Removing "Stand Your Ground" provisions?

Remember that ANY member of the legislature can introduce ANY bill they want. South Carolina actually had one state legislature member introduce a bill a few years back to ban the use of profanity (in print, on the internet, in everyday speech). Didn't go anywhere.

I wouldn't expect any other anti-gun bills go go anywhere in this state either. We've actually been repealing gun laws over the last 10 years. The only thing I'd be afraid of is Federal level legislation.

Not a snowballs chance in hell.

I hope it doesn't go through.

This is one of those situations where the law has no right to tell you what to do. If you fear for your life you have a God given right to protect yourself by any means necessary.

The laws that some places have that would require my 77 year old grandfather to "run first" before drawing on some thugs is ridiculous and irrational.

New York state has a duty to retreat clause in their Castle doctrine. Meaning if able to, you are to run away in the attempt of a home invasion situation. I never saw how this was a viable alternative considering more than likely it would just lead to getting shot or stabbed in the back. Stand your ground laws are very clearly written, to stand the ground where you are legally allowed to be. Cases such as the George Zimmerman case where a "volunteer neighborhood watch" (read as vigilante) not in his own neighborhood chases after a suspicious teen are what call stand your ground laws into the light because that is his defense.

I am all for avoiding conflict when I am out and about. I avoid sketchy areas of town when possible, road rage, and general confrontations. It is the high road of being a concealed carry. But when violence comes to YOU right where you live or work, it is much harder to avoid.

mgkdrgn said:

Not a snowballs chance in hell.

Click to expand...

E-mail your state rep, then write a letter on paper and follow it up with a phone call. Write letters to your local newspapers and contact other media.

Shout them down !

When people say things like "snowballs chance in hell", " they're crazy" and "Never gonna happen" it means they usually (not necessaraily you mgkdrgn) aren't going to one dang thing to preserve their rights.

When enough people say these things and fail to take action we will lose.

Remember these people are using Alinsky's playbook and they will stop at nothing to complete their adgenda.

So write, call, show up when the bill hits the floor for debate, counter every lie they spew with facts. Make them look like the blathering fools they are and expose them for all the world to see.

Without "stand you ground" the lawyers are back in business. Let's say stopping force was used against a crook/criminal in yourhouse. His lawyer will say he was only there to take your TV or Toaster.... my client was not going to hurt you.

Fools say, "stand your ground" just makes it easier to kill people.
"Stand your ground" just insures victims are not prosecuted, for defending themselves.
Look to England, it's against the law to defend ones own life. Let alone spouse, children, innocent...better dead or raped, beaten maybe crippled?

I am particularly concerned about seeing my state (S.C.) listed here.

Click to expand...

South Carolina??? Isn't SC the only state in the southeast that doesn't reciprocate with its border states on concealed carry??? I always thought it was the most anti state we had down here. Unless I'm wrong, it's not surprising.

ME, NH & MA do not reciprocate

ME, NH & MA do not reciprocate

Click to expand...

Yeah, but I was kinda looking at "down here" meaning the SE. I noticed that the paperwork with permit showed I could go most anywhere down here as long as I didn't go through SC. Most NE states I wouldn't even drive through anyway because I might need gas or food. Every penny I can keep away from the more oppressive states is a good thing.

blkbrd666 said:

South Carolina??? Isn't SC the only state in the southeast that doesn't reciprocate with its border states on concealed carry??? I always thought it was the most anti state we had down here. Unless I'm wrong, it's not surprising.

Click to expand...

The "border state" we don't recip with is GA, and that was mainly because of a Jakie Knox led pissing contest. (he didn't like the fact they required no training)

Now that Jakie has been "retired", I expect that to change some time in the near future.

If you get to the point, on an issue as clear cut as this, where you have to "educate" your legislators .... they you elected the wrong ones.

After a law suit filed in Texas by a felon who was shot in the legs by a shotgun upon breaking into a house, and the felon won, our local sheriff came on the TV and said to shoot to kill if an intruder enters your home and if he's not armed give him one of your kitchen knives befor LE arrives. This was some 40 years ago in Okaloosa county Fl. and the Sheriff got elected for 3 more terms after that. Today he would be crusified by the media.

Ehtereon11B said:

New York state has a duty to retreat clause in their Castle doctrine.

Click to expand...

Retreat to WHERE, exactly?

NYS says home invaders have a more legal right to be in YOUR HOME than you do?

I knew NYS had become pretty messed up, but REALLY ....

Here in SC?


BWAHAHAHAHA not a snow clones chance in hell

After the Martin shooting just about every state said they would revisit their Castle Doctrine or stand your ground law. They all said they didn't want loopholes in castle doctrines or stand your ground laws to be used as a license to kill. You can look forward to self protection laws being revisited in almost every state. Here in NC they are waiting to see how the Zimmerman trial plays out.

mgkdrgn said:

Retreat to WHERE, exactly?

NYS says home invaders have a more legal right to be in YOUR HOME than you do?

I knew NYS had become pretty messed up, but REALLY ....

Click to expand...

I don't know. It was one thing I never understood about living in that state. It is hard to defend yourself under NYS Castle Doctrine because of the duty to retreat clause. It states if you can "safely" retreat in a home invasion/burglary to do so. All it takes is for one overzealous attorney to say "well you didn't blow a wall off your house to escape so you didn't even try to get away." Or some other ridiculous nonsense.

Put the lawyers back in business? It never fails to amaze me how demonized lawyers are on this site.

Let's put this one to bed. Please list three cases in SC where a burglary defendant successfully sued a homeowner after being shot.

Acelaw said:

Put the lawyers back in business? It never fails to amaze me how demonized lawyers are on this site.

Let's put this one to bed. Please list three cases in SC where a burglary defendant successfully sued a homeowner after being shot.

Click to expand...

Sorry if my comment is offending. Not my intentions. But's lets be real. There are attorneys that specialize in that field and will grab the case. There are attorneys that will sue anyone for anything regardless if they are right or wrong.

After the Martin shooting just about every state said they would revisit their Castle Doctrine or stand your ground law.

Click to expand...

To my knowledge no OK legislator has considered amending the "OK Stand Your Ground Law". It will not happen in OK.

2nd 41 said:

Sorry if my comment is offending. Not my intentions. But's lets be real. There are attorneys that specialize in that field and will grab the case. There are attorneys that will sue anyone for anything regardless if they are right or wrong.

Click to expand...

Only if they see there is money in it.

With a well written "stand your ground" law, there isn't, which is rather the whole idea.

As a lifelong resident, I've never heard of a case in SC where a burglar was awarded damages in this type of scenario. Is there any history of this happening here at all? I'm just curious for my own sake as it's something you hear over and over.

We are writing our state reps to try to stop this bill in NH. The republican controlled house passed it a few years ago, and the legislature overrode a governor's veto, and there have been "0" issues or incidences of problems that the gun control advocates who wish to repeal that law with this new bill claim. So, they are arguing the passage of the law is critical to avoid something that *might* happen. I think that the bill will go to committee and might end up dying on the vine there. A number of members of the chief of police association are in support of the bill, and our new female Democrat governor would most likely sign it if it made it to her desk, but we still have a few middle ground and conservative reps who will fight and likely stop it.

On the other hand, the first thing that the newly elected, now Democrat controlled house did after starting session in January was to repeal the law that the previous republican controlled house passed about a year ago - and that was to allow CCW to carry in the state house. There are only a few armed policemen in the statehouse when they are in session, and few-to-none after hours, and they representatives wanted the ability to carry their own protection if they chose to do so. The dems immediately stripped this away in their first week of business.