stand your ground vs. self defense

[frenchy]

i know to some there may not seem to be that much difference .. but there is .. stand your ground gives you the right to shoot first and ask questions later because you feel threatened or afraid even if you have no injuries .. stand your ground gives you the right to strike first if you're threatened .. i'm not sure thats how it was meant to be interpreted but thats whats happened more times than we can count .. at least if you're the last man standin anyway .. self defense is a little different in that you have to actually be under attack to claim it ..so whats your view on this ? do you think you should have the right to protect yourself either way ?? or actually be under attack ?? or neither .. just curl up in a ball and take a whoopin and hope they don't kill you ?? no right or wrong answer here .. we're all entitled to our opinion ..  

[T2Friends]

My problem with Stand Your Ground is how do you tell the difference between feeling threatened and standing up for yourself and someone who provokes someone just to start a fight or prove his or her superiority?  Many feel that the best defense is a good offense and that isn't just in sports.  I suppose it is a matter of degrees, in order to defend yourself do you have to take the first blow or can you be proactive and defend yourself against a perceived threat, but what is it that makes that perception real?  

[Mickchick]

I'm a Florida transplant, and I'm not really that familiar with the Stand Your Ground law, though I imagine I will be by the time the trial involving Trayvon Martin is over!  In Georgia, self defense covers feeling threatened - you don't have to wait until someone shoots at you, attacks you with a knife, or throws the first punch.  It's all in how it's perceived, and whether the jury believes that a a reasonable person would have  felt threatened to the extent that he/she had to defend themselves, and to what extent (i.e., deadly force v. something less).  In addition, someone who is in their own home isn't required to flee from their home to safety.  So, under that guidline, I don't see the need for a Stand Your Ground defense.

As for what to do - I tend to agree with the police viewpoint - If I think MY life is endangered, I want to come home at the end of the day and I'll do whatever I think I have to in order to accomplish that.  That being said, I not only don't go out of my way looking for confrontations, I do my best to avoid them to begin with!  And I WILL flee if I feel threatened and that's an option.  I once ran over my ex-boyfriend's foot when he was screaming verbal abuse at me while I was in my car.  I told him to let go of the car and back away so I could leave, he wouldn't  - I left - I didn't realize I'd run over his foot until I saw him hopping up and down and screaming  And, no, I sure in the hell did NOT go back, though I did call his best friend who was an EMT...

[dwalt]

If I feel threatened you bet I will take action.  I have had a gun put to my head before and it will never happen again if I can help it.  That being said a little common sense has to be used.

[frenchy]

yeah , the stand your ground defense can be misused from time to time and thats a problem for sure .. but the whole thing is when you and an attacker are the only one's there to witness the confrontation it becomes harder and harder to unravel just who the instigator and the victim is .. which is where character should come in .. if you're the type thats never been arrested for provokin any kind of incident in your life and the other person involved has a rap sheet for all kinds of stuff that should be some kind of indication .. that don't nesessarily mean that you're innocent because every incident is different , but your character should count for somethin .. of course there's other reasons to consider too like motive .. but when you put as much as you can together you get a clearer picture .. it can still be a jigsaw puzzle with a couple of pieces gone but its better than a blank slate .. i guess my next question would be if you're involved in an incident and you acted in self defense how far should they be able to prosecute you further ?? at what point does the long ordeal end and you're not victimized again ??   

[Lifesighs]

My opinion in this is we're moving backwards in the evolutionary process. It's just a reason to shoot someone and get away with it. I would be a little leary of living in a state that had this law. There are going to be more murders with no consequences unless this law is changed.

[Wayne Goodwin]

Only real threat i ever got was from a boyfriend of my youngest daughter . He would call and i always hung up on him . Once he left a message that he was going to burn my house down . I don't think he would have but ya never know . I have never been in a fight . But i sure put up with a lot of verbal abuse from at school and during my work history . I always turned and walked away . I don't know what i would do if threatened with a gun . Faint i suppose .

I wonder if Color adds to the statistics of how many are shot and killed just because he or she was Black ?

[Wayne Goodwin]

Other words , drag him back in the house if he does ....

[Lifesighs]

The part I don't like about this law is that the decision will be made by the prosecutor whether the person who does the shooting goes free or not. Sounds a lot like a "good ole boy system" to me. I understand about feeling threatened but killing young boys who have no weapon and aren't even bothering you doesn't make sense to me.

[Mickchick]

Not true, Lifesighs - while the Prosecutor has a lot of discretion as to what charges to bring against whom, when it involves a serious question of fact, all of the prosecutors I worked with (in 3 separate jurisdictions in Georgia over a period of 21 years), always chose to present the case to the Grand Jury.  I wasn't in the Grand Jury room with them, but I know whenever I did, I made sure that ALL the known facts, good and bad, were made known to the Grand Jurors.  I didn't want to prosecute someone if the community as a whole was going to consider that person to have been acting within the law.  It's a waste of time and energy.  On the other hand, when it's a question involving an interpretation of fact based on the defendant's word versus what the physical evidence shows ... I was not comfortable making that decision - either way - on my own.  I always presented it to the Grand Jury, and then it was up to a trial jury to decide whether or not they believed the defendant's version of the facts and whether they thought he/she was justified.  Different story, however, if the witness' testimony, physical evidence AND defendant's story all supported the defendant's version of justifiable self defense, but most times there was a real question there, and that's what a jury is there to decide.

[Lifesighs]

Does Georgia have this Stand Your Ground Law? Is the same rule followed? 

I got the impression this was a fairly recent (last few years) law.

[ProblemAgain]

there are other designations for 'stand your ground' laws... basically the idea is justifiable selfdefense. in some locales they also have a 'castle doctrine'. which in simple terms means you are entitled to use deadly force to defend your home (i.e. your castle)...in houston there was a case in the last year or so of a man trying to use that defense for shooting a neighbor...it didn't get far...the man trying to use that a a defense took a gun and marched over to a neighbors to tell them to turn off their music etc etc...now he left his place...went to the other person's place...and brought agun...the people he shot and the one he killed were firefighters...not gangbangers or thugs...he went to prison...

[frenchy]

and he rightly should have problem .. thats not a castle doctrine thing .. as i was sayin every case is different and should be tried on the evidence of that particular case .. 

and i hear you lifey .. and i agree that nobody should be shot if they're not breakin any laws .. especially if they're just a young kid .. and i assume you're referin to the treyvon martin case .. down here in florida we're gettin all set to start that trial and its gonna be a big one .. both sides say they want justice ( so do i ) but both sides don't want ALL THE EVIDENCE  to come forward and i have a hard time with that .. i say let the trial begin and tell the whole truth and nothin but the truth and let the chips fall where they may ..