PDA

View Full Version : Bill could trigger a 'just shoot' attitude



Knimrod
02-20-2006, 11:23 PM
CHRIS CHRISTOFF: Bill could trigger a 'just shoot' attitude
February 20, 2006
BY CHRIS CHRISTOFF
FREE PRESS LANSING BUREAU CHIEF

The state Senate is to begin hearings Tuesday on how to commit to law the kind of public behavior the gun lobby views as an expression of freedom: Shoot first and ask questions later.

Or so it would seem under a proposed bill to give broad legal protection to those who use deadly force -- we're talking guns -- against real or perceived threats.

Justifiable homicide would become less complicated. No longer would law-abiding, gun-toting citizens have to consider alternatives in the face of bodily harm, such as fleeing the scene or calling police.

Don't retreat. Just shoot.

"It's the criminal element that preys upon the lawful element," said bill sponsor, Sen. Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt. "Why should you have to retreat from a criminal? Why should you have to go into your shell? It's a take-back-the-streets kind of thing."

Cropsey chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is to hear testimony on his bill Tuesday in Lansing. Senate Bill 1046 would allow citizens to use deadly force to "prevent the commission of a forcible felony" without facing criminal or civil action. The defender/shooter must have a reasonable fear of great harm. That goes for burglars.

Florida approved such a "stand your ground" law last October. So far the law has been invoked once, when a tow truck operator shot and killed an angry car owner whose illegally parked vehicle was towed away. The towing operator claims he was justified because the car owner tried to run him over.

Witnesses for the dead man give a different account, and the case is still under investigation. The law apparently hasn't made it easier for prosecutors to determine who's telling the truth.

(The Atlanta Journal-Constitution wryly notes that Florida is safer having one less illegal parker roaming the streets. Georgia is considering a similar law.)

Opponents of such "no retreat" laws say they could lead to vigilantism or criminals using the law to evade prosecution. Peter Hamm, of the Washington-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Cropsey's bill is a solution without a problem. Nowhere, he said, are citizens being locked up for exercising their legal right to defend themselves under current laws.

Hamm said besides condoning a macho, gun-slinger ethos, Cropsey's bill could allow a gang member who shoots another gang member to claim self-defense and get away with murder.

The law might condone killing property criminals, such as an unarmed car thief.

Cropsey says if someone steals a car with kids in the backseat, why not? The proposed law wouldn't give immunity to criminals, such as gang members who shoot each other during drug deals, he says.

Cropsey and the National Rifle Association won a huge victory in 2000 when a lame-duck Legislature relaxed the rules for carrying concealed weapons. So far, gun-toting hotheads aren't shooting up freeways and malls, even though the number of CCW permits statewide has more than doubled to about 114,000.

One reason might be that concealed weapon applicants must attend a gun safety course. Instructors emphasize the criminal and legal implications of shooting someone, even in self-defense. They teach that pulling the trigger is a last option.

Now, Cropsey and the NRA want to tell trained gun owners: Remember those legal technicalities over blasting someone? Don't bother.

Just shoot.

Link to article (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060220/NEWS06/602200342)

taurus92
02-21-2006, 06:47 AM
Yeah not being locked up just bankrupt by civil suits from the family members.

khicks
02-21-2006, 10:11 AM
we need to educate this person how we feel about his artucal


http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060220/NEWS06/602200342

taurus92
02-21-2006, 10:30 AM
How about the bankruptcies created when the family members of one of these thugs sues you after being shot while in your house, committing an armed crime, uninvited and late at night? Of course you are not thrown in jail for defending yourself from their attack on you in your house but the lawsuits for the "wrongful death" of this "wonderful soul" will leave you shattered. This is what this bill sets out to correct. This is what "Senate Bill 1046 would allow citizens to use deadly force to "prevent the commission of a forcible felony" without facing criminal or civil action. " means.

Now the other portion commission of a forcible felony means you must know the crime being committed is a felony and it must be committed by force.

Knimrod
02-21-2006, 11:10 AM
Seperate threads for this subject merged....

khicks
02-21-2006, 01:47 PM
we need to let this writer know that we do not like the way he reported this story all one sided. i ahve sent a letter to the editor and to cris over his story

Dale
02-21-2006, 06:02 PM
seem that the evil Trial Lawyers will get together to squash this. Below is a second article with a little better slant (our way).


http://www.lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060221/NEWS04/602210327/1005/news

M1911A1
02-21-2006, 06:16 PM
Yikes, there will be blod in the streets, mass hysteria and vigilateism!
Yep, just like when shall issue was passed. :roll:
It's the Freep, what else would one expect.

That whole crappo about drug dealers shooting each other and claiming self defense is ridiculous. Felons can't own guns legally.

joen
02-22-2006, 06:59 AM
Christoff can't really feel the criminal deserves protection from intended victims, can he? Can he really be that stupid? Can the Free Press actually justify paying this guy? How can the Mommies feel threatened by...aw, forget it.

khicks
02-22-2006, 07:34 PM
any word if these bills where passed to the floor or are thye still stuck in comitty