides that person is
justified in using deadly force under certain
circumstances; provides immunity from criminal
prosecution or civil action for using deadly force; defines term "criminal prosecution", etc.]
Link to the House 0249 General Bill
Jeb Bush, the governor of my state, Florida, signed a new bill
that is supposed to reduce crime by making it legal for people to shoot
an attacker without first trying to escape. This, of course was greatly
supported by the NRA .
This "Stand Your Ground" bill has expanded on the "Castle"
which is a legal concept that allows you to protect yourself than have
to retreat from an assailant who confronts you within your home, hence
the reason why it is called the "Castle" doctrine, as in the saying that a man's home
is his castle.
Castle Doctrine Explanation
First, the Castle Doctrine allowed a person to use deadly force if attacked in one's own home.
For instance, if a woman were attacked by a man, she would not be
allowed to shoot him, if she were able to retreat. And thus came the
"Stand Your Ground" bill.
Now, the rules are that deadly force could be used if one were attacked outside of one's own home or vehicle. (by expanding the meaning of "castle") .
Could this law be justified for people who are guilty of crimes such as when "Levin, 40, is charged with shooting and killing his 16-year-old neighbor as the boy rang his doorbell as a prank."?
Source: 2nd Amendment News 12/26/2003
With all of the hectic traffic and frustration in the highways of
Florida, there are already enough accidents as there are with 2-ton
vehicles, that can do enough damage as it is. We all know that people
get into a different state of mind with "Road Rage". Must their anger
be settled with the use of guns while already in a 2-ton, 4-wheel
This law should be restricted to only protection for an individual in
his home, with fear for his or his family's life, and not to be used
out of home with risk of shooting an innocent individual, or risk of
abuse of the privelege.
Then again, I am against guns period. The selling of firearms to the
general public has always been a bad idea from the start.
So therefore, when guns are available to the public, they are used for
protection from crimes. But because these guns were available to the
public in the first place, crimes were commited, eventually starting a chain of chaos.
- With crime, there is a fear of one's life and property.
- With fear of one's own life and property, there are guns to protect that life and property.
- With crime, there are guns to threaten the owner of that life and property.
The root of this dilemma doesn't nessecarily lie in the gun itself....
But instead, the merchants of the gun.
You may not agree with me, but at least this 6 year old does