Repeal the "Stand Your Ground" Laws

[Red Arrow]

What had actually been unclear was whether a person could use deadly force in defense of others.

You guys with carry permits speak up:
One of my friends with a permit (he is presently out of town or I'd double check with him) once told me that if he saw me (personal friend) being attacked that he could NOT use his gun to defend me.  He would have to watch me die waiting for the police.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You guys with carry permits speak up:
One of my friends with a permit (he is presently out of town or I'd double check with him) once told me that if he saw me (personal friend) being attacked that he could NOT use his gun to defend me.  He would have to watch me die waiting for the police.

It depends.  As with pretty much everything in this life.  Where are you in relation to the incident?  It opens up a whole big can of worms that will in all likelihood have to be litigated.  If it were me with you, and someone attacked you, I would take them out if possible.  That's the way I read the law (see text link below) - to me it is very clear that I have the right to do so.  Now, how do you read it?  Or anyone else?  It depends...some of the guys here attacking the concept of self-defense would be frothing at the mouth if I were to defend you (or anyone else...)  And yes, I have the permit and very luckily, have not had to deal with these kind of situations in a long, long time.  Thank goodness!

One phrase in the OK law;
"reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Section D in law text below...

Right to Absolute safety in your home or business.  This law is what Jeremy Erslund (sp?) was obviously thinking of when he was defending himself and his employees in his pharmacy, and he went too far - so there are still "traps" that can get ya.
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?citeid=69782

Oklahoma Concealed Carry law
http://www.ok.gov/osbi/documents/SDA_Lawbook_NOV_2011.pdf

Concealed Carry Annual Report - 27,000 issued in 2010!  Good for us!!
http://www.ok.gov/osbi/documents/SDA_%202010_%20Report%20_Jan%202011.pdf

[Conan71]

You guys with carry permits speak up:
One of my friends with a permit (he is presently out of town or I'd double check with him) once told me that if he saw me (personal friend) being attacked that he could NOT use his gun to defend me.  He would have to watch me die waiting for the police.

Technically someone with a CCL is not supposed to access or use their weapon unless they have reason to believe the are subject to imminent physical harm or death.  I can make a safe assumption that if a gun were aimed at you it would be aimed at me next.  

And just a courtesy tip to anyone who ever defends themselves, absolutely DO NOT speak to any investigators until you have an attorney present and only after you have given your account to your attorney.  That's your legal right, I suggest you use it.  

Should the cops ask you what happened:  "I'm not sure but I'm still in shock.  I'd like some time to let it sink in and speak to my attorney before I speak on the record."

That's not even remotely suggesting guilt on your part.  It's been pointed out that there either were things said or might have been things said immediately after the cops arrived at Erslund's pharmacy as well as on the scene of the Riverparks SYG incident which eventually worked against each defendant.

I'd love for CF or Guido to weigh in on this one.

[TeeDub]

You guys with carry permits speak up:
One of my friends with a permit (he is presently out of town or I'd double check with him) once told me that if he saw me (personal friend) being attacked that he could NOT use his gun to defend me.  He would have to watch me die waiting for the police.

§21-1289.25 (D) seems pretty clear on this issue.

D.  A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Notice there is another "or" before noting a forcible felony which could be applicable here.

[custosnox]

Technically someone with a CCL is not supposed to access or use their weapon unless they have reason to believe the are subject to imminent physical harm or death.  I can make a safe assumption that if a gun were aimed at you it would be aimed at me next.  

And just a courtesy tip to anyone who ever defends themselves, absolutely DO NOT speak to any investigators until you have an attorney present and only after you have given your account to your attorney.  That's your legal right, I suggest you use it.  

Should the cops ask you what happened:  "I'm not sure but I'm still in shock.  I'd like some time to let it sink in and speak to my attorney before I speak on the record."

That's not even remotely suggesting guilt on your part.  It's been pointed out that there either were things said or might have been things said immediately after the cops arrived at Erslund's pharmacy as well as on the scene of the Riverparks SYG incident which eventually worked against each defendant.

I'd love for CF or Guido to weigh in on this one.

It's my understanding, from the class and the reading of the law, that if you belief you or someone else is in danger of immediate grievous harm or death that you can use deadly force. 

[Teatownclown]

"Shaken Baby Syndrome" used in defense of Trayvon Martin's killer

http://news.yahoo.com/shaken-baby-syndrome-used-defense-trayvon-martins-killer-160623575.html

Now this is really coming from right field. Incredible lying continues to keep these over reaching justifications for murder standing your ground.

[Teatownclown]

Brawl erupts in Florida courtroom after 'stand your ground' hearing postponed

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view/20120710brawl_erupts_in_florida_courtroom_after_stand_your_ground_hearing_postponed/srvc=home&position=recent

In Kissimee, Florida, a 'stand your ground' hearing turns into a stand your ground confrontation in the courthouse hallway. Actually, I'm hoping these crackers will just go the last mile and make 'stand your ground' mandatory ...threatened? Didn't shoot? 5 years in the box, you liberal wimp!

[Hoss]

It's my understanding, from the class and the reading of the law, that if you belief you or someone else is in danger of immediate grievous harm or death that you can use deadly force. 

No, only if that person is blood related or marriage related to you.  Sorry for the lateness of the response, but I have my CC class fresh in my head from Saturday.

[Hoss]

You guys with carry permits speak up:
One of my friends with a permit (he is presently out of town or I'd double check with him) once told me that if he saw me (personal friend) being attacked that he could NOT use his gun to defend me.  He would have to watch me die waiting for the police.

That would be correct RA.  Now, if the attacker, after noticing you've witnessed this, turns to you, then it depends on the level of force involved.  Striking you with a fist?  Can't draw your weapon.  Comes at you with a knife or a gun, however, is considered threat of lethal force.  But a friend being attacked?  You cannot do anything until you are certain that YOUR life is in danger.

[TeeDub]

No, only if that person is blood related or marriage related to you.  Sorry for the lateness of the response, but I have my CC class fresh in my head from Saturday.

While I don't doubt your CC instructor's interpretation of the law....    The statute itself doesn't make that distinction, nor is there applicable case law to limit its intent.

It states very clearly that:
D. A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

There is clearly no distinction of bloodline or marriage.

[Conan71]

You have to be careful about instructor's and even LEO's interpretation of carry and self-defense laws.  In spite of training, it will vary from one to another. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

That would be correct RA.  Now, if the attacker, after noticing you've witnessed this, turns to you, then it depends on the level of force involved.  Striking you with a fist?  Can't draw your weapon.  Comes at you with a knife or a gun, however, is considered threat of lethal force.  But a friend being attacked?  You cannot do anything until you are certain that YOUR life is in danger.

It's not that straightforward... there are both laws to consider and they say in slightly different ways that defending someone else (non-relative) is allowed.

[Hoss]

It's not that straightforward... there are both laws to consider and they say in slightly different ways that defending someone else (non-relative) is allowed.

That's not what I was told Saturday and there were cases that were cited that appeared to be the case.  Maybe as part of the stand your ground (Castle Doctrine) law.  When out and about as a CC license holder, no.

[heironymouspasparagus]

That's not what I was told Saturday and there were cases that were cited that appeared to be the case.  Maybe as part of the stand your ground (Castle Doctrine) law.  When out and about as a CC license holder, no.

Read the actual text of the law, then let me know what you think.  See Title 21, section 1289.25 part D (link below).  I know how I read the section, and have heard a couple interpretations of it.  Don't remember hearing guido weigh in on it, but don't get the impression that he works much with this type of law.  Anyone else??

http://www.ok.gov/osbi/documents/SDA_Lawbook_NOV_2011.pdf

[Conan71]

Read the actual text of the law, then let me know what you think.  See Title 21, section 1289.25 part D (link below).  I know how I read the section, and have heard a couple interpretations of it.  Don't remember hearing guido weigh in on it, but don't get the impression that he works much with this type of law.  Anyone else??

http://www.ok.gov/osbi/documents/SDA_Lawbook_NOV_2011.pdf

"...to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forceable felony."

What it's going to hinge on is whether or not the investigators believe there was about to be a forceable felony or whether or not an assault with bare fists, feet, or a chair leg would cause great bodily harm.  I'm aware of people being killed with one blow to the head before.

But, yes, I'm reading that if I saw someone being assaulted by someone else with a knife, gun, or having a forceable felony committed on them (I'm guessing rape or armed robbery) I could intervene and shoot the newly-minted felon.