is this what you guys call a redneck ?

[snafu]

Okay that’s just sick..

I can’t believe any of you would take the side of this piece of shit asshole! He killed a kid in cold blood. He deserves to DIE! I don’t care how shitty the kid was. Poison the kids dog or something. You don’t shoot someone in cold blood. And even in a rage you don’t go up and cap him at point blank when he’s down.

 

But just like liberals they throw the gun control in the mix. It has nothing to do with this. The fuck head could’ve killed the kid in a thousand ways with out a gun.

 

 

My first thought was my son doing something stupid like running through a crazy mans yard. I want to see this guy fry after getting corn hole'd in prison for a few years!

 

 

In the US, you can't shoot someone for walking on your property...

If they walk into or break into your HOUSE then in most states its open season...Someone breaking into your house gives you the right to assume they are going to harm you...you can shoot them even before you know for sure they have a weapon.

 

You can't shoot someone for walking on your yard and you can't shoot someone breaking into your house either.

You can only shoot someone if you or someone elses life is in danger.

That's the problem. We don't educate people on gun laws and saftey.

Someone can be stealing your car and your kid is in it and by law(I don't agree with this) you can't shoot the fucker. In this instance you need to convince the jury that you feared for the childs life.

[Lethalfind]

For fuck's sake Lethal. You wanna argue the point, then you present this case. What the fuck is your game? The kid that copped a couple of bullets and died was a clever fuck, in control of his crew of mates. He baited this old fella continually, over a long period of time, and when he copped a blast, you sided with him. What kinda drugs are you on????

 

I am an ex teacher, and I have twenty three nephews and nieces that grew up with me. I can read kids' eyes.

 

You want to refute that kind of experience in favour of one kid who happened to be a smart kid?

 

Well fuck you. And the horse you rode in on.

 

The post you quoted (of mine) in this post was not an argument to what had been previously said, IF you had read it you would have seen that.

AGAIN, in the US baiting someone and walking on their lawn is not something you can legally shoot someone for, because this happened in the US, those LAWS apply.

 

Frankly, if you were really a teacher, I'm glad your not anymore because your cold blooded attitude is not something I would want around my children. I also thank god your in Oz and not here.

 

I still can't believe you really think what this old fucker did was OK, I think your a poser trying to stir up conversation for the sake of it which makes you a piece of shit in my book...

 

Above all else, I HATE people who are fake, it doesn't matter for what reason they choose to be this way.

[Lethalfind]

Okay that’s just sick..

I can’t believe any of you would take the side of this piece of shit asshole! He killed a kid in cold blood. He deserves to DIE! I don’t care how shitty the kid was. Poison the kids dog or something. You don’t shoot someone in cold blood. And even in a rage you don’t go up and cap him at point blank when he’s down.

 

But just like liberals they throw the gun control in the mix. It has nothing to do with this. The fuck head could’ve killed the kid in a thousand ways with out a gun.

 

 

My first thought was my son doing something stupid like running through a crazy mans yard. I want to see this guy fry after getting corn hole'd in prison for a few years!

 

 

 

 

You can't shoot someone for walking on your yard and you can't shoot someone breaking into your house either.

You can only shoot someone if you or someone elses life is in danger.

That's the problem. We don't educate people on gun laws and saftey.

Someone can be stealing your car and your kid is in it and by law(I don't agree with this) you can't shoot the fucker. In this instance you need to convince the jury that you feared for the childs life.

 

Sorry, here in Florida I can shoot someone once they are in my house, the fact that a stranger has walked into my house uninvited is enough for local law enforcement to believe I felt my life and safety and that of my daughter were threatened.

Of course this could be different from state to state and what threatens a big burly man is completely different to what would constitute feeling threatened for me. According to a recent change in the law, if I have a license to carry a concealed weapon and I am say in the Wal-Mart parking lot and someone does something to me that makes me feel threatened for my life, I can shoot them there as well. We don't actually have to be in my house.

 

I agree that this man deserves to fry and honestly I think Builder feels the same way. Mods often feel they have to pretend to feel a certain way in order to stir up conversation. Honestly if a subject requires someone pretending to feel a certain way to stir up conversation then maybe that topic isn't worthy of people's time.

I can't stand posers...Evidenty that is what Builder has become and what a complete and total waste of time chatting with him is because of it...

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

This old man should be a hero.

 

The little punk piece of shit was picking on an old man for five years (yes I do believe the word of an old man over that of some teenage sack of shit) The old man in question had enough so he blasted him. This man has a right to stand up to the little asswipe and doesn't need to put up with his shit. Don't want to get shot then leave people the fuck alone.

[eisanbt]

Did you see the footage?

 

You gun-toting "I need to seal my tiles to hide the blood of my last kill" glock toting fucking retarded mickey mouse paying momma.

 

Everthing this old fella did is what you have ranted about doing as being your god-given right as a registered gun-toting American citizen, Lethalfind. And now I find you backing the assailant.

 

What a fucking hypocrite.

 

 

 

Firstly, I didn' know you would let yourself be such a dick builder, I'd expect more of you. It makes me sad.

 

Secondly wither or not the case involved harassment form the dipshits or a nutcase old man with an ichy trigger finger there was no need to shoot the kid in that instance or any other short of direct assult on him. I definatly understand you position on dipshits and I'm sorry leathal but stright As, especially in boys, seldom make them perfect angles. I'm fairly fresh out of the education system and, being apart of this generation, have delt with it much more then yourself. Maybe if they're in the chess club and wear special shoes they might be docile but that dosn't even totally rule it out.

 

You've made several mentions to footage, please give us a link or something and mayhap we could better understand eh? From my understanding the kid was simply crossing the guy's lawn, you can't even justify an insanity plea based on past experiences to justify his timing here. There are shitloads of options other then shooting the kid down which could have accomlished something, and without bloodshed (Hell a leg shot even).

 

Last I will make mention to your reconignition of the man's beaten down expression, atleast reconize that to somebody mentally ill that thier expressions can be just as genuine as their reality is to them (Or the one they may claim to have pending psychoics). This however dos not make the actual circumstances any different.

 

I will can't accept murder outside of direct self-defence. You can lay the shit down without taking a life away.

[Lethalfind]

This old man should be a hero.

 

The little punk piece of shit was picking on an old man for five years (yes I do believe the word of an old man over that of some teenage sack of shit) The old man in question had enough so he blasted him. This man has a right to stand up to the little asswipe and doesn't need to put up with his shit. Don't want to get shot then leave people the fuck alone.

 

I have a question for you...IF this kid had been harassing him for 5 years, then why is it the police had no mention of him calling them since 2003?

 

All you have is this old mans word...are you really that gullible?

You should visit prison sometimes, EVERYONE there is innocent.

 

This old man sounds a bit paranoid from what I have read. If there was a problem he should have called the police and if he had to, call them daily to substantiate the problem. When something happens, they could have come out and talked to people who might have witnessed something, so at least some kind of record was kept of the events.

There are other ways to take care of a problem in your neighborhood before you actually gun down someone in cold blood for walking on your yard...one of them is civil court...yes that costs money but not near as much as this mess he has gotten himself into.

A fence around his yard would have been a hell of alot cheaper...

Did you notice the articles said he had a flag from the Navy flying in his yard? I think maybe he was suffering from some mental problems posibly as a result of his time in the service. His reaction was simply not reasonable in my opinion and he will end up spending time in jail for his actions...

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

Sorry, here in Florida I can shoot someone once they are in my house, the fact that a stranger has walked into my house uninvited is enough for local law enforcement to believe I felt my life and safety and that of my daughter were threatened.

Of course this could be different from state to state and what threatens a big burly man is completely different to what would constitute feeling threatened for me. According to a recent change in the law, if I have a license to carry a concealed weapon and I am say in the Wal-Mart parking lot and someone does something to me that makes me feel threatened for my life, I can shoot them there as well. We don't actually have to be in my house.

 

I agree that this man deserves to fry and honestly I think Builder feels the same way. Mods often feel they have to pretend to feel a certain way in order to stir up conversation. Honestly if a subject requires someone pretending to feel a certain way to stir up conversation then maybe that topic isn't worthy of people's time.

I can't stand posers...Evidenty that is what Builder has become and what a complete and total waste of time chatting with him is because of it...

 

 

A couple of points...

 

1. PLEASE! Stop talking about posers. You sound like a tool.

 

2. They're mods because of the fact that they're assholes.

[snafu]

This old man should be a hero.

 

The little punk piece of shit was picking on an old man for five years (yes I do believe the word of an old man over that of some teenage sack of shit) The old man in question had enough so he blasted him. This man has a right to stand up to the little asswipe and doesn't need to put up with his shit. Don't want to get shot then leave people the fuck alone.

 

How do you know the old man wasn't just being and old fucking whinny asshole about his fucked up yard? That's what it sounds like to me. There is no reason to shoot someone thats not in self defense.

[Lethalfind]

A couple of points...

 

1. PLEASE! Stop talking about posers. You sound like a tool.

 

2. They're mods because of the fact that they're assholes.

 

I willl continue to speak of Posers as long as people on here (normally Mods with nothing of real value to say) keep acting that way. I don't care if you like it or not, you might want to give my posts a miss if this bothers you that much...

 

I don't think all the Mods are ass holes but anyone who feels they have to pretend to believe something in order to get attention and stir up conflict is a complete and total waste of space in a place like this.

 

I want REAL conversation with people, REAL exchange of ideas and opinions, this bullshit of pretending something that is not true pisses me off to the max...

[Lethalfind]

How do you know the old man wasn't just being and old fucking whinny asshole about his fucked up yard? That's what it sounds like to me. There is no reason to shoot someone thats not in self defense.

 

I completely agree with you Snafu...I think he was an old fuck who was the ass hole in the neighborhood...rather then take real action to stop what he perceived as a problem such as calling the police about the supposed harassment or putting up a fence, getting a BIG dog and staking him out in the yard, he bitches at people and eventually shoots and kills a 15 year old kid??? Thats about as far as reasonable as I can imagine.

[eisanbt]

Did you see the footage?

 

You gun-toting "I need to seal my tiles to hide the blood of my last kill" glock toting fucking retarded mickey mouse paying momma.

 

Everthing this old fella did is what you have ranted about doing as being your god-given right as a registered gun-toting American citizen, Lethalfind. And now I find you backing the assailant.

 

What a fucking hypocrite.

 

 

 

Firstly, I didn' know you would let yourself be such a dick builder, I'd expect more of you. It makes me sad.

 

Secondly wither or not the case involved harassment form the dipshits or a nutcase old man with an ichy trigger finger there was no need to shoot the kid in that instance or any other short of direct assult on him. I definatly understand you position on dipshits and I'm sorry leathal but stright As, especially in boys, seldom make them perfect angles. I'm fairly fresh out of the education system and, being apart of this generation, have delt with it much more then yourself. Maybe if they're in the chess club and wear special shoes they might be docile but that dosn't even totally rule it out.

 

You've made several mentions to footage, please give us a link or something and mayhap we could better understand eh? From my understanding the kid was simply crossing the guy's lawn, you can't even justify an insanity plea based on past experiences to justify his timing here. There are shitloads of options other then shooting the kid down which could have accomlished something, and without bloodshed (Hell a leg shot even).

 

Last I will make mention to your reconignition of the man's beaten down expression, atleast reconize that the expressions of somebody who is mentally ill can be just as genuine as their distorted reality is to them (Or the one they may claim to have pending psychoics). This however dose not make the actual circumstances any different.

 

I will can't accept murder outside of direct self-defence. You can lay the shit down without taking a life away.

[Lethalfind]

Firstly, I didn' know you would let yourself be such a dick builder, I'd expect more of you. It makes me sad.

 

Secondly wither or not the case involved harassment form the dipshits or a nutcase old man with an ichy trigger finger there was no need to shoot the kid in that instance or any other short of direct assult on him. I definatly understand you position on dipshits and I'm sorry leathal but stright As, especially in boys, seldom make them perfect angles. I'm fairly fresh out of the education system and, being apart of this generation, have delt with it much more then yourself. Maybe if they're in the chess club and wear special shoes they might be docile but that dosn't even totally rule it out.

 

You've made several mentions to footage, please give us a link or something and mayhap we could better understand eh? From my understanding the kid was simply crossing the guy's lawn, you can't even justify an insanity plea based on past experiences to justify his timing here. There are shitloads of options other then shooting the kid down which could have accomlished something, and without bloodshed (Hell a leg shot even).

 

Last I will make mention to your reconignition of the man's beaten down expression, atleast reconize that to somebody mentally ill that thier expressions can be just as genuine as their reality is to them (Or the one they may claim to have pending psychoics). This however dos not make the actual circumstances any different.

 

I will can't accept murder outside of direct self-defence. You can lay the shit down without taking a life away.

 

This kid could have been the antichrist...horns and all, the old bastard still had no right too shoot him.

I believe one article that I posted here stated the boy had crossed the yard and the old man had said something to him, probably telling him to get off his property and then the boy walking back to the house he was at, walked across it again...this was enough to push this shit head over the top and shoot him...

It was merely a suggestion that IF the kid had been the trouble maker the old man seemed to think he was that you think there would have been mention of it from someone else, someone from his school or someone else in the neighborhood. Around here if a kid is a troublemaker, the kid is well known throughout the neighborhood for it.

[Lethalfind]

I have been continuing too look for something that sheds more light on this...

 

Chicago - An American man shot and killed a 15-year-old neighbour because he walked across his front lawn in a street without sidewalks, media reported on Tuesday.

 

In a chilling tape of an emergency call, Charles Martin, 66, calmly told the operator: "I just killed a kid... I shot him with a 410 shotgun twice... He's laying in his yard."

 

A neighbour in Union Township, east of Cincinnati, Ohio, told the Cincinnati Enquirer that Martin had argued with the boy, Larry Mugrage, on Sunday afternoon when he walked across the lawn with his 13-year-old brother.

 

Four hours later, as Mugrage was on his way home to get a video game, Martin shot him while he was walking down the street.

 

"I've been being harassed by him and his parents for five years. Today just blew it up," Martin told the 911 operator.

 

"The kid's just been giving me a bunch of (expletive), making the other kids harrass me and my place, tearing things up."

 

Martin was charged with murder and held without bail.

 

Prosecutors told an arraignment hearing that the shooting was "cruel" and "cowardly" premeditated act, the Enquirer reported. - Sapa-AFP

 

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=22&art_id=qw1142977693294B223

 

This article seems to be saying he shot him 4 hours after he walked across his lawn and at a time when he was in the street, not on his lawn, not sure how accurate that is.

[snafu]

Sorry, here in Florida I can shoot someone once they are in my house, the fact that a stranger has walked into my house uninvited is enough for local law enforcement to believe I felt my life and safety and that of my daughter were threatened.

[\QUOTE]

 

Well you might be talking about this.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1557282,00.html

Your not reading the law right.

 

But it still doesn

[snafu]

Sorry, here in Florida I can shoot someone once they are in my house, the fact that a stranger has walked into my house uninvited is enough for local law enforcement to believe I felt my life and safety and that of my daughter were threatened.

Not in any state.

 

You might be talking about this.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1557282,00.html

Your not reading the law right.

 

But it still doesn

[Lethalfind]

From what Builder was saying it seemed he had seen some footage of the man himself saying what happened and pointing too his lawn??

 

I don't know how this is posible since they are saying he is being held without bond...when did he have the opportunity to give this interview?

 

http://wbal.com/news/story.asp?articleid=42583

 

This article seems to be saying the man shot the boy when he was at home in his own yard...read what the man told the 911 operator when asked where the boy was...

 

"You shot him with a shotgun? Where is he?" the dispatcher asked.

"He's laying in his yard," the caller said. Mugrage, who police said was hit in the chest, was pronounced dead at a hospital

Its sounding more and more like this old fart is off his head...4 hours after this kid walks in his yard he stays that mad and shots him either in the street or in his own yard?? NICE, jail is too good for this old shit head.

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

I have a question for you...IF this kid had been harassing him for 5 years, then why is it the police had no mention of him calling them since 2003?

 

Why would he make it up? Especially if he went and confessed the attack immediately after?

 

All you have is this old mans word...are you really that gullible?

...which I believe over some dumbshit teen

 

You should visit prison sometimes, EVERYONE there is innocent.

 

Unless they were wrongfully accused, they're aren't. They have been proven guilty. This is why they are in jail

 

This old man sounds a bit paranoid from what I have read.

Yes old people tend to get paranoid especially when being terrorized by teenage punks.

 

If there was a problem he should have called the police and if he had to, call them daily to substantiate the problem. When something happens, they could have come out and talked to people who might have witnessed something, so at least some kind of record was kept of the events.

 

An oops on his behalf....Hmm, maybe he thought it would just blow over..

 

 

There are other ways to take care of a problem in your neighborhood before you actually gun down someone in cold blood for walking on your yard...one of them is civil court...yes that costs money but not near as much as this mess he has gotten himself into.

 

There is civil court but courts tend to give kids slaps on the wrist. The best way to deal with teenagers running around causing problems is to pump them full of lead (hell, ALL teens DESERVE to be gunned down - but let's not get into that right now)

 

A fence around his yard would have been a hell of alot cheaper...

 

You do know it is possible to hop a fence right?

 

Did you notice the articles said he had a flag from the Navy flying in his yard? I think maybe he was suffering from some mental problems posibly as a result of his time in the service.

 

...And being harassed by some punk kid doesn't help that any.

[hugo]

From

 

Law lets people shoot to kill to protect property

Texans well within rights to fire, especially at night

By JIM SCHUTZE

Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle Dallas Bureau

 

DALLAS -- A Dallas man machine-guns two teen-agers for stealing wheel ornaments from his car.

 

In two cases -- one in Houston, the other near Fort Worth -- men shoot and kill their daughters when they mistake them for burglars.

 

A man near Waco catches a teen-age thief, calls the boy's mother to tell her he's going to blow her son away, then shoots him in the back with a shotgun.

 

In only the latter case was the shooter indicted. In the other cases, no charges were filed or grand juries refused to indict.

 

Experts say that's just the way things are in Texas: If you are defending yourself, your family or your property against imminent harm -- or if you believe that's what you are doing -- you can shoot to kill. Especially at night.

 

"When homeowners, property owners or merchants raise the defense of deadly force to protect property, grand juries have a tendency to resolve any reasonable doubt in their favor," said Norman Kinne, chief prosecutor for Dallas County.

 

Kinne should know. He was the prosecutor who took the wheel ornaments case to a Dallas County grand jury, seeking murder charges against Shedric Bables, 23.

 

That grand jury declined to indict Bables in spite of evidence that he had methodically executed two teens in a parked car after the man who was actually removing the wheel ornaments had run away.

 

In defending his actions, Bables' lawyers pointed to the portion of Texas law governing the use of force by private citizens in protection of property, which is quite different from the use of force in self-defense.

 

In self-defense, a person who shoots someone to death must be able to prove that shooting was the only way to escape serious personal harm.

 

The law on protection of property sets up certain conditions under which it is not legal to shoot a thief or an intruder.

 

But all bets are essentially off if the theft occurs at night, as was the case with Bables. If it happens at night, according to Texas law, you can shoot a thief simply to stop him from stealing or to stop him from getting away after he has stolen something.

 

"Texas law is fairly standard in line with other states," said University of Texas criminal law professor Robert Dawson, "except for that one nonstandard protection giving a citizen the right to use deadly force to prevent someone who stole something at night to escape with the property. That's an extreme position."

 

But that extreme provision of Texas law -- giving you the right to kill someone in order to keep him from getting away with your stereo set under cover of darkness -- is actually the oldest, most traditional portion of the law, Dawson said, going back to horse thieves and the earliest history of Texas.

[Lethalfind]

Not in any state.

 

You might be talking about this.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1557282,00.html

Your not reading the law right.

 

But it still doesn’t give anybody the right to shoot someone that’s not a threat to your person or persons. Go ahead and shoot the drunk neighbor that mistakes his house for yours and see how long you stay out of jail.

 

Force against force!

 

The link you posted is from April of 2005, this has since been passed into law. You are wrong, I can shoot someone once they are in my house, I say this with the knowledge of having discussed this at our Neighborhood watch meetings with the police who regularly attend them. Of course there are exceptions, if the neighborhood toddler walks in my front door and I shoot him, I would have a hard time convincing anyone that I was affraid for my life. The police will tell you that you have to be affraid for your life, this is of course relative to the person whose house is being broken into and who is doing the breaking in.

 

As for someone mistaking my house for his, I take the responsible gesture of making sure all my doors are ALWAYS locked (day and night), therefore someone could not mistake my house for theirs and walk in, they would HAVE to break in. I figure if I am going to have a gun and be ready to shoot someone, I need to make sure someone doesn't wander in accidently...I still hear stories where people are shot under the circumstances you describe and nothing is done to the shooter for the simple reason the person has been shot in someone elses house in which they were not an invited guest.

RO is the one you want to talk to about this, he is really well versed in these kinds of laws. You have to remember what the police tell me I can get away with, a single Mother living on her own with a small child might be very different then what someone else can get away with. Anyone who says "I was affraid for my life" will be looked at by the law and they will ask themselves was that a reasonable response...I will get a wider latitude then another man for instance.

[Lethalfind]

From

 

Law lets people shoot to kill to protect property

Texans well within rights to fire, especially at night

By JIM SCHUTZE

Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle Dallas Bureau

 

Thanks for that post Hugo, Florida is not to the same point I don't believe with the being able to shoot someone because they are stealing but the other laws are pretty much the same. I guess people who don't own guns might not be aware of this. I wanted to make sure what the laws were in this state BEFORE I got a gun to make sure I didn't end up in jail...

[Lethalfind]

Fla. Gun Law to Expand Leeway for Self-Defense

 

NRA to Promote Idea in Other States

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501553.html

"By Manuel Roig-Franzia

Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, April 26, 2005; Page A01

MIAMI -- It is either a Wild West revival, a return to the days of "shoot first and ask questions later," or a triumph for the "Castle Doctrine" -- the notion that enemies invade personal space at their peril.

 

Such dueling rhetoric marked the debate over a measure that Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ® could sign as early as Tuesday. The legislation passed so emphatically that National Rifle Association backers plan to take it to statehouses across the nation, including Virginia's, over the next year. The law will let Floridians "meet force with force," erasing the "duty to retreat" when they fear for their lives outside of their homes, in their cars or businesses, or on the street.

 

 

• 
  [ ]

 

 

 

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said in an interview that the Florida measure is the "first step of a multi-state strategy" that he hopes can capitalize on a political climate dominated by conservative opponents of gun control at the state and national levels.

 

"There's a big tailwind we have, moving from state legislature to state legislature," LaPierre said. "The South, the Midwest, everything they call 'flyover land' -- if John Kerry held a shotgun in that state, we can pass this law in that state."

 

The Florida measure says any person "has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm."

 

Florida law already lets residents defend themselves against attackers if they can prove they could not have escaped. The new law would allow them to use deadly force even if they could have fled and says that prosecutors must automatically presume that would-be victims feared for their lives if attacked.

 

The overwhelming vote margins and bipartisan support for the Florida gun bill -- it passed unanimously in the state Senate and was approved 94 to 20 in the state House, with nearly a dozen Democratic co-sponsors -- have alarmed some national gun-control advocates, who say a measure that made headlines in Florida slipped beneath their radar.

"I am in absolute shock," Sarah Brady, chair of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said in an interview. "If I had known about it, I would have been down there."

 

The lessons of history do not bode well for gun-control groups and their leaders, such as Brady, who became a crusader after President Ronald Reagan and her husband, then-White House press secretary James S. Brady, were seriously wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt.

Florida has a track record as a gun-law trendsetter. In the mid-1980s, the NRA chose Florida to launch a push for "conceal carry" or "right-to-carry" laws, which allow states to issue permits for residents to carry firearms. Democrat Bob Graham, who was then governor, vetoed the measure, but it was resurrected after he left office and was signed in 1987 by Gov. Bob Martinez, a Republican.

 

At the time, fewer than a dozen states had right-to-carry laws. Now there are 38.

 

LaPierre thinks the new Florida measure -- nicknamed the "Castle Doctrine" by its conceiver, Florida lobbyist Marion P. Hammer, a former NRA president -- can create the same momentum.

 

Critics argue that the measure is so broad it will encourage fights between neighbors, parents at soccer games or drinking buddies to escalate into gunfights.

 

"It's almost like a duel clause," said state Rep. Dan Gelber, a Miami Beach Democrat and former federal prosecutor whose wife is a state prosecutor. "People ought to have to walk away if they can."

 

 

 

 

Gelber believes that Florida's major prosecutor groups, populated by state attorneys who must run for reelection, stayed out of the fight and many lawmakers supported the bill because they fear the NRA.

 

Law enforcement did not try to block the measure, siding with the NRA rather than opposing the group, as many sheriffs and police officials had done during the debate two decades earlier over right-to-carry.

Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist, a leading candidate for the Republican governor's nomination in 2006, was among those who wrote letters of support. With that kind of high-level backing, Rep. Dennis Baxley, a Republican from Ocala who sponsored the House measure, could ridicule critics as "hysterical."

 

"Disorder and chaos are always held in check by the law-abiding citizen," Baxley said.

 

As in the mid-1980s fights over the right-to-carry law, the state's big newspapers have almost unanimously lined up against Baxley's measure, although their outrage did little to stop its easy glide. South Florida Sun-Sentinel columnist Howard Goodman said the state was "getting in touch with its inner Dirty Harry." Martin Dyckman of the St. Petersburg Times told tourists, indisputably a bedrock of the state's economy, to stay away: "Lebanon might be safer."

 

Hammer, a 4-foot-11 dynamo with a national reputation for her persuasive powers, dismissed the papers as "liberal, anti-gunners" and "Chicken Littles." The current law unfairly forces Floridians to make split-second decisions about a criminal's intent, she said, and NRA lobbyists like to note that was deemed impossible generations ago by legendary Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. "Detached reflection," Holmes said in one of his most oft-quoted pronouncements, "cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife."

 

Hammer stresses that violent-crime rates in Florida have dropped since the right-to-carry law was signed. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement reports that violent crimes dropped from 1,136 per 100,00 residents in 1989 -- two years after the law went into effect -- to 727.7 per 100,000 in 2003.

 

Her opponents counter that Florida's drop is not tied to the gun law and note that national violent-crime rates have been trending down. More important, Gelber and others say, is that Florida still ranked second in the nation, behind only South Carolina, in violent crime in 2003, according to U.S. Census Bureau statistics.

 

Brady's best hope, as a national fight appears inevitable, is that there will be a backlash -- much like the bounce that gun control got in Florida in the 1980s when the loss on the right-to-carry law was followed by victories on waiting periods and background checks.

 

"This," Brady says of the new Florida measure, "will be the thing that will awaken the sleeping great number of Middle Americans who will think this is so absurd."

 

But, for now, it is the thoughts of another group that really matter, the ones with guns. In this state of 17 million people, permits to carry guns have been issued more than 1 million times in the past 18 years."

 

Snafu, think about what your saying...why would I have to take LESS care in who I shoot in public then who I shoot once they have entered my home???

[Lethalfind]

http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/StateLaws.aspx?ST=FL

 

Florida Statues regarding the use of firearms...

 

"The legislature of the State of Florida, in a declaration of policy incorporated in its "Weapons and Firearms" statute, recognizes that adult citizens of the state retain their constitutional right to keep and bear firearms for hunting and sporting activities and for defense of self, family, home, and business and as collectibles."

 

"Under Florida law, there is no "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a lawful right to be (like my house). Instead, you may stand your ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others."

 

"It is unlawful to knowingly discharge a firearm in any public place, or on the right of way of any paved public road, highway or street or over any road, highway, street or occupied building, except in defense of life or property, in performance of official duties or where expressly approved for hunting."

 

I was finally able to find the link I was looking for, this tells me I can shoot someone once they have entered my house...It also tells me I can fire a warning shot in a public place to deter someone from harming me or my property...

[tizz]

Verbally taunting and old crazy man, obsessed with his pathetic lawn is hardly an offence that justifies such a senseless act. had the kid been brandishing a weapon then fine. here IS A GUY THAT SHOT NOT ONCE BUT TWICE, TO INSURE A KILL because the kid walked on his piece of shit lawn? Sorry but no. If this kid had been such a fucking problem to the guy, why hadn't HE called the police to complain at some point? I live in a town without sidewalks and here you learn that YA kids walk on your lawn at times, but as long as they are not actually tearing it up or doing anything dangerous, who cares, it's better than seeing them smooshed in the street.

 

Nope, this guy has no defence what so ever for this. Even if he HAD made 100 complaints to the police, it is still just a dumb old man who has to blow a 15 year old kid out of existence because he is too ignorant to fight his battles with his mind. He MUST have voted for Bush .

[tizz]

I was finally able to find the link I was looking for, this tells me I can shoot someone once they have entered my house...It also tells me I can fire a warning shot in a public place to deter someone from harming me or my property...

 

 

Even a warning shot poses a danger. Within the first three months I was living in Albuquerque, 2 kids under the age of ten were killed after bullets shot straight in the air found their way back to earth (through the tops of the kids' heads). Just remember, for every action there is an equal and opposite REaction, and everything that goes up (and stays within the eirsth's atmosphere for you smartasses out there) must come down somewhere.

[Lethalfind]

Even a warning shot poses a danger. Within the first three months I was living in Albuquerque, 2 kids under the age of ten were killed after bullets shot straight in the air found their way back to earth (through the tops of the kids' heads). Just remember, for every action there is an equal and opposite REaction, and everything that goes up (and stays within the eirsth's atmosphere for you smartasses out there) must come down somewhere.

 

A warning shot should be shot into the ground for this very reason...