Support NeoGAF

[SykoTech]

Just got done reading that story about the Father's Day newborn tragedy, and now I read this.

This state man...

 

[IrishNinja]

ehh...we're outing Rick Scott this year, and finally approving medical marijuana in november. cannot wait for us to at least start taking these baby steps

From a south Floridian (unless its for Disney or College)

right click, save as
shit is the truest thing ive seen on here in forever

 

[Rygar 8 Bit]

like how they leave out the part where that 20 year old fired a warning shot in the direction of a room that had children in it and thats why she got the sentence

 

[Gabotron ES]

Warning shot to the face

 

[riotous]

Problem with making warning shots legal, is that it promotes people to fire their weapon any time they are scared.

Letter of the law wise that would still be illegal.

But it's almost a contradiction based on how gun safety and self defense laws are usually put into effect. If you can fire a warning shot to scare someone off, you aren't in eminent enough danger to justify the use of a firearm in the first place. Outside of rural areas in general that's how it's seen.

It just doesn't make sense, and I agree it promotes behavior that would still be illegal. The Florida police and courts have a habit of allowing for behavior more extreme than the law even seems to allow.. in that sense shooting a gun in the air when you are scared might effectively become legal for people. At least... some people.

 

[Metaphoreus]

You should never trust media accounts of the law. They're almost always wrong. I posted about this law way back when it was a mere bill:

And the bill is an important fix to what, apparently, was an oversight in originally drafting Florida's existing self-defense statutes. The bill describes the problem thus:

(1) . . . [P]ersons have been criminally prosecuted and have been sentenced to mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment pursuant to s. 775.087, Florida Statutes, for threatening to use force in a manner and under circumstances that would have been justifiable under chapter 776, Florida Statutes, had force actually been used.

You can see the problem there. When attacked, a person would be better off killing his or her attacker (if deadly force was justified) than in merely threatening his or her attacker with deadly force. If she kills the attacker (and the deadly force was justified), then she has committed no crime, but if she merely brandishes a weapon or fires a warning shot (which no one suggests is a good idea), then she has committed a crime, regardless of whether force would have been justified if it had actually been used.

Here's how the bill describes its purpose:

(2) The Legislature intends to:

(a) Provide criminal and civil immunity to those who threaten to use force if the threat was made in a manner and under circumstances that would have been immune under chapter 776, Florida Statutes, had force actually been used.

(b) Clarify that those who threaten to use force may claim self-defense if the threat was made in a manner and under circumstances that would have been justifiable under chapter 776, Florida Statutes, had force actually been used.

(c) Ensure that those who threaten to use force in a manner and under circumstances that are justifiable under chapter 776, Florida Statutes, are not sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment pursuant to s. 775.087, Florida Statutes.

(d) Encourage those who have been sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment . . . for threatening to use force in a manner and under circumstances that are justifiable under chapter 776, Florida Statutes, to apply for executive clemency.

The bill then goes on to amend various sections of the Florida Statutes by adding in "or threatened use" (and similar language, depending on grammatical constraints) wherever it had merely said "use" before.

As you can see from the above, the bill isn't specifically directed to "warning shots," but is directed to threats of force even where force doesn't end up being used. I'm not persuaded the law would actually authorize warning shots (i.e., intended misses, as opposed to intended-hits-that-missed). The bottom line of this bill is this: if you would have been justified in killing an assailant, you're now equally justified in threatening the assailant with deadly force.

EDIT: Since some people have brought up Marissa Alexander (more than the article itself does), I've also posted on that subject as well:

This is one of those stories that becomes embedded in popular culture despite good reason to disbelieve it. Here's how the court described Marissa Alexander's conduct when ruling on her motion seeking immunity from prosecution, claiming to have acted in self-defense:

The Defendant had not been living in the marital home for the two months leading up to the shooting. On the evening of July 31, 2010, the Defendant drove herself to the marital home and parked in the garage, closing the garage door after parking her vehicle. The Defendant stayed the night in the marital home.

…

After breakfast, the Defendant went into the master bedroom. Before entering the bathroom, the Defendant handed her phone to [______] to show him pictures of their newborn baby [______], who was still in the hospital. At that point, the Defendant went into the master bathroom while [______] looked through the phone. While going through the phone, [______] observed texts from the Defendant to her ex-husband Lincoln Alexander prompting [______] to question whether the newborn baby was his. At this point, [______] opened the bathroom door to confront the Defendant regarding the texts. A verbal argument ensued between the Defendant and [______]. For this reason, [______] stepped out of the bathroom and yelled for his sons to put their shoes on because they were leaving. [______] returned to the bathroom and demanded that the Defendant explain the texts and the verbal argument continued. During the verbal argument, [______] stood in the doorway to the bathroom and the Defendant could not get around him. Either [______] moved from the doorway or the Defendant pushed around him to exit the bathroom.

[______] moved to the living room where his children were. Subsequently, the Defendant emerged from the master bedroom and went into the garage where her car was parked. The Defendant testified she was trying to leave the residence but could not get the garage door open. (The Court notes that despite the Defendant’s claim she was in fear for her life at that point and trying to get away from [______] she did not leave the house through the back or front doors which were unobstructed. Additionally, the garage door had worked previously and there was no evidence presented to support her claim.) The Defendant then retrieved her firearm from the glove box of the vehicle. The Defendant returned to the kitchen with the firearm in her hand and pointed it in the direction of all three Victims. [______] put his hands in the air. The Defendant shot at [______], nearly missing his head. The bullet traveled through the kitchen wall and into the ceiling in the living room. The Victims fled the residence and immediately called 911. The Defendant stayed in the marital home and at no point called 911.

I even started a thread back when the prosecutor in that case released a bunch of evidence to the public, which you can see here.

 

[riotous]

You should never trust media accounts of the law. They're almost always wrong. I posted about this law way back when it was a mere bill:



As you can see from the above, the bill isn't specifically directed to "warning shots," but is directed to threats of force even where force doesn't end up being used. I'm not persuaded the law would actually authorize warning shots (i.e., intended misses, as opposed to intended-hits-that-missed). The bottom line of this bill is this: if you would have been justified in killing an assailant, you're now equally justified in threatening the assailant with deadly force.

Thanks, interesting.

And agreed on the first sentence. Media reports about laws are often terrible.. replace "laws" with just about anything really, lol. It's like a bunch of people horrible at the game "telephone."

 

[Gordon Shumway]

My favorite part of recently being b

Spoiler

l

ack in Florida? ALL of my son's old friends and family (wife's side) seem very opinionated/paranoid of the blacks, and how much he needs to be careful..awesome, I know. All very happy, gun loving patriots

Spoiler

from South America and Cuba. Lucky light-skinnededed bastard..

 

[J10]

Can black people use this?

 

[Ventara]

So what happens when two people both decide to fire warning shots at each other? Seems like a quick way to start a gunfight.

Edit: Maybe I should read what Metaphoreus posted first.

 

[royalan]

On one hand, in Marissa Alexander's case, from what I know about it she should have definitely been able to evoke Stand Your Ground.

That said, I''m not sure if this is the right way to fix the Stand Your Ground law. Feels like it's going to make things even crazier...

 

[Brakke]

<championship post>

Thanks, Metaphoreus.

 

[enzo_gt]

what the fu-

"The goal was to expand those special stand-your-ground provisions to firing a warning shot, to expand use of it as a tool for people accused of a crime to claim a form of self-defense," Abrams said.

WHAT THE FUCK

 

[Lord Thrappleper The 49th]

What a bunch of pish posh. A scholar and a gentleman would invoke the right of duel should his ground be stood upon. If you missed, that was a shilling down the drain and forever ridicule by your peers, not a declaration of warning. Clearly colonials have their own way of doing things.

 

[Fusebox]

Which way do I fire a warning shot??

Straight up in the air like an old cowboy movie? Or an inch to the left of my attackers head like a modern action movie?

 

[HK-47]

.

 

[Complex Shadow]

Can black people use this?

they can try. =|

 

[Valkyr Junkie]

I wonder how many people are both outraged about Marissa Alexander being convicted, and this being made law.

 

[Volimar]

I'd hate to be a black meter reader in Florida.

 

[Winterfang]

What constitutes as a warning shot? Not in the general direction of another person?

Shooting without the intent to harm?

I guess? Like a shot in a stomach or leg? I want someone to explain it also.

 

[Fusebox]

You fire a warning shot across the brow.

 

[Volimar]

What if I want to summon the invisible swordsman?

 

[Angelus Errare]

Rick Scott voters ladies and gentlemen.

 

[davepoobond]

It would make more sense if the progression was reversed honestly. But an expansion of this law is just sad.

 

[commedieu]

I wonder how many people are both outraged about Marissa Alexander being convicted, and this being made law.

Why would people not be outraged at terrible gun laws that work against the population? You are wondering, so any insight to the correlation?

 

[Zeyphersan]

Whoever edited that article needs to be shot.

Just fire a warning shot, first

 

[Chariot]

Don't why you're upset. If Florida continues with laws like this the problem will solve itself at some point.

 

[Foxix Von]

Holy shit.

Even as someone who tends to lean towards being pro gun ownership, I find this INSANE.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Can black people use this?

Of course not.

they can try. =|

Black defendants are actually a bit more successful at making SYG claims than are white defendants in Florida:

Blacks make up 16.6 percent of Florida's population but account for 31 percent of the defendants invoking the stand your ground defense. Black defendants who invoke this statute are actually acquitted 8 percentage points more frequently than whites who use this very same defense.

Those who conclude the law is racially biased point to data compiled by the Tampa Bay Tribune, which collected 112 cases where people charged with murder relied on Florida's stand your ground law, from the first cases in 2006 to July 24 of this year. The Tribune's "shocking" claim: 72 percent of those who killed a black person faced no penalty compared to 59 percent of those who killed a white.

But this doesn't tell the whole story as blacks are overwhelmingly killed by other blacks. Thus, it is also true that blacks claiming self-defense under the stand your ground law are convicted at a lower rate than are whites. About 69 percent of blacks raising the stand your Ground defense were not convicted compared to 62 percent of whites.

...

Surprisingly, no one had run regressions with this data to see if these factors might explain the different conviction rates for whites and blacks. Such analysis finds no evidence of discrimination. While the results are not statistically significant, the regressions suggest that any racial bias would go the other way &#8212; that killing a black rather than a white increases the defendant's odds of being convicted.

The estimates also show that white defendants are more likely to be convicted than black defendants. Whether the person killed initiated the confrontation and whether there was an eyewitness were the most important factors in determining whether there was a conviction.

 

[terrisus]

Warning shots were legalized in Florida, just days after a guy in Florida was killed by a stray bullet. smh

That was my first thought on seeing this.
Quite a morbidly ironic juxtaposition.

 

[Alchemy]

Man, fuck ever going to Florida.

 

[Two Words]

I don't get the problem here. It sounds like the law was changed in large part after a woman was sentenced to 20 years for firing a warning shot? I'm not sure what is wrong with this. Assuming somebody feels threatened and fires a bullet into the dirt as a warning shot, why should they be charged with a crime?


EDIT- Just read the court's account for her story. If that's true then she should be in jail.

 

[Arkos]

I would like to announce that my mobile platform "ArkTek," which can project with a three meter radius of accuracy where your warning shots, fired harmlessly into the air, will land, is now open to public investment. Please PM me with your bank account information, etc.

 

[echoshifting]

Attention, neighborhood: I am just going to stand in my yard waving this gun around and firing in the air...if you get shot it's your own fault!

 

[BigDug13]

Holy Shit not even I can defend this stuff.

That woman was guilty as shit but the Zimmerman situation allowed her to get sympathy she did not deserve.

She left the house and came back with the gun to shoot in self defense

While this may be true...20 fucking years for a warning shot???

 

[Kai Dracon]

This seems like pure opportunism to use the outrageous recommended sentence in the Alexander case as justification for a an extension to the law designed to please paranoid gun owners.

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

did the woman that fired the warning shot and got sentenced to 20 years in jail actually shoot anyone?

 

[Ponn]

You should never trust media accounts of the law. They're almost always wrong. I posted about this law way back when it was a mere bill:



As you can see from the above, the bill isn't specifically directed to "warning shots," but is directed to threats of force even where force doesn't end up being used. I'm not persuaded the law would actually authorize warning shots (i.e., intended misses, as opposed to intended-hits-that-missed). The bottom line of this bill is this: if you would have been justified in killing an assailant, you're now equally justified in threatening the assailant with deadly force.

EDIT: Since some people have brought up Marissa Alexander (more than the article itself does), I've also posted on that subject as well:



I even started a thread back when the prosecutor in that case released a bunch of evidence to the public, which you can see here.

Thanks for write up. Media is hilarious in that NONE of what you posted has been shown or talked about on the news even though there was some questionable holes in the story as it was reported. And im in Jax where this is a big story.

 

[zero shift]

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

 

[KidGalactus]

Nice try, Rick. We're still getting rid of you.

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

WTF at this chart.

 

[PhoenixDawn]

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

I certainly have to hand it to them for that. They've managed to cut the murder rate by the simple solution of completely redefining it to a narrower scope by reclassifying a large portion of the murders as "self defence". Guess it does look good in graphs though, which is all that matters.

Edit: Wait what the fuck, the scale on that chat is such a mess. Why would any sane person design a graph like that?

 

[Kettch]

Holy Shit not even I can defend this stuff.

That woman was guilty as shit but the Zimmerman situation allowed her to get sympathy she did not deserve.

She left the house and came back with the gun to shoot in self defense

She did not leave the house. She went to another room of the house (a connected garage).

It's amazing how this gets posted in every thread about her. Misinformation is so easy to spread.

 

[Bodacious]

Guns aren't for signifying ... the situation either demands the use of deadly force in defense of self/others, or it does not. Warning shots are for idiots. Generally speaking I'm not in favor of laws written to protect idiots.



.

 

[darthbob]

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

What the hell kind of chart is this?

 

[antonz]

She did not leave the house. She went to another room of the house (a connected garage).

It's amazing how this gets posted in every thread about her. Misinformation is so easy to spread.

That is enough. If you can leave the area and disengage that does not give you the right to go back and reengage now that you have a gun. Leaving the main residence to enter the garage even if connected to the house is disengaging. She could have gotten into her car and left.

 

[sixteen-bit]

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

this is the looniest graph ever

 

[Kettch]

That is enough. If you can leave the area and disengage that does not give you the right to go back and reengage now that you have a gun. Leaving the main residence to enter the garage even if connected to the house is disengaging. She could have gotten into her car and left.

She claims the garage door was not functioning when she tried to leave. Which was originally backed up by her husband (the one shot at), before he changed his story.

 

[hom3land]

Police officers aren't even allowed to fire warning shots. Are they allowed now?

 

[mr2xxx]

I don't understand why people are so concerned. Stand your ground has had some effect to murder rates. Just look at this informative chart from Reuters.

WTF? They went up after the law was in effect.

 

[Ponn]

She claims the garage door was not functioning when she tried to leave. Which was originally backed up by her husband (the one shot at), before he changed his story.

That really doesn't have much to do with the situation though. According to all reports she could have just walked out the door, his kids were there and he was not forcefully keeping her in the house or, the key point of stand your ground, threatening her life or putting her in immediate danger.