Support NeoGAF

[Kettch]

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.

That's all fine if you want to argue that. I just have a problem with people continuously saying she left the house or that she was already out of the situation every time the topic comes up. When the first is not true and the second is not a fact.

 

[PantherLotus]

That chart us upside down LOL

 

[LosDaddie]

My brothers, for the love of god move out of Florida.

Still the best state in our great Union

 

[Brakke]

That chart is misattributed, looks to me like Polygon made it.

 

[Zee-Row]

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

Don't kid yourself , South Florida is just as crazy and maybe even crazier.

 

[commedieu]

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

But this doesn't tell the whole story as blacks are overwhelmingly killed by other blacks

The % is about blacks using syg against non-blacks. When you say "Buh buh more blacks are criminals!" You're ignoring the whole point, and trying to some how downplay the entire situation. Without understanding the basic reasons why there is more crime in the world from poor communities. As if it is an epiphany to any adult, or anyone that understand different class/cultures.

If the commentary about blacks not being treated equally in the eyes of the law, when it comes to a historic precedent of gun laws and the African american community, well, you have a % of blacks shooting whites, who aren't treated statistically the same way, which is why officials from various offices in government have suggested to look into its execution as a law, and the data of blacks and minorities being the victims of not being able to equally use the defense.

We were recently contacted by PBS Frontline, who posed a very interesting question: do SYG laws make the racial disparities better or worse?

We used a statistical technique called regression analysis to look at the relationship between the races of the victim and the shooter and justifiable homicide rulings. This method finds the same results as above—black shooters are far less likely to be found justified in a shooting, and shootings with a black victim are far more likely to be ruled justified.

The answers suggest that SYG laws make justice harder to come by all the way around. Compared with white-on-white shootings in states that do not have an SYG law, we find the following:

A white-on-white shooting is less likely to be ruled justified in a state with an SYG law.
A black-on-white shooting is also less likely to be ruled justified in an SYG state.
However, a white-on-black shooting is more likely to be ruled justified in an SYG state.
Finally, we ask whether the racial disparities remain in SYG states. Compared with a white-on-white shooting in an SYG state

black-on-black shootings and black-on-white shootings are less likely to be ruled justified, but
white-on-black shootings are more likely to be ruled justified.
Overall, SYG laws do not appear to reduce racial disparities and in important ways make them more pronounced. This is why, in our opinion, they are bad laws.

This is just one of the multitude of articles covering this..but, Despite the number of blacks killing other blacks, the institutional problem is still here when it comes to African americans, and the justice system.

 

[LosDaddie]

Don't kid yourself , South Florida is just as crazy and maybe even crazier.

From Orlando/Tampa on down is ok. It's the real "Florida" people from outside the state think it is. Everything north of Orlando is The South

 

[Gamerloid]

While the law previously stated that the a person invoking "Stand Your Ground" had to "reasonably believe it is necessary" to use force to prevent bodily harm, it now reads that to use force or threaten to use force a person must also believe they are in imminent danger.

Is there a way to stop people from making crap up to make it seem like they felt they were in imminent danger?

I'm making a special birthday thread here if I can survive to see it. This state...

 

[Metaphoreus]

The % is about blacks using syg against non-blacks. When you say "Buh buh more blacks are criminals!" You're ignoring the whole point, and trying to some how downplay the entire situation. Without understanding the basic reasons why there is more crime in the world from poor communities. As if it is an epiphany to any adult, or anyone that understand different class/cultures.

If the commentary about blacks not being treated equally in the eyes of the law, when it comes to a historic precedent of gun laws and the African american community, well, you have a % of blacks shooting whites, who aren't treated statistically the same way, which is why officials from various offices in government have suggested to look into its execution as a law, and the data of blacks and minorities being the victims of not being able to equally use the defense.

This is just one of the multitude of articles covering this..but, Despite the number of blacks killing other blacks, the institutional problem is still here when it comes to African americans, and the justice system.

I think arguments about why certain groups within society commit more crimes are interesting and important, but irrelevant in the context of your question. Your question (and the responses to it) implied that black defendants could not benefit from SYG laws. That's clearly false, as the data I cited shows.

By the way, would you please provide a link to whatever source you're quoting? I'd like to review it in more detail.

EDIT:

Is there a way to stop people from making crap up to make it seem like they felt they were in imminent danger?

I'm making a special birthday thread here if I can survive to see it. This state...

This isn't responsive to your question, but I'm not really sure what the article is talking about in the portion that you quote. Nowhere is a requirement of imminence added to the statutes by this law--and, in fact, that requirement was already present in existing law. You can read the bill for yourself, here. You'll see that the word "imminent" is never underlined, but appears in plain text throughout, meaning that it's not being added to the existing statute--it's already in the existing statute. Talk about incompetent journalism. (Here's a link to one statute amended by this bill as it appeared prior to the amendment--though this link should be updated at some point in the future with the amended text.)

 

[GaimeGuy]

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.

Well said.
I'm surprised by the reactions in this thread, which are almost entirely like the below:

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.



.

Warning shots can be for people who feel like they're endangered but still absolutely want to do everything in their power to avoid having to deprive another person of their life. I would much, much rather someone fire a warning shot as a last ditch effort to diffuse a situation without bloodshed than skip straight to the act of killing.

The law should not encourage people to fire guns unnecessarily, but more importantly, it shouldn't encourage homicide at the expense of a non-homicidal recourse. Telling someone they committed a crime by not killing an assailant seems fucked up to me.

 

[commedieu]

I think arguments about why certain groups within society commit more crimes are interesting and important, but irrelevant in the context of your question. Your question (and the responses to it) implied that black defendants could not benefit from SYG laws. That's clearly false, as the data I cited shows.

By the way, would you please provide a link to whatever source you're quoting? I'd like to review it in more detail.

Black defendants don't benefit from SYG equally to whites, or *gasp* crime in general. What do you need to review in more detail? Are you not aware of this problem in the USA, with SYG just being a highlight of the overall problem? What is going to come across your desk, to say to yourself "Oh, I get that joke. Its because the justice system is generally unfavorable to blacks."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/

At FRONTLINE’s request, Roman analyzed the pool of 43,500 homicides by race in states with Stand Your Ground laws* and those without them. Because he wanted to control for multiple variables — the races of the victim and the shooter, whether they were strangers, whether they involved a firearm and whether the murders were in Stand Your Ground states — Roman used a technique known as regression analysis, which is a statistical tool to analyze the relationship between different pieces of data.

Roman also found that Stand Your Ground laws tend to track the existing racial disparities in homicide convictions across the U.S. — with one significant exception: Whites who kill blacks in Stand Your Ground states are far more likely to be found justified in their killings. In non-Stand Your Ground states, whites are 250 percent more likely to be found justified in killing a black person than a white person who kills another white person; in Stand Your Ground states, that number jumps to 354 percent.

That’s why the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights announced last month that it would investigate concerns about racial bias in the law’s application.

Michael Yaki, the commissioner leading the probe, said in an email that he wasn’t surprised by Roman’s findings. “It reinforces even more the need for a comprehensive investigation,” he said.

He added: “What the [commission] will do is more complete, more thorough, and ultimately aimed at determining whether SYG statutes by their nature, enforcement, or application, create opportunities for racial bias to enter into the system.”

Yaki said he planned to examine a handful of states that have enacted Stand Your Ground laws, most likely including Florida. His study should take at least a year.

Read the whole thing. While Roman himself points out the issues with the data, it is still vastly more thorough than your source. I mean, there really is a bunch of these sorts of data collection/analyst that include black on black crime in their figures.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Black defendants don't benefit from SYG equally to whites, or *gasp* crime in general. What do you need to review in more detail? Are you not aware of this problem in the USA, with SYG just being a highlight of the overall problem? What is going to come across your desk, to say to yourself "Oh, I get that joke. Its because the justice system is generally unfavorable to blacks."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/

Thank you. I asked you for your source because NeoGAF is "a neutral ground where facts and evidence . . . prevail." I'm not going to accept what you say as true simply because you assert it to be so, and you should adopt a similar approach to dealing with others online (and offline, for that matter).

 

[commedieu]

Thank you. I asked you for your source because NeoGAF is "a neutral ground where facts and evidence . . . prevail." I'm not going to accept what you say as true simply because you assert it to be so, and you should adopt a similar approach to dealing with others online (and offline, for that matter).

I forgot the source.

No problem

 

[Gamerloid]

This isn't responsive to your question, but I'm not really sure what the article is talking about in the portion that you quote. Nowhere is a requirement of imminence added to the statutes by this law--and, in fact, that requirement was already present in existing law. You can read the bill for yourself, here. You'll see that the word "imminent" is never underlined, but appears in plain text throughout, meaning that it's not being added to the existing statute--it's already in the existing statute. Talk about incompetent journalism. (Here's a link to one statute amended by this bill as it appeared prior to the amendment--though this link should be updated at some point in the future with the amended text.)

Heh, you're absolutely right. You really do know your stuff, Metaphoreus. Thanks for the enlightenment.

 

[Syphon Filter]

Florida is actually pretty cool in certain places. It's wacky yes. But no income tax, great weather year round.

i hate hot weather.

 

[CLEEK]

Someone should fire a warning shot at Florida.

http://memeguy.com/photos/images/ju...g-a-nuclear-artillery-shell-no-fake-25491.gif

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

I fired off a warning shot. It just so happened to catch him center mass.

 

[Lespedeza]

well I'm just never going to florida, meh no big loss.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I fired off a warning shot. It just so happened to catch him center mass.

I stood my ground by firing a warning shot that killed him officer, it was an accident.

 

[ezrarh]

There really are only a few states you want to live in in this country and Florida is definitely not one of them.

 

[CadetMahoney]

A legal gun owner threatening to use force (fire a warning shot), must also believe they are in imminent danger.

So shooting in random directions is now legalized?

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.

Yea I don't get it.

I need clear cut unambiguous scenario examples of where shooting in the walls/random direction are legit and bulletproof from prosecution.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

I remember back during the whole Trayvon Martin thing people kept bringing up that whole "Black woman arrested for warning shots" thing, acting appalled that she would be arrested for warning shots. Now, people are acting appalled that you can't be arrested for warning shots. Funny how that works.

But yeah, warning shots are (or at least should be) a big no-no.

 

[wsippel]

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.

Not only is that chart hilarious, it's also insane that Florida has more than 13 times as many gun deaths as all of Germany (54 in 2013, including accidents), a country of 80 million people.

 

[Angelus Errare]

If someone pulled out a gun, you'd think that alone would be enough of a warning.

Not only is that chart hilarious, it's also insane that Florida has more than 13 times as many gun deaths as all of Germany (54 in 2013, including accidents), a country of 80 million people.

Well in Florida people buy skittles and tea after dark…EMINENT DANGER! Do I need to remind you what you can do to someone with a bag of skittles?!

 

[KernelPanic]

Did the NRA buy Florida recently? Wow that's stupid.

 

[TheOMan]

"How did I know he would move right into my warning shot?"- Future murderer

Came here to the post this. It will happen, guaranteed.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

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

I'm kinda surprised at your incredulity at the fact that a law that allows you to kill people made murders go up in the state.

 

[mr2xxx]

I'm kinda surprised at your incredulity at the fact that a law that allows you to kill people made murders go up in the state.

I'm surprised at the map where a quick glance makes it seem that they went down.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

I'm surprised at the map where a quick glance makes it seem that they went down.

Roger. Misread that.

Carry on.

 

[vas_a_morir]

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

Not according to the chart. The line is clearly going down, indicating less.

 

[Jarmel]

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 best chart I've ever seen.

Not according to the chart. The line is clearly going down, indicating less.

Look at the chart again, mainly the sides.

 

[Paganmoon]

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

20 years does seem excessive, but I believe, from what I've read, that the guy she shot at had his children with him as well, so that must've been taken into consideration also.

 

[StayDead]

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

I was just about to make a post regarding this. Some states in America really have crazy, crazy laws that make no sense to me as an outsider.

 

[BradC00]

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

i think that's the point. it's misleading because it's upside down

 

[Yrael]

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 remember seeing this chart when it first came out on the Internet. The creator claimed to have been influenced by another plot showing deaths in Iraq, which had the visual effect of blood running down a wall...but it is still strongly possible that there was an intent on the part of the creator to deceive as well, since the Iraq plot was much easier to understand (the x-axis had been moved to the top of the graph, and the visual relation to blood is much more obvious). Regardless of her intent though, the gun death graph is incredibly misleading.

http://www.visualisingdata.com/index.php/2014/04/the-fine-line-between-confusion-and-deception/

 

[Eighty Deuce]

This news excites me, pop pop YEEEEEHAWWW.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

If the situation isn't serious enough to justify shooting the threat center-mass then it's not serious enough to justify discharging a lethal weapon.

But at the same time I don't believe this woman should be facing decades in jail for a warning shot.

 

[TS-08]

If the situation isn't serious enough to justify shooting the threat center-mass then it's not serious enough to justify discharging a lethal weapon.

But at the same time I don't believe this woman should be facing decades in jail for a warning shot.

I believe the prosecution's theory is that she fired at the man and simply missed.

 

[CrankyJay]

Wow, what could go wrong?

What could possibly go wrong?

I know these are rhetorical questions, but damn if we see some news stories of deaths from phantom bullets that just drop out of the sky.

 

[Marvel]

"How did I know he would move right into my warning shot?"- Future murderer

Sad thing is, this will likely happen. Word from word at some point.

 

[King Cobra]

As a Floridan I am glad that our laws here will protect us from any angle should we have to use lethal force for protection.

 

[Summer Haze]

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

This was what i immediately thought of too.

Jesus....

 

[turtle553]

Yea I don't get it.

I need clear cut unambiguous scenario examples of where shooting in the walls/random direction are legit and bulletproof from prosecution.

It seems this also covers brandishing a weapon.

Here is a scenario:

You are walking down the street and a guy pulls a knife and asks for your wallet.

Under the original SYG, if you pull a gun and shoot him you will get off probably. But if you pull a gun and don't shoot, you would be guilty of brandishing and could get 20 years in prison because of mandatory minimums.

Whether a prosecutor would try that is a different thing, but this revision seems to fix the part where it is better to shoot someone when not absolutely required.

 

[Squalor]

Haha, Florida is such a garbage state.

 

[RumblingRosco]

C'mon, I'm sure you can think of a few!

I AM MELTING IN AN ATMOSPHERE OF SOLID WATER HERE :-[

In non-Florida states, we just call that ice.

 

[hwalker84]

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

Yep. A warning shot isn't an attempted headshot either.

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

I stood my ground by firing a warning shot that killed him officer, it was an accident.

Thats what happened in that one case in Florida when the old white man fired into the young black teens car all because he was annoyed by there loud music.

 

[Portugeezer]

"How did I know he would move right into my warning shot?"- Future murderer

Amazing

 

[n00bsauce87]

I remember seeing this chart when it first came out on the Internet. The creator claimed to have been influenced by another plot showing deaths in Iraq, which had the visual effect of blood running down a wall...but it is still strongly possible that there was an intent on the part of the creator to deceive as well, since the Iraq plot was much easier to understand (the x-axis had been moved to the top of the graph, and the visual relation to blood is much more obvious). Regardless of her intent though, the gun death graph is incredibly misleading.

I just realized that the chart was upside down. I was like, maybe this is good facts for the law, but then this and I was like

 

[MilkyJoe]

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

Could have ended the thread right here.