H 5072 Bill to Ammend Use of Deadly Force in SC

Please contact your SC Representative and the Judiciary Committee in opposition to H 5072.

This bill was introduced in SC House yesterday by another anti self-defense zealot in response to the Florida shooting. It removes your right to stand your ground and use deadly force anywhere but your home or vehicle. The summary states it only removes this right in a place of business, but if you look, the deletion covers the entire parargraph that also states "anywhere you have a lawful right to be".

Here is link to bill:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/query.p...921879&result_pos=0&keyval=1195072&numrows=10

Please contact your Representative and the Judiciary Committee where this bill now resides.

Judiciary Committee:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/email.php?T=C&C=H2000000200


I sent the following:

A person's right to self-defense goes beyond the home or vehicle. It follows the person regardless of their location. By passing this bill you would put law abiding citizens at more risk and protecting criminals. It is time we STOP PROTECTING CRIMINALS.

It is a disgrace that the incident in Florida would be used to ammend a law that protects the rights of law abiding citizens while promoting an anti self-defense agenda. There are rules governing appropriate use of deadly force that must be followed, but to say you cannot stand your ground and use deadly force when called for is to further endanger the lives of those already placed in harms way with no recourse, but to take the risk of retreat.

Do not place law abiding citizens in this situation. Kill H 5072

Speaking in the judiciary sense only of course, but good point.

I believe this is the biggest threat to our 2A rights in years. The liberal media and lawmakers will shamelessly milk it dry to promote their agenda.

You should be concerned about this regardless of what state you live in. If it passes in one, it will likely spread to others.

Kleanbore said:

I'm afraid you are confusing two subjects.

When the Second Amendment was drafted and when the Constitution was ratified, citizens in every state had a duty to retreat, if safely possible, before resorting to deadly force to defend themselves. It was a matter of common law. Nothing to do with the keeping of arms or the bearing of arms.

Click to expand...

That is true. I see this as a threat to our right of self-defense in the broader sense, but has nothing to do with the RKBA. Here is a GOA article that put it very well.

http://gunowners.org/op03282012lp.htm