View Poll Results: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Be Federal Law?

Voters
24. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I should be protected under Federal Law to be a Man and defend me and mine.

    17 70.83%
  • No, I'm a coward who should be made to run and hide.

    7 29.17%
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 139

Thread: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

  1. #41
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,787

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Okay, I'll address this.

    "Stand your Ground" is a label attached to a legal provision removing the "duty to retreat prior to using lethal force" that existed in SOME State's laws previously. It was labeled "Stand your ground" probably by detractors, attempting to portray it as encouraging vigilantism and macho posturing.

    Not So.


    The basic standard for self-defense is pretty similar in all states. All that I know of require the following:

    1. You must be without leqal fault in the incident. Meaning, if you were committing any crimes or wrongs at the start of the incident, you are automatically disallowed the self-defense legal defense, right there.

    2. You must have been in, or believed yourself in, imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm.

    3. A reasonable person in same situation also believe #2 (the "reasonable man clause")

    The fourth item used to be "was unable to safely retreat from the situation"... the so-called SYG just removed that fourth requirement from those states that had it... and this was a GOOD thing because it was too easily abused by prosecutors against people who were legitimately defending themselves, who might have trouble PROVING they couldn't safely retreat.

    It's hard enough proving self-defense as it is... and SD is an "affirmative defense", meaning you can't just claim it, there has to be somethign supporting it.




    So you STILL cannot claim self-defense under SYG if you STARTED OFF IN THE WRONG!
    interesting, thanks goshin, written like this then yes i would support it national and it should be national.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    I've noticed that liberals tend to be more tolerant of criminals than victims...and by victims, I mean my TV, my car, my stereo.

    I value my car more than I value the person trying to take it from me illegally. Frankly, I think I'd be doing society a disservice by letting him go free - not to mention reducing my own net worth.

    Let me shoot him in the head and save the taxpayer the cost of a trial.

  3. #43
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    I've noticed that liberals tend to be more tolerant of criminals than victims...and by victims, I mean my TV, my car, my stereo.

    I value my car more than I value the person trying to take it from me illegally. Frankly, I think I'd be doing society a disservice by letting him go free - not to mention reducing my own net worth.

    Let me shoot him in the head and save the taxpayer the cost of a trial.


    Personally I despise thieves and rarely shed a tear when they get shot dead. Particularly since most of them are not the Gentleman Burglar of literary myth, but thugs perfectly willing to use violence to achieve their larceny.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  4. #44
    The Light of Truth
    Northern Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:10 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,963

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    The poll is absurd so I abstain.

  5. #45
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,787

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Personally I despise thieves and rarely shed a tear when they get shot dead. Particularly since most of them are not the Gentleman Burglar of literary myth, but thugs perfectly willing to use violence to achieve their larceny.
    just had to quote and BOLD this part.

    i always laugh when people cry about trust and knowing if the INTRUDER/CRIMINAL is a "real" threat.

    the solution is simply, if you want me to trust you and not question whether you are a "real" threat, keep your ass on the outside of my house
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #46
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChezC3 View Post
    Below is a wonderful story of a man defending his home from intrusion.

    http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/05/0...-gardner-home/

    My problem is when you watch the video, you'll hear the narrator state Law Enforcement officials advise that home owners when faced with intrusion should flee.

    This to me is the most asinine, cowardly, depend on nanny state, thinking one could have and it really is disturbing that Law Enforcement officials, who have already been proven NOT to have a constitutional obligation of protecting you and yours would tell you and me to tuck tale and flee.

    If an intruder invades my home it will be by God's grace that he is capable of leaving it vertically. I will not flee, I will fight.

    I feel that this is a universal right, not one that should be subject to review or under the purview of anyone or anybody. Therefore, it should -- in my opinion -- fall under Federal statute, not to be limited or restricted in any way by State, County, or local levels of government.

    What say you?
    Yes it should be federal law.Citizens shouldn't have to worry about what state they are in regarding self defense.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Personally I despise thieves and rarely shed a tear when they get shot dead. Particularly since most of them are not the Gentleman Burglar of literary myth, but thugs perfectly willing to use violence to achieve their larceny.
    Maybe it's just me, but "Gentleman Burglar" seems oxymoronic in nature.

    Now, I know that in a perfect world you can't just shoot someone dead for taking your stuff, but - as you alluded to - if severe violence or potential for death resulted in it, I could see punishment for it being capital in nature.

    Obviously some limitations need to be made. Stealing bread to eat and stave off starvation is one thing. However, nobody needs my car to live. Additionally, people who do this once are almost certain to do it twice.

  8. #48
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,125

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) really, winking back is serious now? i had no idea lol
    2.) well those are good chooses then
    3.) well its just my opinion i admit that but ill give you my rundown.

    intruder in your house or in the middle of forcibly trying to enter your house, deadly force is allowed
    intruder on your property retreat/investigation is first unless obvious fear for ones life is present or intimate danger is present then deadly force is allowed, this one of course will be very subjective and one will still have to be careful in some cases.

    as for stand your ground laws, im not sure that I could come up with how that needs written, most i have seen are very sloppy and basically COULD allow me to push you and punch you on time, then you start kicking my ass then i shoot you.

    a stand you ground law IMO has to be written much better or just extend castle laws to place of work, vehicles and person like they did here in PA.
    I THINK id have to check that deadly force is allowed for protecting yourself and to prevent a felony but id have to check on the felony part. Like shooting a guy committing a rape.
    1. Don't know you that well, couldn't tell if you were throwing a mock out there...
    2. Thank you
    3. I think we can all agree in common sense implementation. However common sense isn't winning the day in our government and evidence to that fact is that if it was then there wouldn't need to be any laws of this nature on the books in the first place. The fact that they are tells me that their are some down right imbeciles who are promoting an agenda that tells you to run and hide, to not resist aggression and to basically allow yourself to be robbed and or get your ass kicked if not murdered.

    The wording of such laws would have to be taken under considerable consideration but there is a movement to prevent people, to make law abiding citizens culpable for reacting to crimes committed against them.

  9. #49
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Maybe it's just me, but "Gentleman Burglar" seems oxymoronic in nature.

    Now, I know that in a perfect world you can't just shoot someone dead for taking your stuff, but - as you alluded to - if severe violence or potential for death resulted in it, I could see punishment for it being capital in nature.

    Obviously some limitations need to be made. Stealing bread to eat and stave off starvation is one thing. However, nobody needs my car to live. Additionally, people who do this once are almost certain to do it twice.


    I brought out this term, "The Gentleman Burglar", to exemplify how some people protest that you can't know an intruder in your home means you harm... perhaps he just wants your TV, and you should let him have it rather than use violence.

    To which I tell them, the reason you SHOOT HIS SORRY ASS, is BECAUSE you don't know what he may do... and given the risks in waiting to find out, shoot first!

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Should Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground Laws Be Federal Law [W18]

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    I brought out this term, "The Gentleman Burglar", to exemplify how some people protest that you can't know an intruder in your home means you harm... perhaps he just wants your TV, and you should let him have it rather than use violence.

    To which I tell them, the reason you SHOOT HIS SORRY ASS, is BECAUSE you don't know what he may do... and given the risks in waiting to find out, shoot first!
    You'd be surprised how many liberals I see that would give him the benefit of the doubt. A criminal. Benefit of the doubt.

    Is it just me, or do those two things simply not belong together?

Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •