Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hey -- you're the one placing an inherent moral valuue on killing.*shrug*. Ok.
If you aren't willing to back up that moral stance with something substantive, there's no reason anyone should take it, or you, seriously.
:shrug:
All You Need to Know About Irrational "Self-Defense" Laws in Three Pictures
That's Ezekiel Gilbert. He was acquitted yesterday in the murder of Lenora Ivie Frago, who had taken $150 from Gilbert for sex and then refused to have sex with him or give him the money back. So he shot her, not wanting to kill her (and it did take her a few months to die). But because Texas allows people to use deadly force in order to retrieve stolen property (and because the sex did not occur, despite prostitution being illegal, the money was considered stolen), Gilbert, for lack of a better phrase, got off.
That's Ralph Wald. He was acquitted last week for the murder of Walter Conley. Conley had been in the middle of having sex with Wald's wife, so, like any reasonable person, Wald claimed that he assumed his wife was being raped and shot Conley dead. His defense was Florida's Stand Your Ground law, which allows anyone who believes that he or she is facing danger in his or her home to use deadly force. Wald said his wife was in danger, so he shot first and asked questions later. Oh, wait, actually he didn't do that last part. He told police he was glad the guy was dead.
That's Marissa Alexander. Last year, in Jacksonville, Florida, she was sentenced to 20 years in prison for firing a shot in the air to warn her husband, Rico Gray, to back off her. He had been arrested previously for domestic violence against her, beating her when she was pregnant, and on that day in 2010, he "approached her in a rage" when Alexander drove up to their house to get clothes. She was trying to move out and get away from Gray. Before she fired the shot, he had chased her through the house, broken down a door to get at her, and cornered her in the garage. The judge said she should have fled instead of firing twice into the air. At trial, her Stand Your Ground defense was rejected because the jury did not believe she faced imminent danger. She was convicted of aggravated assault and given the mandatory sentence. She is still in prison.
Look at the pictures. Here's your homework assignment. See if you can figure it out: What is different about Alexander?
Update: Several rude readers have pointed out that Alexander was not necessarily the innocent victim her defenders maker her out to be, as if that invalidates the point here. Nope, sorry. She's in jail for 20 years for firing a gun and harming no one. Wald and Gilbert are free after murdering people and using bad laws to shield them from punishment of any sort.
These laws should be repealed.
Flaw:I will put it as succinctly as I can:
(Disclaimer: I will not do, nor will I encourage this behavior, it is set out as a means to an end.)
If a liberal says self-defense is "irrational", punch them in the face. If they punch you back, then ask "I thought you said self defense was irrational?" If a liberal insists on saying self-defense is "irrational", burglarize their home, and if they pull a gun on you, ask "I thought you said self-defense was irrational?"
Any liberal that believes self-defense is irrational will not have a gun.
Not necessarily. Liberals are pretty irrational.
Flaw:
Any liberal that believes self-defense is irrational will not have a gun.
Not necessarily. Liberals are pretty irrational.
A liberal who believes self defense to be irrational yet owns a gun is a hypocrite.
Nothing wrong with the laws, the problem is with the prosecutors who abuse the laws, and juries who fail to see through that abuse.
BTW, the reason that Marissa Alexander could not use self defense as a defense, is for the simple reason that she went out to her car, got the gun, and then went back into the house. She should have taken a plea deal, but the prosecutor should never have charged her with a felony.
It is common, now-a-days, for prosecutors to overcharge every case and expect a plea deal on what should have been the legitimate charge in the first place.
Nothing wrong with the laws, the problem is with the prosecutors who abuse the laws, and juries who fail to see through that abuse.
BTW, the reason that Marissa Alexander could not use self defense as a defense, is for the simple reason that she went out to her car, got the gun, and then went back into the house. She should have taken a plea deal, but the prosecutor should never have charged her with a felony.
It is common, now-a-days, for prosecutors to overcharge every case and expect a plea deal on what should have been the legitimate charge in the first place.
You skipped the obvious step. She was out of the situation and did not have to return to it. She knew the violent abuser was in there waiting for her, and she went back in anyway. Being stupid doesn't get you extra points and it doesn't entitle you to a verdict of self defense.
Just like li'l Trayvon who could have just kept on stepping. He didn't have to assault Zimmerman.
Nothing wrong with the laws, the problem is with the prosecutors who abuse the laws, and juries who fail to see through that abuse.
BTW, the reason that Marissa Alexander could not use self defense as a defense, is for the simple reason that she went out to her car, got the gun, and then went back into the house. She should have taken a plea deal, but the prosecutor should never have charged her with a felony.
It is common, now-a-days, for prosecutors to overcharge every case and expect a plea deal on what should have been the legitimate charge in the first place.
You skipped the obvious step. She was out of the situation and did not have to return to it. She knew the violent abuser was in there waiting for her, and she went back in anyway. Being stupid doesn't get you extra points and it doesn't entitle you to a verdict of self defense.
Just like li'l Trayvon who could have just kept on stepping. He didn't have to assault Zimmerman.
and you are taken back when people call you a bigot? really?
she comes off as a bigot with the 'kept on stepping' comment.....
not playing the race card but i am sure not denying that the race card exists...now are you?
but i am white women...so what the fuck does all this ****** mess have to do with me?
You skipped the obvious step. She was out of the situation and did not have to return to it. She knew the violent abuser was in there waiting for her, and she went back in anyway. Being stupid doesn't get you extra points and it doesn't entitle you to a verdict of self defense.
Just like li'l Trayvon who could have just kept on stepping. He didn't have to assault Zimmerman.
and you are taken back when people call you a bigot? really?
Why would people call her a bigot? I mean, unless they had some kind of agenda that involves playing the race card.
she comes off as a bigot with the 'kept on stepping' comment.....
not playing the race card but i am sure not denying that the race card exists...now are you?
but i am white women...so what the fuck does all this ****** mess have to do with me?
What does "kept on stepping" mean? Is that some kind of code for ******?
