[driftdiver]

I agree, this law is the result of an overzealus prosecutor. A woman is serving 20 years under mandatory sentencing guidlines for firing a warning shot as her ex was threatening her.

[Jonty30]

My understanding of that particular case was that she was able to vacate the room he was in, but went back into the room with a gun.

[RC one]

20 years for each warning shot served consecutively if the prosecutor has her way. that’s life in prison - mandatory.

[mlo]

"I agree, this law is the result of an overzealus prosecutor. A woman is serving 20 years under mandatory sentencing guidlines for firing a warning shot as her ex was threatening her."

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.

[sarasmom]

I wish people would stop bringing that case up, as it does not apply.
The woman left the premises, went out to her car, retrieved a gun, and fired a weapon through walls where her own children were present.Her children were not under threat from anyone but her.

Not exactly the normal definition of a “warning shot”.

[PapaBear3625]

I agree, this law is the result of an overzealus prosecutor. A woman is serving 20 years under mandatory sentencing guidlines for firing a warning shot as her ex was threatening her.

I've researched this case. The woman fired a shot into the wall near her husband's head. I don't think it was a warning shot, just lousy aim. Which is why she's facing hard time.