General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > Armageddon and Survival
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
arashi
 
arashi's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Greg View Post
Oh, well good. I thought you were asking for a link as proof... I was going to say, gtfo my guns foram.

hahaha no not me... glad we understood each other there.
__________________
grrr, i can't believe someone got me an avatar, this one is so shitty!
Old 01-15-2009, 05:03 PM arashi is offline  
Reply With Quote
#16  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

DHermit
www.TShirtReview.com
 
DHermit's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arashi View Post
Well imagine that. Guess when I went through CWP class that wasn't the case. Surprise.

what year did you go through it... and did you actually read the law that I posted in it's entirety that this thread is all about? Read it....

edit: Since you didn't read it the first time, you're probably too lazy to read it this time and will continue to spread false information without citation, so I'll do it for the good of everyone.

Section 2. Section 776.012, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using
force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent
that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend
himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful
force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and
does not have a duty to retreat if:

(a) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent
imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to
prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or.
(b) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

Section 3. Section 776.031, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
Use of force in defense of others.—A person is justified in the use
of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the
person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or
terminate the other’s trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference
with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property,
lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a
member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose
property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is
justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that
such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible
felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place
where he or she has a right to be.


Again in section 776.013:
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is
attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty
to retreat and 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 to himself or herself or another
or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

So basically as long as you're not trespassing, you can use force and have no duty to retreat. You have the right to be anywhere (within reason) except someone else's property when they have asked you to leave.

Feel free to say sorry now.

Last edited by DHermit; 01-16-2009 at 04:20 PM..
Old 01-16-2009, 04:14 PM DHermit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#17  

arashi
 
arashi's Avatar
 
Thanks for clearing that all up.
__________________
grrr, i can't believe someone got me an avatar, this one is so shitty!
Old 01-16-2009, 04:19 PM arashi is offline  
Reply With Quote
#18  

Mr. Baz
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHelmet View Post
<---- is a Florida CWP holder

Same here.
Old 01-19-2009, 12:08 PM Mr. Baz is offline  
Reply With Quote
#19  

detail
Impeach and try Bush/Cheney! 911 was an inside job!
 
AZ is pretty loose in their gun laws, wish we opened them up even more like FL.
Old 01-20-2009, 08:19 PM detail is offline  
Reply With Quote
#20  

mohavewolfpup
I masturbated a guy to death with my own hands
 
i have a question. it's mentioned that fists would be not be considered a deadly weapon? suppose you see someone using their fists against a person on their head to steal a purse/wallet? I know i would want to shoot their ass if they tried punching me in my skull, you could cause serious damage to someone and kill them hitting them in their skull/below the jaw/in the back of the head, etc.

what if they throw a rock at your head/someones head? they kick you in your groin/punch you there, etc? that's bodily harm to someone correct? or if they punch you in your chest/kidneys area? i'd think those are some places you could also cause some serious damage to (heart/kidneys/liver/etc)

what if you see someone just getting punched regularly, ie on the arms, back, etc but you don't know they have a roll of quarters in their rolled up fist?

i'm not trying to be a ass, i'm curious. how does the law decode stuff like the above? justified to shoot them, or instant jail for the one pulling the trigger?
__________________
Member of the toyota cheap fix clip club
To Own Yank Out Trashed Axle
Old 01-20-2009, 09:08 PM mohavewolfpup is offline  
Reply With Quote
#21  

DHermit
www.TShirtReview.com
 
DHermit's Avatar
 
Well I'm not 100% about the punching someone in various places, but since I've testified in some attempted murder cases, I am clear on the following:

Throwing a rock at someone, regardless if it's the head or not, is considered a "deadly weapon". Also, something to consider is that kicking someone with a shoe is considered a deadly weapon and will result in the least charge of attempted manslaughter.

If you're trying to save someone's life, and it seems for example that they are under attack and cannot defend themselves, I'd say that lethal force is justified. If you see two guys about to spar in the street, don't start shooting. If one guy gets knocked out and the other guy won't stop, that's where I believe you'd be justified.
Old 01-21-2009, 10:30 AM DHermit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#22  

FirstInSpace
 
FirstInSpace's Avatar
 
That's intersting, Dhermit, because I was reading through Orange County Statutes last night noticed such wordage...including 'forcible felony'...

Florida Statutes:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...TOKEN=52614788

Justifiable Use of Force:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...EChapter%20776


Definitely one of the very key things here is 'feeling threatened,' and as such, to a point that justifies deadly force. Certainly someone could break in to your home, but deadly force may not be justified. This might be some kind of check to prevent the ultra-paranoid from just shooting anyone that steps on their property.

Another interesting wordage is how they mention having 'the right to be [there].' We, of course, have the right to 'be' in most public places. But if your license is suspended, and you're carjacked, and you kill the carjacker...you don't have the right to be on the road or in the car (if it's operational), so your right to use deadly force has been trumped. Very much like you said, if you're a drug dealer and you're mugged at gunpoint in your dwelling and you shoot the attacker...your dwelling is being used for illegal activity and your right of force is trumped.

*I'd like to add at this point that I found another interesting statute under the Crimes Title for Public Nuisances. Under this title, along with other definitions, any person who keeps a 'place where controlled substances are illegally kept, sold, or used' commits a felony of the third degree. Even if you're in the category of misdemeanor possession, your dwelling could be declared public nuisance, and then you are guilty of 3rd degree felony. Obviously (and luckily), you must be a nuisance to the public, not just your own dwelling.

See that title here:
http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/ind...EChapter%20823

In the example where you have two people fighting outside a bar...this is not a forcible felony (unless its rape or one of the fore-mentioned). Since it is not a forcible felony and you wouldn't reasonably feel threatened by two random people fighting, deadly force is not justifiable.

Say you try to break up the fight, and then you are engaged and endangered...OK, deadly force may be justified. Suppose one of the persons involved in the fight is your designated driver. You may feel endangered because that is your means of safe harbor to your castle...deadly force may be justified.

There's obviously a lot of fuzzy wording here that could be misinterpreted. However, I think that allowing residents to take advantage of their property ownership and right to bear arms together is a great thing. I would hope that deadly force is a last resort for anyone, but at least we have the comfort of knowing that it *is* an option in protecting ourselves and others.
__________________
Old Schooler - Classic Ga[M]ing Club

If assholes could fly this place would be an airport.
Old 01-21-2009, 07:24 PM FirstInSpace is offline  
Reply With Quote
#23  

Liquid_pjear
Click, Click, Bloody Click, Pancakes!
 
I know here recently we had a guy walk into a gas station at night and there was a guy beating the crap out of the guy working there. The guy walking in shot and killed the guy and the police didnt charge him. To the best of my knowledge the guy attacking the clerk was just using his body no weapons.
Old 01-23-2009, 03:49 AM Liquid_pjear is offline  
Reply With Quote
#24  

DHermit
www.TShirtReview.com
 
DHermit's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstInSpace View Post


Definitely one of the very key things here is 'feeling threatened,' and as such, to a point that justifies deadly force. Certainly someone could break in to your home, but deadly force may not be justified. This might be some kind of check to prevent the ultra-paranoid from just shooting anyone that steps on their property.

The OP in this thread has statutes that talk about breaking into your home. Florida made it a statue that if someone is breaking into your home or vehicle while you are inside, it is automatically assumed they are doing so in violence with the intent to harm you. So yes, you could shoot anyone who steps INSIDE your property, but not on your front lawn. Inside your property includes porches, garages, etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstInSpace View Post
Another interesting wordage is how they mention having 'the right to be [there].' We, of course, have the right to 'be' in most public places. But if your license is suspended, and you're carjacked, and you kill the carjacker...you don't have the right to be on the road or in the car (if it's operational), so your right to use deadly force has been trumped. Very much like you said, if you're a drug dealer and you're mugged at gunpoint in your dwelling and you shoot the attacker...your dwelling is being used for illegal activity and your right of force is trumped.

I talked to my lawyer about the illegal activity thing. He said that the law would look at the type of illegal activity that is going on. I think basically this is to prevent crack houses and the likes of gang houses from having justified shooting privileges inside that dwelling. He said they aren't going to come in and search your whole home, so this wouldn't really be an issue if you just had a bong inside or mp3, etc. It would have to be related to the crime.



Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstInSpace View Post
In the example where you have two people fighting outside a bar...this is not a forcible felony (unless its rape or one of the fore-mentioned). Since it is not a forcible felony and you wouldn't reasonably feel threatened by two random people fighting, deadly force is not justifiable.

Say you try to break up the fight, and then you are engaged and endangered...OK, deadly force may be justified. Suppose one of the persons involved in the fight is your designated driver. You may feel endangered because that is your means of safe harbor to your castle...deadly force may be justified.

Well I agree, to a point. However, reading from the forcible felony definition that you linked to:

776.08 Forcible felony.--"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

Key words there are Aggravated assault and battery, along with the last line. As I said, if someone is kicking someone else with their shoe, that is assault with a deadly weapon.
Old 01-24-2009, 10:31 AM DHermit is offline  
Reply With Quote
#25  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.