"Stand Your Ground" Law

[DrPhil]

Instead of resurrecting those other threads, I am giving this law its own thread.

Originally Posted by USA Today

'Stand your ground' laws

At least 21 states (in blue) have laws allowing citizens to use deadly force without attempting to retreat when threatened outside the home.
Source: Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...tin/55208980/1

[PeppyGPhiB]

Hm. The map seems to be out of date, because Washington state also has a "Stand Your Ground" law, which in some states is called "Right to Not Retreat." Note that Stand Your Ground should not be confused with the right to self defense, which is protected more broadly.

[Iota Man]

I know if somebody tried to start some shit with me off my property, yeah, I'd probably beat his ass right on the spot. As long as he didn't have a gun LOL. I like the law, but what makes it not work are the mofos who would abuse it and take advantage of it. But that's with almost every law, though.

[ibis]

I should be able to protect myself from harm especially if someone tries to break in to my home and harm my family.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by ibis

I should be able to protect myself from harm especially if someone tries to break in to my home and harm my family.

SYG and similar laws generally apply outside the home - inside your own home, you're almost never required to 'retreat' (where would you go anyway?).

[DrPhil]

Exactly, KSigRC. People are not outraged over people protecting themselves from home intruders.**

Those who are outraged are bothered by people using SYG to be (often) unnecessarily violent and murderous in an exaggeration of self-defense. Not every verbal and physical altercation is an unavoidable and deadly altercation. Some people who have (mis)used SYG have been arrested and prosecuted and some have not. This has been discussed in other threads.

**Since SYG has primarily been discussed about the use of guns (as deadly force) for self-defense without the duty to retreat, contrary to what many people believe, having a gun makes you more likely to be the victim of gun violence. That includes the fact that the average gun owner is neither equipped nor "anxious" to aim a gun at an actual person and shoot. Gun owners who are law abiding citizens need to remember that they are not the motivated offenders. When self-proclaimed law abiding gun owners begin talking trash about shooting people and acting crazy talking about "hey if someone messes with me...they are DEAD," that is when I tell them that they are no different than a motivated offender. They simply have a different motivation which would be classified as an expressive crime rather than an instrumental crime.

[DrPhil]

I found this to be interesting.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...mi-street?lite

Originally Posted by article

...the man shot in the truck was Greyston Garcia, who was granted immunity in March under the controversial self-defense law following a stabbing.

Garcia had chased down and stabbed a thief who had broken into his truck after the thief swung a bag filled with heavy car radios at him,
according to the Herald.

Pardon me but when you have the ability to chase someone down, you became the aggressor and were no longer defending yourself. It would be one thing if the offender was a kidnapper (of humans--not of car parts).