Felon Walks Free Using ‘Stand Your Ground’ Defense – Even Though He Was Banned from Having a Gun

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Nov 28, 2015.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    so not only was he a felon and not allowed a gun he was attacking his wife. but hey it is perfectly ok to shoot someone because they are stopping you from beating up someone. only in murica™ would this be ok. so no news on if he is in trouble with having a gun or attacking his wife. of course they guy was not armed or anything but does it really matter? we can shoot who we want as long as we have a good excuse.

    http://latest.com/2015/11/felon-wal...-even-though-he-was-banned-from-having-a-gun/
     
  2. pdqgp, Nov 28, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2015

    pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #2
    Next time call the cops?

    The wife and brother in law are the ones in the wrong. She should have called the cops and the brother should have done so as well. Certainly he shouldn't have gone over there if he even remotely suspected there was going to be violence and given the circumstances it's fair to say there likely was going to be.

    SYG does allow the owner of a home to defend himself and technically the gun may not be owned by him so perhaps that's the direction the judge used when deciding. Don't know, don't have the details. Wife shouldn't have had the gun in the house if she was housing a felon.
     
  3. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #3
    well that may have been a better solution huh? they guy murdered someone and beat his wife and had a ilegal gun and walked. but hey I am sure your proud cause Murica.
     
  4. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #4
    Yep.

    • was the gun owned by him or the wife?
    • should the wife have a gun in the home if he's a felon?
    • should the wife have a gun in the home if she's too afraid herself to deal with the husband?
    • should the wife have even been in the home still?
    • why didn't the wife call the cops?
    • why would the brother go over to a known hostile situation without a LEO?

    Hey, sad story but lots of opportunities that look like needed to have been thought through and weren't.
     
  5. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #5
    this is a stand your ground failure. using SYG when it is actually murder. it said he owned the gun. few wines use guns against their husbands. SYG is often used for murder by felons and even while they commit felons. but guns are the only important thing in murica™ seems everything else is second.
     
  6. pdqgp, Nov 28, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2015

    pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #6
    SYG is a pretty clear law. His house, his right to defend it within the bounds of the law. Even felons have the "right" to defend their home. Per all the liberals here, that's the fair and equitable thing in the US. Criminals have rights too ya know....

    The gun ownership, it's up to the courts to prove he actually did "own" it. If it's in the house, it's joint property so one could argue it's hers too. Did they argue that point? Could the defense argue she supplied a felon with a gun? If so could they then make her an accessory to the death? could get quite interesting quite fast.

    Either way, the two laws are completely separate. SYG and the felony gun violation are separate. The prosecution could have gone after him for possession of a firearm but did they? if not, why not?

    Again, I get the point you're trying to make, but in the end, my points above in the previous post are solid. Wife and brother made some serious errors in judgement that resulted in the 19yr old being killed as best I can garner from this article, within bounds of the law as it relates to SYG. That law didn't fail here. There were simply some poor judgements made but perhaps some further state or federal charges yet to filed.

    Next time, call the cops. That's what they are there to do. Tell them the matter in a few words, mention there's a gun involved and Robocop sized guys with guns will come to the rescue. Especially important if the wife isn't in possession of the gun they have or is not in a position to muster the strength to use it.
     
  7. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #7
    it is clearly been fully abused. want me to post a few of the failures? gangbangers shooting rivals people shooting unarmed people in the back while they were walking or running away? Race plays a huge part in the guilt or innocence of SYG cases. if the shooter is white they often get away with it. black nope shoot black often it stands. the law failed he was not legally entitled to own a gun and I bet he was on probation too. the law failed as it often does when it is SYG. even the cops knew he was guilty.
     
  8. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #8
    why? are we done discussing this one?

    Really? Do you really think a judge looked at this dude and said, he's a fine upstanding white citizen? please...post this guys picture and share with those here what he looks like. He looks like Emenem on Crack.

    the law failed or the procescution failed? law is pretty clear and I'm not saying he's allowed to posses a gun. play that out Steve. If that is put in motion, then what role does the wife play in the death? she supplied him the gun right? joint home, gun is there and she knows it.....is she now an accessory and charged with manslaughter? she called her brother over to a dangerous situation where a gun and a felon were together......not pretty.

    Again, I don't know the details but I can see the above being a reason nothing was filed. Although the prosecution does have an obligation so the above could still stand to be put forth.
     
  9. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #9
    The article doesn't say he beat his wife, only that the wife was the victim of an abusive relationship (which may not have involved physical battery and/or the abuse could have been reciprocal). There is also no mention of the brother's actions or the threat he posed to the husband.
     
  10. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #10
    the prosecution prosecuted him the judge let him go. He is a felon in position of a gun there is no doubt about that. he did not have a right to use a gun. so the SGY is not even applicable. the law started out ok but it keeps getting watered down. How is it ok to shoot someone in the back while the yard running away or down? the law has changed to allow that. all a person has to do is say they feel threatened and they are justified on shooting in some states. tell me how is that a solid law? I mean just because cops can do it should everyone be able too? in the Us you want to kill someone? shoot them and say they threatened me or hit them with a car and say you did to see them. pretty much get away with it.
     
  11. pdqgp, Nov 28, 2015
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2015

    pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #11
    based on what?

    please cite the area of the law that says SYG isn't applicable to felons.

    The story shows he was shot in the face/chin not his back. Her story says he was leaving.....his story likely says he was entering after being told not to. My guess anyway.

    It's a very solid law. Castle doctrine baby. A man's home is considered his safest refuge and people have an absolute right to exclude anyone from their home. In many states this includes ones vehicle too. Thus car jackers beware too.

    My house, my castle and I can kill anyone I don't want in my castle that entered illegally or refuses to leave and poses a threat to my safety. I have a right to defend my home and no, I don't need to be all soft about it just because you're unarmed. It's about TIME that America stop f- -ng around with the bad guys.

    No, you still have to be within the eyes of the law. you can't just say something and get away with it.
     
  12. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #12
    who knows why the judge did it? he thought anyone can shoot anyone if they have a excuse? who knows?
    SYG has been used away from home by gang members by people committing felons at the time people have used it wile someone as been running away and they have succeeded. A lot of the time it was based on color of skin. hell don't you remember the black woman who fired a shot in her own house to stop her husband from attacking her" she got 20 years even with the husband testifying in her favor. the law is very ripe for abuse. a law can't be solid f it is easy used to murder.

     
  13. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #13
    According to what I read it's because as I've noted, the two laws are separate. Felon with a gun vs Castle Doctrine/SYG. He has a right to the latter.

    I remember that one clearly. Feel free to open up a new thread. She was guilty as hell. There are no such things as warning shots to start with. That was not a case of SYG...she wanted it to be but it wasn't. I'll have to join that conversation later if you truly want to get it going. Her color had nothing to do with it.
     
  14. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #14

    You think that’s bad, look at what Obama’s doing. The day after the Paris terrorist attacks, he let go five Islamists held at Guantanamo Bay and turned them over to the Saudis.

    Which one of the two events implies longer-raging problems for the public safety in "‘Murica?"
     
  15. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    I read the story and watched the video, and I am confused by one aspect of this case. If you're banned from possessing a gun, then I would assume that ban extends to one's home.

    I suppose there could be an issue that another housemate wouldn't have to forfeit their right if another person living in the house lost theirs. However, that doesn't appear to be the case here. From the little information available, it sounds as if the judge is saying you can keep a gun at home, even if you are banned from owning a gun—which just doesn't make sense to me.
     
  16. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #16
    No, the law is clear, felons are not allowed to possess a firearm in SC. Has he been confirmed as a felon? Not sure but just asking. In the end however, the two laws are separate. Even felons have a right to the Castle Doctrine and SYG. Again, I stand by the fact that the courts probably gave the wife a break by letting him go and not charging her as an accessory. Not much info here to determine for sure though.
     
  17. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #17
    How did a felon get a hold of a gun? Thought that never happened?
     
  18. pdqgp macrumors 68020

    pdqgp

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    #19
  19. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #20
    Saw the video , not a single tear shed , something is fishy there
     
  20. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #21
    Per article, she wasn't even in the home when the incident happened, so she didn't need protection at that time. She may have arranged for her brother to kill her husband while she was away, in which case husband would be justified in defending himself.
     
  21. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #22
    I personally believe a man has a right to beat his wife. Her brother should've known better than to involve himself in her defense.
     
  22. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #23
    Do you know that he beat his wife? Did he do so just before brother appeared, such that the wife would have needed immediate protection?
     
  23. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #24
    Yeah, I read the article.
     
  24. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #25
    Call the cops. Got a niece who gets what's coming to her about once a month. When my nephews decided to get involved they were arrested and she went back to her "abuser".
     

Share This Page