quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

If you are saying can I envision a situation where retreat is impossible... yes I can... but the Zimmerman and this case were not one of those situations...In any court if YOU can prove you could not retreat than it would be a simple self defense case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I am talking away from your home or vehicle as is clearly spelled out in the SYG law... A simple amendment to require an attempt to flee if reasonably possible would not negate the purpose of the law. In both recent cases murder would have been avoided.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I am talking away from your home or vehicle as is clearly spelled out in the SYG law... A simple amendment to require an attempt to flee if reasonably possible would not negate the purpose of the law. In both recent cases murder would have been avoided.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Why not return to common law self defense that worked for 400 years?


Because it didn't.
We got a generation of prosecutors who made the guy defending himself prove his
innocence.

We had 400 years of the burden being on the person claiming self defense and it worked just fine. And weren't you just arguing that it wasn't the laws fault if the jury went wrong? Then how can you blame the law for the prosecutors?

It didn't always work just fine. Sometimes people got, and still get prosecuted for anything involving a gun by some overzealous anti gun pompas asshole Mike Nifong type.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I don't rant ...And I am not going back over the Zimmerman case... we all have our opinions on what went down and we all know Zimmerman took advantage of a flawed law that resulted in a dead child... My suggestion for an amendment would not be perfect but would make a better law that could stop tragedies as in this case and the Zimmerman case while keeping the guts of the law.

This law will not stand as it is today my friend...reasonable people are realizing the problems it is causing... lol...Mark my words 2 years from now the law will have changed or been repealed outright.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Why not return to common law self defense that worked for 400 years?


Because it didn't.
We got a generation of prosecutors who made the guy defending himself prove his
innocence.

We had 400 years of the burden being on the person claiming self defense and it worked just fine. And weren't you just arguing that it wasn't the laws fault if the jury went wrong? Then how can you blame the law for the prosecutors?

It didn't always work just fine. Sometimes people got, and still get prosecuted for anything involving a gun by some overzealous anti gun pompas asshole Mike Nifong type.

You cannot demand a perfect system. that is ridiculous. What you can expect is a system that works most of the time of rmost of the people.

And clearly SYG has swung things too far the other way. So we have centuries of experience with self defense as an affirmative defense where if you had to shoot someone you also had to go to court and make your case that you had to do it which worked against SYG which clearly does not work.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Your excusing murder over trivial matters........ nothing new there. [8|]

Nobody is doing that. You're just pulling shit out of your ass because none of the strawman crap you're blathering on about address anything we actually said.

Bullshit....... You guys love to blame the dead guy, no matter what the reason was. There is clearly NO excuse to shoot anyone over popcorn, loud music, egg throwing or eating skittles.

Just for your info, here in the UK you can kill in self defence, everyone here knows that and also knows you may have to justify why in court. You wont get people here pissing and moaning about a prosecutor doing his job in such situations.

Pulling more shit out-a-yer ass I see. Where has anyone blamed the dead guy for playing loud music or throwing popcorn ? Show me Mr expert. Show me where someone was killed because they were eating skittles.

And in case you never noticed, I haven't criticized the way you do things in the UK.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I don't rant ...And I am not going back over the Zimmerman case... we all have our opinions on what went down and we all know Zimmerman took advantage of a flawed law that resulted in a dead child... My suggestion for an amendment would not be perfect but would make a better law that could stop tragedies as in this case and the Zimmerman case while keeping the guts of the law.

This law will not stand as it is today my friend...reasonable people are realizing the problems it is causing... lol...Mark my words 2 years from now the law will have changed or been repealed outright.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Why not return to common law self defense that worked for 400 years?


Because it didn't.
We got a generation of prosecutors who made the guy defending himself prove his
innocence.

We had 400 years of the burden being on the person claiming self defense and it worked just fine. And weren't you just arguing that it wasn't the laws fault if the jury went wrong? Then how can you blame the law for the prosecutors?

It didn't always work just fine. Sometimes people got, and still get prosecuted for anything involving a gun by some overzealous anti gun pompas asshole Mike Nifong type.

You cannot demand a perfect system. that is ridiculous. What you can expect is a system that works most of the time of rmost of the people.

And clearly SYG has swung things too far the other way. So we have centuries of experience with self defense as an affirmative defense where if you had to shoot someone you also had to go to court and make your case that you had to do it which worked against SYG which clearly does not work.

But you can and do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

No I didn't I said:

There are different laws that cover in your home... and even then an attempt should be made to retreat. If given the choice most sane people will retreat rather than kill.

I did not say change this part of the law... only that sane people should and would retreat rather than kill if given a choice.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I think that can be safely said... If you had a choice to go out the back door with your family and call the police or pull out a gun and start shooting perhaps putting yourself and you family at risk...which option would you choose? AND which option do you think most sane people would choose?

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

But if your house was set up where you could retreat...perhaps a safe room or another exit... would you retreat? I just want to get a feeling for your mindset.


Butch