Posted on 01/20/2005 2:20:03 PM PST by ExSoldier
It's crap like this that makes me glad to be a part of FR!
And glad that we are feared by the losers trying these stunts.
Bump-a-roonie!
That's great! Thanks for posting the info.
Hang on. I know Charlie Crist personally. He's one of the good guys. I think you're speaking of the SLIMEBAG STATE ATTORNEY in Palm Beach County instead of the Attorney General for the entire State of Florida.
I think it's a great bill (see my posts #14 and #15); I was just very surprised when I first read the initial posting because as far as I am aware, the Castle Doctrine is unimpaired in Florida.
But this bill is more than a mere fix for a putatively broken situation, it's a fine move forward: it makes it clear that one can defend oneself and others in many different situations, it allows the defense of property up to deadly force in the case of the perpetrator engaging or is about to engage in a forcible felony, and it provides remedies for cases where a homeowner is prosecuted unreasonably.
If this makes it through (and I think it has a good chance), then I would like to see Mrs. Hammer tackle turning Florida's very succesful CCW law into Vermont/Alaska carry.
Great bill indeed. Thanks for the post and the excerpts.
I'm particularly encouraged by the provision for fees and costs in wrongful prosecutions. Even innocence can be expensive in the face of overzealousness or worse.
My Grandfather was convicted of manslaughter for killing a man who had fired six times at him first. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Fortunately the Governor, Sydney J. Catts, recognized an injustice had been done, and gave him a full pardon.
You are entirely correct, ExSoldier. Charlie CRIST is an absolutely great Attorney General, and I hope he will be our next Govenor. The States Attorney in Palm Beach County is the culprit in this case; he seems to me to be a real vindictive prosecutor.
pong!
SWEET!BTTT!
bttt
http://www.flsenate.gov/data/session/2005/Senate/bills/analysis/pdf/2005s0436.cj.pdf
http://www.flsenate.gov/cgi-bin/View_Page.pl?Tab=Committees&Submenu=4&File=CJ_050126_1400_1600.html&Directory=\committees\senate\Agenda\
You are CORRECT
Just for the record, here's the law in Arizona:
13-411. Justification; use of force in crime prevention
A. A person is justified in threatening or using both physical force and deadly physical force against another if and to the extent the person reasonably believes that physical force or deadly physical force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's commission of arson of an occupied structure under section 13-1704, burglary in the second or first degree under section 13-1507 or 13-1508, kidnapping under section 13-1304, manslaughter under section 13-1103, second or first degree murder under section 13-1104 or 13-1105, sexual conduct with a minor under section 13-1405, sexual assault under section 13-1406, child molestation under section 13-1410, armed robbery under section 13-1904, or aggravated assault under section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraphs 1 and 2.
B. There is no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force justified by subsection A of this section.
C. A person is presumed to be acting reasonably for the purposes of this section if he is acting to prevent the commission of any of the offenses listed in subsection A of this section.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=13
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.