TRN: Your take on this please

[roxalot]

Trn, you're being unreasonable. You know damn well if a kid punches another kid ( with no witnesses ) and the punched kid dies, the puncher is most likely going to serve time with at least a manslaughter charge. . Unless there's evidence to prove otherwise such as injuries on the puncher due to being attacked.

[Deleted]

Jul 5, 2017 16:15:58 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 5, 2017 16:01:30 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Who decides what "opportunity" is?  The one fearing for his life at the moment, or the asshole in his ivory tower second-guessing him days later?
You NEVER have to retreat.  If you can, that is always the best action, but requiring it is plain stupid, illogical, and unreasonable.

You REALLY want someone in an emergency to stand there and debate himself "Am I being reasonable?"  You are beyond absurd.
You obviously have never been physically attacked out of the blue.

Who decides the opportunity? The jury. That's the way it was before stand your ground laws existed. I am big time against a judge being able to dismiss charges if the judge thinks reasonable self-defense was used. How can a judge do that without a formal trial, or at least a major evidentiary hearing?

You're presuming they were in fact "in fear for his life". If the circumstances exist where that is so crystal clear, then no jury would ever convict.

You're presupposing an actual fear of life as a backdrop for your belief in all scenarios. Horse manure.

As the law is now, a defendant need only to claim that he was standing his ground. He doesn't have to prove it. The prosecutor has to prove he wasn't. By clear and convincing evidence. At least before, the Defendant had to prove he was acting in self-defense. It is nearly impossible to disprove a negative.

If the prosecutor can't, then the guy walks. Like if he cold cocked a guy in the jaw.

So you propose that we all walk around with a jury to help us decide what to do in a fraction of a second.  To quote Clint Eastwood ....  "MAR-velous."   
Secondly, you don't bring innocent people to trial ot determine if they did something wrong.  It isn't the judge's call to make.   That is up to the D.A. and a Grand Jury, if necessary.  Where do you get your ideas from?
A citizent NEVER has to prove he is innocent.  If that was the case in Florida, that is a violation of the U.S. Constitution. You should know that.

YOUR suggestion is "We are going to arrest you and then find out if you did something wrong."  That is BULLSHIT and you know that too.   That's what cops are doing already when they harass innocent persons carrying guns openly in open carry states.  Since that is a legal activity, cops have NO RIGHT to stop them and ask them why they are doing it.
You want a police state.  I do NOT.

If I can put my hands on a person, especially a small woman, I can kill that person with my bare hands.  So can you.  If you have any brains at all, ANY time a person comes at you in an aggressive manner, you BETTER fear for your life.  


As I said, you obviously have never been attacked by a criminal in a split second.

IF you have, I'd love to hear the circumstances and how you handled it.    I'm waiting.

[trnyerheadncough]

Jul 5, 2017 17:51:25 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Trn, you're being unreasonable. You know damn well if a kid punches another kid ( with no witnesses ) and the punched kid dies, the puncher is most likely going to serve time with at least a manslaughter charge. . Unless there's evidence to prove otherwise such as injuries on the puncher due to being attacked.

I provided a real life example where the exact thing happened and the State's attorney let the kid walk on the notion that he was merely standing his ground.

There was no fight. There was no scuffle. Basketball trash talk and a couple of fouls. One punch.

Here's a link about the story. The facts of the story aren't exactly correct, but they're close enough that you get the idea.

link

[roxalot]

Jul 5, 2017 20:02:29 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 5, 2017 17:51:25 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Trn, you're being unreasonable. You know damn well if a kid punches another kid ( with no witnesses ) and the punched kid dies, the puncher is most likely going to serve time with at least a manslaughter charge. . Unless there's evidence to prove otherwise such as injuries on the puncher due to being attacked.

I provided a real life example where the exact thing happened and the State's attorney let the kid walk on the notion that he was merely standing his ground.

There was no fight. There was no scuffle. Basketball trash talk and a couple of fouls. One punch.

Here's a link about the story. The facts of the story aren't exactly correct, but they're close enough that you get the idea.

link

So that happened in 2010...?.. I saw where the puncher was granted bail on a battery charge but where does it say he was acquitted ..?..

[trnyerheadncough]

Jul 5, 2017 20:20:29 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Jul 5, 2017 20:02:29 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

I provided a real life example where the exact thing happened and the State's attorney let the kid walk on the notion that he was merely standing his ground.

There was no fight. There was no scuffle. Basketball trash talk and a couple of fouls. One punch.

Here's a link about the story. The facts of the story aren't exactly correct, but they're close enough that you get the idea.

link

So that happened in 2010...?.. I saw where the puncher was granted bail on a battery charge but where does it say he was acquitted ..?..

He wasn't acquitted. The state's attorney refused to prosecute the case because she decided it was a "stand your ground" situation and she dropped the charges.

[roxalot]

Jul 5, 2017 20:26:43 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 5, 2017 20:20:29 GMT -5 roxalot said:

So that happened in 2010...?.. I saw where the puncher was granted bail on a battery charge but where does it say he was acquitted ..?..

He wasn't acquitted. The state's attorney refused to prosecute the case because she decided it was a "stand your ground" situation and she dropped the charges.

She decided..?.. on what grounds did she make her decision..?..

[trnyerheadncough]

Jul 5, 2017 20:28:29 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Jul 5, 2017 20:26:43 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

He wasn't acquitted. The state's attorney refused to prosecute the case because she decided it was a "stand your ground" situation and she dropped the charges.

She decided..?.. on what grounds did she make her decision..?..

As I said, she decided the "stand your ground" law applied here, and refused to prosecute.

Realistically, there's a chance she just was scared of losing. Our State Attorneys here are notoriously chickenshit.

[roxalot]

Jul 5, 2017 21:24:46 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 5, 2017 20:28:29 GMT -5 roxalot said:

She decided..?.. on what grounds did she make her decision..?..

As I said, she decided the "stand your ground" law applied here, and refused to prosecute.

Realistically, there's a chance she just was scared of losing. Our State Attorneys here are notoriously chickenshit.

So she makes her decisions based on whether or not she thinks she can win cases. Sounds like a typical lawyer.

[bamorin]

Jul 6, 2017 5:19:49 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Jul 5, 2017 21:24:46 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

As I said, she decided the "stand your ground" law applied here, and refused to prosecute.

Realistically, there's a chance she just was scared of losing. Our State Attorneys here are notoriously chickenshit.

So she makes her decisions based on whether or not she thinks she can win cases. Sounds like a typical lawyer.

........and the states laws are written by the state legislature that is made up of mostly?

A: Carpenters

B: Plumbers

C: Electricians

D: Other

[trnyerheadncough]

Jul 6, 2017 5:19:49 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Jul 5, 2017 21:24:46 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

As I said, she decided the "stand your ground" law applied here, and refused to prosecute.

Realistically, there's a chance she just was scared of losing. Our State Attorneys here are notoriously chickenshit.

So she makes her decisions based on whether or not she thinks she can win cases. Sounds like a typical lawyer.

Apparently that one does...to the detriment of the government and the people she serves.

[Deleted]

Jul 6, 2017 6:26:01 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 6, 2017 5:19:49 GMT -5 roxalot said:

So she makes her decisions based on whether or not she thinks she can win cases. Sounds like a typical lawyer.

Apparently that one does...to the detriment of the government and the people she serves.

ALL prosecutors try cases based on their chances of winning.  If they know they can't win outright, they will plea-bargain with the defense for a guilty plea to a lesser charge.  This makes their prosecution record look "good."  District Attorneys in most states are ELECTED.  That makes them typical crooked politicians.
Have you ever ONCE been in a criminal courtroom?   It is ALL political.

[trnyerheadncough]

Jul 6, 2017 8:07:44 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

Jul 6, 2017 6:26:01 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Apparently that one does...to the detriment of the government and the people she serves.

ALL prosecutors try cases based on their chances of winning.  If they know they can't win outright, they will plea-bargain with the defense for a guilty plea to a lesser charge.  This makes their prosecution record look "good."  District Attorneys in most states are ELECTED.  That makes them typical crooked politicians.
Have you ever ONCE been in a criminal courtroom?   It is ALL political.

But to drop a case entirely? The most rookie lawyer could get a battery conviction.

[Deleted]

Jul 6, 2017 8:29:27 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Jul 6, 2017 8:07:44 GMT -5 @muttthemaster said:

ALL prosecutors try cases based on their chances of winning.  If they know they can't win outright, they will plea-bargain with the defense for a guilty plea to a lesser charge.  This makes their prosecution record look "good."  District Attorneys in most states are ELECTED.  That makes them typical crooked politicians.
Have you ever ONCE been in a criminal courtroom?   It is ALL political.

But to drop a case entirely? The most rookie lawyer could get a battery conviction.

I agree with you there.  Sorry about being mean so early in the morning.  I am TRYING to do better.   Maybe cup of coffee #2 will help.

[roxalot]

Jul 6, 2017 5:54:55 GMT -5 bamorin said:

Jul 6, 2017 5:19:49 GMT -5 roxalot said:

So she makes her decisions based on whether or not she thinks she can win cases. Sounds like a typical lawyer.

........and the states laws are written by the state legislature that is made up of mostly?

A: Carpenters

B: Plumbers

C: Electricians

D: Other

I hope it's not B. I would hate to think a bunch of butt crack plumbers had the power to declare war.

[Deleted]

Jul 6, 2017 16:16:00 GMT -5 roxalot said:

Jul 6, 2017 5:54:55 GMT -5 bamorin said:

........and the states laws are written by the state legislature that is made up of mostly?

A: Carpenters

B: Plumbers

C: Electricians

D: Other

I hope it's not B. I would hate to think a bunch of butt crack plumbers had the power to declare war.

Which state can declare war?
Other than California, who declares war on GOOD Americans.