Posted on 04/05/2014 12:01:01 AM PDT by kingattax
On April 3rd, the Florida senate passed warning shot legislation by a vote of 32-7. The state house had already passed the measure, so it now goes to Gov. Rick Scott (R) for his signature.
If signed, this legislation will make it legal to fire a warning shot as a last step before shooting an attacker who has launched an assault.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I fired a shot into the air, it came to Earth I know not where...bad idea, waste of ammo.
Interesting, that is exactly how warning shots will be delivered in my home, and I have said so for decades.
There was only one shot. It's three counts because she endangered three people. There were also two children standing with her husband. It's also not the prosecutor's call. The sentence is a mandatory minimum by law.
The law doesn’t allow warning shots. It allows someone to threaten the use of force in the same situation where the actual use of force would have been legal. In other words, if it would have been self-defense to shoot someone, it will now also be self-defense to threaten to shoot someone. It wasn’t before, and because Florida has strict mandatory laws involving the use of a gun, people would get serious prison time for threatening to do something that would have been legal if they’d done it.
But it also requires that any threat of force must not pose a risk to public safety, which pretty much rules out any wild warning shots. The exact opposite of what people are saying about this law.
Note that none of this applies to the Marissa Alexander case because she wasn’t acting in self defense.
Since they are mandatory sentences, the prosecutor has nothing to do with it.
Also, Marissa Alexander is not serving any time now. She is awaiting retrial. If she goes to trial, if the prosecutor doesn't offer her a plea, she will be convicted again. She didn't fire a warning shot, her husband wasn't threatening her. She didn't act in self defense.
I assume you mean Marissa Alexander. This bill has no bearing on the facts of her case. She wasn't acting in self defense.
First, it doesn't allow firing warning shots. Second, assuming for a moment it did, there would be no need to claim that. It allows the threat of force in the same situation where the use of force would be legal. There's no looser standard for the threat. If you'd be ok with a threat, you'd be ok if you hit him.
that's a 10 second hundred yard dash ... hardly average
Unless it's at the center of mass.
The da and prosecutor have leeway not to pursue charges.
Right?
Sure, but the charges are appropriate in this case. The problem is only that they have mandatory minimums.
Here's how homeowners die in a break-ins - - Homeowner: “Put your gun down or I'll shoot’. At which point the perp aims his gun and kills the homeowner. Crimnians don't give warnings or play fair. And as far as killing one of these people? Even their fathers would cheer in relief...
Here's how homeowners die in a break-ins - - Homeowner: “Put your gun down or I'll shoot’. At which point the perp aims his gun and kills the homeowner. Criminals don't give warnings or play fair. And as far as killing one of these people? Even their fathers and children would cheer in relief...
This law is ALLOWING a warning shot, not MANDATING one. If you feel that one is necessary and/or useful, you can now do it without fear of prosecution. Otherwise, go for center-of-mass as needed.
It doesnt allow warning shots.
Standard LEO training is what is getting innocent people murdered.
Just fire two quick shots at the attacker. Tell the judge the warning shot just happened to miss your target, which of course was the sky!
Not exactly the normal definition of a “warning shot”.
That is the case which led to this law. You may not like it but you will have to deal with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.