GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-13-2012, 20:03   #1
SiberianErik
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,195
SYG law uhhh stands

Glad no changes were made because one ute got what was coming to him

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/ne...aw-inta/nS5yj/
__________________
Ed Brown 1911 fan #1
HK45 fan #2
FN PS90SBR/FiveSeven fan#3
SiberianErik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 12:15   #2
rvrctyrngr
Senior Moment
 
rvrctyrngr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gator Nation
Posts: 5,578


I have a huge problem with the 'immunity for self-defense' hearings that are currently being utilized in the courts. The hearing is NOT authorized by statute, and during the hearing, the defendant must prove that they acted in self-defense. The courts are using this based upon a flawed decision by the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Peterson, which based its opinion on a similar but different Colorado Statute!!!

The intent of the legislation was to 'presume immunity for self-defense cases', and make the State prove the defendant did not act in self-defense, not the other way around. What's happening now basically nullifies the Legislature original intent.
__________________
Director,
Florida Carry, Inc.

Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife.
-Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes Brown v. United States, 1921

Last edited by rvrctyrngr; 11-23-2012 at 12:16..
rvrctyrngr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 13:10   #3
Mr. Blandings
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,187
The solution is to get the Legislature to amend the statute with an updated, clear statement of legislative intent. It may be handy to wrap that into an update of 790.01 to clear up the current confusion sparked by the brief filed from the FL AG's office.
__________________
Alumnus:
Massad Ayoob, Calibre Press, GLOCK, Southern Exposure Training Center, Randy Cain, Andy Stanford, ASP, Modern Combative Systems, National Rifle Association.
Mr. Blandings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 23:46   #4
packinaglock
John 3:16 <><
 
packinaglock's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Loxahatchee Fl
Posts: 4,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiberianErik View Post
Glad no changes were made because one ute got what was coming to him

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/ne...aw-inta/nS5yj/
Great news!
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
packinaglock is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 00:30   #5
Batesmotel
Senior Member
 
Batesmotel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 12,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiberianErik View Post
one ute got what was coming to him
Around here a Ute is a Ute indian. Utah is named after the tribe. You scared me.
__________________
If it can't get you in trouble, it's not an adventure.
Batesmotel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 01:17   #6
TK-421
Senior Member
 
TK-421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 4,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Batesmotel View Post
Around here a Ute is a Ute indian. Utah is named after the tribe. You scared me.
TK-421 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 05:19   #7
packinaglock
John 3:16 <><
 
packinaglock's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Loxahatchee Fl
Posts: 4,600
That was a funny show, Joe was great.
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
packinaglock is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2012, 15:32   #8
rvrctyrngr
Senior Moment
 
rvrctyrngr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gator Nation
Posts: 5,578


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Blandings View Post
The solution is to get the Legislature to amend the statute with an updated, clear statement of legislative intent. It may be handy to wrap that into an update of 790.01 to clear up the current confusion sparked by the brief filed from the FL AG's office.
We have a fairly comprehensive package heading up to the Capital for this session.

Unfortunately, there's only so much we can expect from our friends in Tallahassee each session. The immunity for self-defense hearing burden of proof will have to wait for another time.
__________________
Director,
Florida Carry, Inc.

Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife.
-Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes Brown v. United States, 1921
rvrctyrngr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,024
343 Members
681 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42