Latest Headlines
- Merry Christmas! The Story Of The Greatest Gift Of All
- First Responders Put On Christmas Light Show For Children’s Hospital Patients (With Gallery)
- House Ethics Releases Scathing Report On Matt Gaetz
- Photos: Christmas Activities At Jim Allen Elementary
- Here’s The Christmas Closure And Trash Schedule You Need To Know
- Letters To Santa From Byrneville Elementary Third Graders
- Cause Of ‘Major’ Fire At Ascend Remains Under Investigation
- Letters To Santa From Byrneville Elementary Second Graders
- Fire Destroys Mobile Home Being Used For Storage Near McDavid
- Photos: Gingerbread House Day At Lipscomb Elementary
‘Stand Your Ground’ Panel Meets In Pensacola, Changes To Law Unlikely
November 14, 2012
A group tasked by Gov. Rick Scott with reviewing the state’s “stand your ground” self defense law appears unlikely to recommend any major revamping of the statute, although it will make suggestions for additional study by lawmakers.
The panel, meeting Tuesday in Pensacola, worked on a draft report that largely would urge lawmakers to look more carefully at couple of particular concerns about areas of the law that may be vague. The panel was created to review the law in the wake of the case in which neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.
The basic premise of the law isn’t being challenged by the panel, which includes lawmakers, prosecutors, defense attorneys, representatives of minority communities and law enforcement. The law essentially allows anyone who feels that their life or someone else’s life is in danger while out in public to meet the threat of force with force. If they claim that was the situation, they can go to a hearing before a judge and get a ruling on that issue without ever going to trial.
The governor’s Task Force on Citizen Safety and Protection does want lawmakers to look more carefully at the part of the law that says that the presumption of justifiable self defense doesn’t apply when the person who uses defensive force is engaged in “unlawful activity.”
That phrase may be too vague, the panel determined after hearing several “what if” scenarios and testimony that the decision about what unlawful activity is may vary in different parts of the state. One question that arose was whether that could mean, for example, that an immigrant in the country illegally wouldn’t be able to claim self defense under the law.
Task force members said Tuesday that they didn’t completely agree on what ought to constitute unlawful activity, but said the Legislature may want to look at tightening the definition.
Another issue that drew much attention on Tuesday was what the process for law enforcement is when dealing with situations where a shooters claims they’ve stood their ground in self defense. The panel spent much of the morning discussing whether law enforcement may detain someone who is involved in a shooting and claims to have been shooting in self defense.
Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, the original sponsor of the bill and a member of the panel, said the whole point was to prevent people from having to “lawyer up” to fight the state in such cases when “they’ve done the right thing.”
But law enforcement officials say they still need to investigate whether the person’s claim is true, and may need to take fingerprints, example.
The group’s report is due by the start of the legislative session in March.
By David Royse
The News Service of Florida
Comments
25 Responses to “‘Stand Your Ground’ Panel Meets In Pensacola, Changes To Law Unlikely”
So glad that this law is unlikely to change.
A friend of mine has a window sticker which says “due to the rising cost of ammunition, there will be no warning shot fired”. Good policy to deal with B and E.
Our second amendment rights are very important…so much so that the founding fathers made it the second Amendment to our Constitution. David is correct…only law-abiding citizens will obey the laws. Criminals can always get guns…steal them, buy from each other, etc. And LEOs are not always available at a moment’s notice, through no fault of LEOs. If our founding fathers did not have guns we would still be under British rule!
CONSIDERING:
“It’s apparent you people live in the a community thats not highly educated. Not one time did I say to stop defending yourself or to band guns. I said that some people shouldn’t have the wright to carry weapons that has mental issues or having eago thinking they have a wright to kill. ”
If you complain about the education level of others, it would support your case if your spelling of “that‘s“, “right”, “ego”, “ban” were correct. Me, I don’t care because I’m not supporting any idea by educational level, but those who do seem to think that matters might be well advised to be careful of such things.
It really isn’t a matter of a lack of education. It’s a matter of viewpoint, just like the idea that the Old West was a lawless place and there is always law and order everywhere else. Arrest reports and news items notwithstanding.
Further, most people don’t admit to wanting to ban guns. Rather they think “certain people” shouldn’t be allowed to have them unless they prove themselves acceptable and only certain guns should be allowed to exist, no ugly guns allowed. They don’t realize that only law-abiding people abide by laws so their efforts would only disarm those who don’t need to be disarmed while having no effect on those most dangerous to society.
Anyhoo, the idea that the right to keep and bear arms should be infringed shows an attitude of lawlessness, ignoring the supreme law of the land which forbids infringement of the rights of the citizens.
Just a thought.
David for thinking
It’s apparent you people live in the a community thats not highly educated. Not one time did I say to stop defending yourself or to band guns. I said that some people shouldn’t have the wright to carry weapons that has mental issues or having eago thinking they have a wright to kill. I never said to take your wright of protection away for your home. We don’t live in the wild Wild West. I do own a gun and have a concealed permit for it and ill do anything not to have to use it. If there no way out I will use it.
Several years ago while walking across a parking lot I was accosted by a carload of young men I was not bothering them just going to my car, at that time I weighed a total of 95 lbs they slowed down and kept yelling obsceane things they wanted to do to me and me to them, I stopped and pulled my pistol from my purse and told them come on I had 5 shots and a spare clip I know I can hit at least 3 of you before you can get out of the car, all I could see was their tail lights and I have been packing ever since but now I am legal with a concealed permit. I have not gained that much weight since then but still feel venerable. I WILL PROTECT MYSELF NO MATTER WHAT. If you think you will hurt me, I will defend myself to the death be it mine or yours. I WILL STAND MY GROUND
You break in my home I will drop you where you stand, if I’m not mistaken there is a castle law in fla, if your life is threaten you have the right to shoot them on your land . hey if they come on my land with a weapon , shoot to kill .cause I will protect my family. news flash there s a time coming where you will have to protect what you got and family.believe that .
REGARDING:
“it will be god’s will or my bad aim if you”
Good point, maybe I don’t have to worry after all.
David for trust
If you break in to my house , I will shoot you, it will be god’s will or my bad aim if you survive. Great law, and I agree with Mr. Tim. By the way, I love the west.
Bob, actually Fred is dead on with his opinion. If things were ran more like they were in the old days, we wouldn’t have so much horrible and just flat out sickening crime. Instead people are so concerned with criminals rights, and giving them excuses for there actions. If we went back to the days of actual punishment, we wouldn’t have so much crime.
You come into my house uninvited, be ready to stare down the end of my gun. What people don’t seem to comprehend is that if you are a law abiding citizen, you don’t have to fear being shot by a homeowner. If you’re a criminal and you break into someones home, you deserve all that’s coming to you….even death!
Now let’s get you signed up for that psych evalution Bob.
They really need to add a psychiatrist evaluation for people like “Fred” that has such strong feeling and touts outrage at his views like ” I am what the government fears, an overtaxed, armed, employed, voting, self sufficient conservative who believes in self defense by overwhelming force.”. People like that and has thoes over the top views are why the laws are being reviewed. Reading his comment reminds me of what happened out west. He has thoes same views and shouldn’t be allowed to have weapons. Fred my truly not be that way but you can’t tell that he’s not by his writings.
This is why I have sticker on all my doors and windows that says ‘This House is Protected by Smith & Wesson ” Read it because that is your warning.
REGARDING:
“By his statements it would seem that if an unarmed intruder broke into our homes he would have you exit the back door and leave the intruder with your property rather than stand your ground and defend yourself. “
Actually, I think you misread what he wrote:
“You bet if they break in or wave a gun at me I think you should defend yourself!!”
He used the word “or” break in OR wave a gun, he agrees defending yourself is merited. I don’t know why people think guns are magic. If he waves a stick at you, he may intend to kill you. If he raises his fists at you, he may intend to kill you. Even if he “only” intends to beat you up a little bit, he may kill you.
When in doubt, shoot it out.
Okay, that may not be a good idea either, but avoid trouble if you can. It’s rough on those who still have a conscience to realize they sent a damned soul to Hell.
David for caution
The problem is people like the individual that posted his comments under the name “trouble”. By his statements it would seem that if an unarmed intruder broke into our homes he would have you exit the back door and leave the intruder with your property rather than stand your ground and defend yourself. This mentality is common among liberals and will be the death of us all if we dont point out the insanity of their pacifist, gun hating attitudes. So, “trouble” for our sakes please put a sign in front of your trailer which reads, “gun hating liberal inside, please come take everything that I own because I will neither defend myself nor my family against you….please lock the door back when you are done”.
VERY WELL SAID Mr Richard Bousquet…I totally agree with you!!!
At my age (72) I could not fend off an intruder or a person that would want do harm to me.. I do carry and visit a range twice a week. Will I use a gun to defend people around me, yes. I do think we should the right to protect ourself, family and our property. YES. We should have laws alowing the citizens of Florida the right to protect themself, family, property, and people around them. These laws should be a deterant to all who want to take away a our freedoms in this State and in our Country. Make no mistake, we will defend this USA and that includes the state of Florida and the people in it.
I like the BB Pistol in the picture….
@trouble – I’m sorry but I’m not waiting to see if a intruder into my home has a weapon or not. The fact of the matter is that anyone who breaks into my home or property will face the consequences of their actions….even if that’s death. This should not even be an issue! You don’t break into my home, you don’t get shot…period. You break into my home….be prepared to die…period. I’m so sick of people thinking criminals should have rights!
No one who breaks into your home is there to have coffee…..their there to do some type of harm…..do you really want to stop and ask them? The law should stay just the way it is and the more criminals who understand that they will be shot, just might stop and think about it. If not, shot ‘em……… Tired of the criminals running our lives!
The problem with the law is it is grossly misinterpreted. Some people seem to think this law gives them a license to kill someone as the first option. There are several cases in the courts with defendants who are claiming protection under this law, when it is obvious the entire situation could have been avoided (by anyone with common sense). I couldn’t care less if they change the law or not. In my opinion, people will continue killing each other – our society is just predicated on violence. We have to be prepared to protect ourselves.
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
As the saying goes “Trespassers will be shot, survivers will be shot again”. If you enter my house and I did’nt invite you or I don’t know you I am not going to ask if you have a weapon I am going to assume you do have one and will act accordingly. Imagin what the outcome would have been on 9-11-01 if Americans were not scared to defend themselves for fear of offending some idiot who needed to be removed from the gene pool. I am what the government fears, an overtaxed, armed, employed, voting, self sufficient conservative who believes in self defense by overwhelming force.
@trouble,
What if the person being attacked is a female, and the attacker is a large male. Shouldn’t she be allowed to defend herself with deadly force if necessary?
I agree with Carolyn. No changes are needed. The exceptions should not make the rules.
Love “Stand Your Ground.” No changes are needed. And we don’t need the ‘no facts’ of the Trayvon Martin case to make or change our laws.
I just don’t think shooting someone who is unarmed and you can leave safely is is agood law. You bet if they break in or wave a gun at me I think you should defend yourself!!I I think whole law should be re checked.