The fallout begins

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PigFarmer

New member
All:

My goal with this post is to make you aware of an article of legislation being introduced in Congress that would have grave consequences to our rate to protect ourselves. Please do not turn this into a referendum on the Zimmerman/Martin shooting.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/may/8/house-vote-trayvon-amendment/

Per the article, several legislators are trying to cut federal grants to states that have laws similar to stand your ground laws of FL. In essence they are taking the same approach used to raise the drinking age to 21, pull the purse strings to enforce compliance. This would have major impacts as most if not all states have become dependant upon these funds.

Please write you Congress person, and voice your opinion.

Edit: Mods please move if this belongs in the Law/Civil Rights section
 
Gotta love a knee jerk reaction to an isolated incident, I bet if anyone was to to the research they would find that statistics would prove that many more law-abiding gun owners rightfully defended themselves with the stand your ground laws than not, I also bet many more concealed weapon permit holders lawfully and rightfully defend themselves vs it being used for the wrong purposes.
 
It's socialism versus individualism.

It's better that society deal with crime - even at the cost of defensless innocents dying at the hands of criminals, than have individuals "take matters into their own hands."

deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted
Click to expand...

That's a bad thing? Every death due to self defense is one less rape, homocide or robbery of an inocent person. But to the people sponsoring this amendment, it's better to live with a very large population of criminals than have a very small incidence of "vigilantes".
 
Two posts have already been deleted for insulting language. We may disagree with a politician's actions, but denigrating them on a personal level is beneath us. It is also prohibited by forum rules.

Let's keep this civilized.

Frankly, I don't see the bill going anywhere.
 
Law or not IMHO (I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.) one never looses the right to self defense in the event of immediate danger (BG has weapon that can cause death, close enough to inflict death and intends to cause death or reasonable disparity of force) that meets the reasonable man level of qualification.

All these laws really do is help hold back prosecutors from prosecuting every act of self defense as a crime.. Not that all prosecutors do that but plenty enough do..
 
That's the problem with the creeping growth of our national government; it has crept so long that it is choking the host. The federal government has been using the threat of withholding funds from states to bribe and extort them to comply with Washington's point of view on a variety of topics for a long time now. I don't see this particular law having much chance but it's always best to be vigilant.
 
Just a tip of the iceberg example of the large government's inevitable future machinations if national reciprocity ever passes.
Will write more emails.
 
The federal government has been using the threat of withholding funds from states to bribe and extort them to comply with Washington's point of view on a variety of topics for a long time now.
Click to expand...
I seem to remember something along the lines of "no taxation without representation" from history class, but it's been a while.
 
Yep looks like they want the US to become like the UK where the only legal thing to do is cower and allow yourself to be beaten/stabbed/rapped (but probably not shot because most guns are illegal) while hoping that the police show up in time to save your butt.

I won't use any "alienating" language but this is about a battle of ideals, Don't fool yourselves for a moment into thinking otherwise. This is something that transcends all party affiliations, geographical locations, races, religions or sexual orientations.

One side views things like self defense as counter to the collective good and insist on promoting ideas with collective/government only solutions. They want you to "need" the Government at some level to provide a solution, to encourage you to seek out some level of Government to solve your problems. This is America and its your right to want that, to vote for that and to support that.

The other side is all about individualism, individual responsibility and thus the right to not ask permission before defending yourself from an attacker. It is about the frontier spirit where you are responsible for your own well-being and prosperity. Again, it is your given right to believe in it, vote for it and support it.

That's why America is a great Nation, we the average people still have an incredible amount of personal choice in how we live our lives. In most states you have the right to choose to own and carry a firearm for self defense, or to not do so if you wish. In an increasing number of states you have the right to not retreat when faced with a serious physical threat, or you have the right to do so anyways. These laws simply give you the choice.


Thankfully I don't see this passing in the House OR the Senate, too many people on both sides of the isle come from areas where voting on a bill detrimental to your right to self defense is political suicide.


I seem to remember something along the lines of "no taxation without representation" from history class, but it's been a while.
Click to expand...

That pesky 200 year old document and what it stands for standing in the way of collective progress I tell you! I am sure someone will vote on a bill to "Fix" that soon....
 
thalllub said:
The proposed amendment stands zero chance of becoming law.
Click to expand...

All the same, it's more than a little distressing to see this sort of legislation brought up at every opportunity. In WA we have one legislator who brings up the same anti-gun bill every year, with little hope of it ever passing. I don't recall the person or bill off the top of my head, but it seems borderline psychotic. Maybe that's not the right term, but I sure worry about the person doing this having any say in how my state is run. Try to explain that to someone not familiar with 2A issues.
 
And to stop sending Fed money.

Although, it looks like now that the dem leadership is backing away from this (politically dangerous for them) mess of an amendment.
 
Hmmm... Maybe.

Probably depends on what the party thinks will advance their cause best. He's probably a shoo-in for re-election. I'm not sure he even has an opponent at this point.

The amendement is not likely to gain much approval nationally. Stand your ground laws are, I think, viewed favorably by most.

Don't know if his religious views figure in. Do the muslims have an identifiable opinion on the issue?

w
 
Quote:
The federal government has been using the threat of withholding funds from states to bribe and extort them to comply with Washington's point of view on a variety of topics for a long time now.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember something along the lines of "no taxation without representation" from history class, but it's been a while.
Click to expand...

The feds did this with the motorcycle helmet laws and they found it didn't work for long.

Just remember the other guy is always right and BIG BROTHER KNOWS BEST.
 
Just a statistic

I read another article, http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/deaths-nearly-triple-since-stand-your-ground-enacted/, after reading the "deaths have been tripled comment" about florida's castle doctrine and found that the average number of self defense death's per year from 2000-2004 was 12 people. from 2005-2010 that number rose to a measly 35 per year. I had a hunch those numbers would be miniscule which is why they only used words like tripled. I am in agreeance with everyone else at this point. It most likely will not come to pass in the near future but I believe people said that about seatbelt laws several years ago and when the bill for raising the drinking age to 21 was first put on the table. You never know what could happen so remain aware and up to date on the situation.
 
The first case of FEDERAL extortion against the states in my memory goes back a far piece in history... Anyone remember when the FEDS required ALL states to adopt MAXIMUM speed limit of 55mph???

The trucking industry was a big part of getting states to quit kowtowing to the feds in that instance...

Brent
 
Personally, I think the only solution is to either eliminate the state governments or the federal government. That's one solution to the problem of too much government--assuming you believe there really is too much government. I'm a socialist myself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top