The things I learn never cease to amaze me. Just when I think I have it all figured out, something comes along that changes everything. Apparently. there are still 29 states out there that have "duty to retreat" laws still on the books. What, exactly, does this mean to you and me? Let's keep this nice and simple. Basically, if you are attacked in a public place, (I.E., anywhere but in your private domicile) and you defend yourself to the demise of the attacker, the attacker or (in the event of his/her death) his/her family can sue you , have you prosecuted or both if you did not retreat from he criminal attack. Whuh??? That's right. In these states, if you are confronted, attacked, mugged or carjacked in a public place, you must first attempt to "disengage" the situation by backing away. The idea is to avoid potentially deadly situations. Now, while I understand the spirit of these laws, they are absolutely ripe for abuse. Someone who has been attacked by criminals does not need to be victimized a second time by a second-guessing legal system.
It comes as no surprise to me that the NRA is a staunch supporter of these so called "Stand Your Ground" bills. For once, I actually agree with them. Florida was first to pass them, a year ago, allowing everyday citizens to use deadly force against muggers, carjackers and such. The new laws protect the citizens from being prosecuted should the attacker decide he was "wronged" by picking on the wrong person. Several states are considering similar legislation. It just stands to reason, to me, that if I have the right to kill an intruder in my house that I should be able to shoot a carjacker, instead of jumping out of my car and backing away, hoping he'll change his mind and not take my car or hurt me. I see this as a huge step towards taking back our streets. Along with concealed weapons laws, the citizens are starting to get an upper hand on the criminals who don't live by laws and morals. Naturally, there are detractors.
Zach Ragbourn of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence the proposals "are more acurately called 'shoot first' laws. They allow a person who just feels something bad is going to happen to open fire in public." Well we are not a nation of Bernie Goetzs. I just don't picture a bunch of folks running around looking to be vigilantes. I see criminals wondering of the little weak victim they chose to mug is armed. I see carjackers hesitating to run up to any given window. I see citizens unafraid to stand up for themselves in the face of common street thugs. I personally live in a state which allows for an eye for an eye. If someone comes at me with a gun, I can shoot back. If they come at me with a bat, I can take the bat away and beat the hell out of them with it. If they attempt to take me down with their bare hands, they're gonna get thrashed. I don't have to fear reprisals, provided I don't 'escalate' the intended violence. 'Course, between you and me, I'm a piss poor shot. Like I've been told before, shoot for center mass and claim you were aiming for a leg.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment