[StarSlayer]

Forcible felony.—"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

How's that for scary?  How many members of the gun-toting public do you think can tell the difference between aggravated assault and common assault?  Common battery and aggravated battery? Robbery versus break and enter?

There are a lot of reasons Florida is OK with people killing other people for.

So don't try stealing **** from Amazon delivery drones in Florida.

[swashmebuckle]

Sound like a bunch of FOREIGNERS WHO WANT TO TAKE OUR GUNS ARE THROWING METAPHORICAL POPCORN AT AMERICA IN HERE

Speaking of drones

[Phantom Hoover]

***** you wish it was popcorn (it is actually popsocialism)

[swashmebuckle]

ack, socialism! Preemptive strike inbooooooooooound

[666maslo666]

That is what duty to retreat means - proportionality.  If one can get away, then killing your assailant is unreasonable and not self-defense.

If thats all that it means, then I guess it is fine. What I am not OK with is making some obligations to act on the part of the victim. The phrase "duty to retreat" strongly implies just that and the phrase "stand your ground" implies the opposite. If what you are saying is right, then it is a real misnomer indeed and is bound to create confusion..

[Hellzed]

Last elections, I voted Stalin !

(I still hesitate between laughing and crying when I remember a fellow American exchange student trying to explain to me how we "have no free market in Europe". Really. He was in 3rd year politics.)

[Mika]

Please tell me that quote from Florida law isn't real, and that the description of forcible felony is a bad joke! I'd say the law effectively rules itself out by siding with defender's beliefs.

I mean, I have criticized Finnish legalization on what it comes to self-defense - applied force must be proportional to the used force which is occasionally ridiculously difficult to show to the court. Or that the law effectively stops you from preventing a rape as the required force to stop it greatly exceeds the force the assailant is using towards YOU (none), leading to a circle of citizens watching this **** happening but nobody does a thing, citing self-defense law which would hand you the heaviest penalties. So just call and wait for the police.

But even with all the defects, the Florida law takes the cake. Big time.

[Flipside]

What concerns me is burden of proof. In order for the state to prosecute someone, even if they've been caught in the act, there is a level of evidence that is required in order to successfully do so. What worries me is that you can end someones life on a suspicion, The whole burden of proof thing is gone.

Whilst self defence is one thing, shooting someone for throwing popcorn in your face is not self-defence, and claiming you believed you were in actual danger is highlighting the error in your own judgement, especially if you invoke an entirely dis-proportional response to it.

The whole reason that Americans have the right to Trial by Peer, a right which is even more important than bearing arms in my opinion,  is to prevent this kind of Judge-Dredd mentality.

[666maslo666]

Of course self defense law should be based on what the defender believes, thats not the issue. Id say most criminal laws are based on that, ever heard of mens rea (guilty mind)? The beliefs of the accused at the time when the crime happened are of great importance.

However we are talking about *reasonable* belief, what a reasonable person would think in such a situation. If someone is crazy enough to think a thrown popcorn bag endangers their life, then it doesnt apply.

[karajorma]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/16/movie-theatre-shooting-man-texting-florida

Thought that was great reading on the subject. Although when I got to this bit

Since Florida grants concealed carry permits via its Department of Agriculture, rather than, say a criminal justice agency, the state cannot use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to screen applicants.

What the actual ****?

[TrashMan]

However.

In order for the self-defence defense to apply, certain legal standards usually have to be met. Like, for example, there not being any other option to safeguard your own life. Stand Your Ground removes that, by stating that lethal force in self defence is justified even if the defender could have run away.

I have no problem with that really.

Just because you (MAYBE) could have run away, doesn't mean you will or should.
Fight or flight response, born in a fraction of a second while adrenaline is pumping.

It's easy to determine in hindsight that "you could have done that or that", but that doesnt' make it applicable.

That said, this entire event is redicolous. He brought a gun to a theatre and killed a guy becaue he threw popcorn!
That's some massive impulse control problem!

[TrashMan]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/16/movie-theatre-shooting-man-texting-florida

Thought that was great reading on the subject. Although when I got to this bit

Since Florida grants concealed carry permits via its Department of Agriculture, rather than, say a criminal justice agency, the state cannot use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to screen applicants.

What the actual ****?

I second that sentiment...

Wut?

[Mongoose]

Sounds about nonsensical enough for Florida.

[MP-Ryan]

What our European friends don't realize is that Florida's biggest agricultural export is not oranges, but cocaine.  Ergo, firearms regulation by the Dept. of Agriculture makes perfect sense.

   

Frankly, it's a miracle that shift-eyed-look didn't make it under Florida's definition of forcible felony.

[Nuke]

leegalize cocaine, problem solved.

[Lorric]

Has this made anyone wonder what he got up to as a cop?

I've got a look at him, and I was expecting to see some frail, doddering old man to feel threatened enough to pull a gun and shoot someone under those circumstances, especially with a career of police training behind him, police Captain as well, not some beat cop. But he looks well built for a 71 year old. Something about this besides the obvious just doesn't seem right. You would think the instincts of being a police officer would be to at least shout some warning, you know, something like "Drop the weapon!" or something before shooting.

[General Battuta]

A lot of cops are pretty much scum with power issues. Not all of 'em, not even as many as people will tell you, but there are some pretty bad people in the force.

[MP-Ryan]

A lot of cops are pretty much scum with power issues. Not all of 'em, not even as many as people will tell you, but there are some pretty bad people in the force.

Particularly in the United States, which has the most disparate policing of any 'advanced' democracy.  With no national police force, training standards, internal investigation capability, or legal restrictions, policing across the United States is quite literally a box of mixed nuts ranging in quality from rotten compost to high-end quality goods.

[StarSlayer]

There are municipal police forces for each community, above them sits State Police for each of the fifty and operating at the Federal level is the FBI.  Between the FBI and State Troopers is there a real need for a national police force?  Small local police departments have a bit of autonomy but most of the city sized departments have Internal Affairs.  My experience comes strictly from the north east but by and large the police forces up here appear to do a good job and screw ups tend to go public and get rectified.

[MP-Ryan]

Point being, the standards/training/education/equipment/accountability is a widely diverse thing from place to place in the US, and internal investigations are often shoddy affairs.

Don't get me wrong - there are a lot of very good, professional police forces and officers in the US, but there is a systemic problem in the US with the standards of policing.

...and if you want to be appalled at just how bad some policing in the US is, follow @PopeHat on Twitter or read the blog.  Holy crap.  Just remember that the authors are making a political point and, while the news they post is accurate, you may or may not like their opinions on it.