|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
FL: Fla. Lawmakers Introduce New Pro-Gun Bill: “Stand Your Ground” on Steroids
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Rep. Dennis Baxley (R-FL) has introduced a bill designed to strengthen Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, which law already sets the national standard for vigilante misconduct.
Baxley introduced H.B. 169, the “Use or Threatened Use of Force” bill earlier this month that proposes to increase protections for people like George Zimmerman from standing trial. The bill provides that those claiming self-defense under “Stand Your Ground” will no longer have to prove that they acted for fear of their own lives. The burden of proof would be placed on the victim, and the prosecutor would have to prove the shooter acted with malice. The bill was introduced once last year, but the Florida Supreme Court rejected it. |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(10/2/2015)
|
"The law is essentially a license to kill. Anyone can shoot another person and claim self-defense without bearing the burden of proof."
The burden of proof in any criminal proceeding is always on the government. We call that "the presumption of innocence" here in the United States.
Florida IS still a part of the United States, isn't it?
If at a SYG hearing the government presents enough evidence to hold the defendant over for trial, the mere claim of self-defense is insufficient to merit dismissing the charge. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
"Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|