|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
It's like saying if I wear Browns gear to a Steelers home game, I'm enticing drunks to punch me in the face.
Indirectly. If you wear a Browns jersey to a Steelers game in Pittsburgh you are inviting attention from more people who take exception to your jersey.. the more people who give you attention the more likely it is that one of them will be drunk and punch you in the face.
Same goes for a scantilly clad woman.. If you dress like that you are inviting sexual attention.. the more attention you get, the greater the odds that one of those giving you attention doesn't know when to stop.... I'm not of the opinion that any woman deserves to be raped or asks to be raped or should have to dress like they are Amish to avoid being raped but the more sexual attention you seek, the more you will get and you can't always control who you get it from.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
Quote:
In Florida, the "forcible and illegal entry" clause in the Florida castle doctrine is intended to represent all that is necessary for the use of lethal force. The threat is implied, and may be assumed by the homeowner.
Which in this case, there was no forcible entry.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428 |
Quote:
Quote:
It's like saying if I wear Browns gear to a Steelers home game, I'm enticing drunks to punch me in the face.
Indirectly. If you wear a Browns jersey to a Steelers game in Pittsburgh you are inviting attention from more people who take exception to your jersey.. the more people who give you attention the more likely it is that one of them will be drunk and punch you in the face.
Same goes for a scantilly clad woman.. If you dress like that you are inviting sexual attention.. the more attention you get, the greater the odds that one of those giving you attention doesn't know when to stop.... I'm not of the opinion that any woman deserves to be raped or asks to be raped or should have to dress like they are Amish to avoid being raped but the more sexual attention you seek, the more you will get and you can't always control who you get it from.
+10, my point exactly. Wow! Let me say it again,
My point exactly
The Views Expressed By Me Are Not Necessarily The Views That You Will Agree With, I'm In My Own Little World But They Know Me Here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I TRIED to type it real slow, maybe you need to read it AGAIN, slowly?
I specifically addressed the question of what does "forcible" mean, it has not been definitively answered, but very clearly no actual "breakage" is required.
The act of stepping over a threshold, which clearly DID happen in this case, MIGHT, or, MIGHT NOT, be considered a "forcible" entry,
Also, AGAIN, this is in reference to FLORIDA law, which is only in effect in, ...ummm,...FLORIDA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
It's like saying if I wear Browns gear to a Steelers home game, I'm enticing drunks to punch me in the face.
Indirectly. If you wear a Browns jersey to a Steelers game in Pittsburgh you are inviting attention from more people who take exception to your jersey.. the more people who give you attention the more likely it is that one of them will be drunk and punch you in the face.
Same goes for a scantilly clad woman.. If you dress like that you are inviting sexual attention.. the more attention you get, the greater the odds that one of those giving you attention doesn't know when to stop.... I'm not of the opinion that any woman deserves to be raped or asks to be raped or should have to dress like they are Amish to avoid being raped but the more sexual attention you seek, the more you will get and you can't always control who you get it from.
I understand that point, but it does play a little fast and loose with correlation and causation. By that logic, you have less of a chance to get raped if you're dressed like a quaker than a slut, and that's really not true at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Other states have dramatically different wording. As there are many retired Ohioans in Florida, our current law may be a reaction to the previous, bizarre Ohio law that actually required the homeowner to jump out a second-story window to avoid a confrontation in preference to defending their home or property.
Completely untrue and sounds like you took something you heard from someone a little too literally
Look, there shouldn't be a duty to retreat from one's home in the face of real danger. I think castle doctrine is a good law. That doesn't mean I think killing first, asking questions later across the board is a good approach. Someone strolling into an open garage with no other considerations does not even come close to justifying lethal force.
But anyway, what's this nonsense about having to jump out of a second story window to avoid a confrontation? Like I said, that sounds completely bogus and made up, and interpreting the (previous) duty to retreat in such a way that it was never meant and never used. If there's an example in the law or case law that I'm not familiar with, please educate me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
That was a quote from the discussion in the legislature in Florida. It was in reference to the duty to retreat. The speaker was attempting to convey an extreme example.
Do you have definite information that, in order to avoid a confrontation, under the previous law, in Ohio, jumping out a second-story window would Never, under ANY circumstances, be required? Or might it be YOUR statement that is bogus and completely untrue.
The man referenced being in a second-story bedroom, the assailant blocking or near the doorway to the room, and the window being the only exit. Assailant having no weapon, homeowner having a gun. I believe his statement was very close to "My understanding of this statute is that it could possibly REQUIRE the homeowner to jump out the second-story window." From the discussion at that time, and also from further research on the subject, I believe his understanding was correct. He was an elected official and almost certainly an attorney.
I am NOT saying that anyone was ever required to do this in a specific case. However, unless the ground under that window was covered with iron spikes, jumping out the window would represent a not-unreasonable danger compared with a direct confrontation, which, IIRC, is what the law required.
Back to the rapist and the provocatively-dressed woman, I guess I have to connect the dots. If there is agreement that no manner of dress could CAUSE the rape, then no manner of leaving valuables in plain sight could CAUSE the burglary. This is in reference to the "trap" complaints.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Except the dude explicitly said he was setting a trap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
So what?
Was this a trap for law-abiding citizens?
Was someone induced to do something they would not ordinarily have done without the inducement being in place? Was this so-called inducement a commonplace circumstance, or something very unusual and out of the ordinary?
You can apparently view unkind language the same as a physical assault, yet a home invasion is not? I find the way your mind operates both disturbing, and fascinating. About 20% of the time, which of course is less than 3.
EDIT - That should read "greater than 3". CHS higher math.
Last edited by Nelson37; 05/05/14 06:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
And that's fine that you typed it slowly. However, anyone can look at the definition for the word "force" and see that this was not done by exerting any force. I understood everything you posted in its entirety. I don't see how anyone walking into a garage when the door is wide open "forced entry" into anything. I believe either that does not constitute "forced entry" and if they wish to include such circumstances into the law, the wording would have to be changed in order to do so. So I understand you feel it MIGHT or MIGHT NOT qualify as forced entry. I however disagree and don't see any way possible it could be considered as such. No problem, we just disagree. 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
It was actually a "reasonable duty to retreat". Some who wish to dismiss such things as unreasonable, which is the case with politicians, seem to forget to include the "reasonable" part. So no, you were never required to risk your own health and safety by jumping out of a second story window in your home. Such extreme examples never applied in Ohio.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,175
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,175 |
Serves him right after what they did at Pearl Harbor.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
So what?
Was this a trap for law-abiding citizens?
Is a death trap for thieves legal?
And if so, should it be?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
You always must respect Animal House references.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
There is a definite distinction between a "forced entry", and a "forcible entry". Yours, mine, or the dictionaries does not matter.
A "forced" entry, meaning that the entry was gained by applying force specifically in order to gain entry, as in breaking a window, is not the same as a "forcible" entry, meaning entry was obtained with some accompanying force. Picky point. The law is full of these.
Lifting a sticky window to enter is "forcible", but not "forced". Very specifically, violently kicking wide an unlocked and partially ajar door is "forcible", but not "forced". This I verified personally with various cops and an assistant prosecutor, with the caveat that a judge might, or might not, see it that way. . The specific intent given by the legislators was that a breakage was not required, but some sort of action was.
The example of stepping over the threshold came from the legislature debate, not from me. There was no definitive answer given, this was from a legislator who objected to the law being passed who stated that the simple act of crossing the threshold, even with no door at all in place, could be considered a "forcible" entry. There was no specific disagreement with his statement.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
So what?
Was this a trap for law-abiding citizens?
Was someone induced to do something they would not ordinarily have done without the inducement being in place? Was this so-called inducement a commonplace circumstance, or something very unusual and out of the ordinary?
You can apparently view unkind language the same as a physical assault, yet a home invasion is not? I find the way your mind operates both disturbing, and fascinating. About 20% of the time, which of course is less than 3.
You should not set traps for the purpose of killing people whether or not they're abiding by a law or not. If you feel they should the next time you get ticketed for speeding please ask the police officer to shoot you in the face. He set a trap to catch criminals and now he has the right to kill you. This is what your illogical statements are saying.
Study some neuroscience one day. But setting a trap for the sole purpose of finding a criminal and killing someone is not the same as a girl who got raped because someone raped her. But thanks for the Ad Hom, so enjoy some yourself:
So I'm glad you think about me and my mind, but neither of us are into you. However, I am concerned that you cannot count to 20. Also 3 what?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
I appreciate what you have been posting about Florida law. I actually agree with a sticky window as qualifying. Even opening a closed door takes using force to turn the knob and push the door open. Even opening an unlocked screen door.
Somehow I have a hard time making the same thing apply to walking into an open garage. But hey, that's just me.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428 |
The Views Expressed By Me Are Not Necessarily The Views That You Will Agree With, I'm In My Own Little World But They Know Me Here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Three people who did NOT object to whatever it was, with two, out of 10, who did, followed by YOUR statement that "20% > 3", which resolves to "2 > 3", which I then described as one of the dumbest things I have ever heard another human being say.
Have you been hanging out with Throw Long? There is no law which allows use of lethal force for speeding. There is, IN FLORIDA, very specific law which allows for use of lethal force in the case of a "forcible and illegal entry".
What is that thing called when the police set up a place to catch speeders? Would that be a "speed trap"?
I've studied a fair amount of neuroscience. What would you like to know?
The rape scenario is to point out that there is no such thing as a "trap" in such cases. In other words, it is not an excuse for such behavior.
In the case of "forcible" or "forced", this was ALWAYS accompanied by "illegal" and there was discussion of leaving out entirely the concept of "force". There was a suggestion that simple "illegal" would not get the law passed, so the vague and indefinite term "forcible" was added. They were trying to walk a fine line, there was some talk of the difference between simple trespass, criminal trespass, and breaking and entering. They were very clear that something LESS THAN breaking and entering was the goal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
That was a quote from the discussion in the legislature in Florida. It was in reference to the duty to retreat. The speaker was attempting to convey an extreme example.
Do you have definite information that, in order to avoid a confrontation, under the previous law, in Ohio, jumping out a second-story window would Never, under ANY circumstances, be required? Or might it be YOUR statement that is bogus and completely untrue.
The man referenced being in a second-story bedroom, the assailant blocking or near the doorway to the room, and the window being the only exit. Assailant having no weapon, homeowner having a gun. I believe his statement was very close to "My understanding of this statute is that it could possibly REQUIRE the homeowner to jump out the second-story window." From the discussion at that time, and also from further research on the subject, I believe his understanding was correct. He was an elected official and almost certainly an attorney.
I am NOT saying that anyone was ever required to do this in a specific case. However, unless the ground under that window was covered with iron spikes, jumping out the window would represent a not-unreasonable danger compared with a direct confrontation, which, IIRC, is what the law required.
Back to the rapist and the provocatively-dressed woman, I guess I have to connect the dots. If there is agreement that no manner of dress could CAUSE the rape, then no manner of leaving valuables in plain sight could CAUSE the burglary. This is in reference to the "trap" complaints.
Taking Pit's post about the former law requiring a reasonable duty to retreat, I don't see jumping out of a second story window to be reasonable at all, whatsoever. I doubt any 'reasonable' person would think being required to do that would be reasonable either. It sounds more like silly hyperbole/exaggeration to make a point or pass a law.
In any case, you made the claim, you provide the evidence. What did the former law say, and did a scenario like what you possibly claimed could happen ever actually materialize in Ohio? Or any state for that matter? I'm just asking for 1 example... I don't think that is unreasonable. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
What is that thing called when the police set up a place to catch speeders? Would that be a "speed trap"?
I don't really know if it's a valid comparison, as one scenario results in a small fine, the other, death.
Quote:
I've studied a fair amount of neuroscience. What would you like to know?
What synapse misfire led to you insinuating that you wanted to sexually assault me with dairy products? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,803 |
I believe as we see in this case, the prosecutor here didn't see this guy as any direct threat and that the shooter actually left the safety of his own home to engage the intruder. Yes, I know we aren't talking about Florida. To me, this prosecutor most likely knows the law and sees the evidence as compelling enough to move forward with the case. As you said, the laws vary from state to state. If in fact Florida would allow these circumstances to constitute the right to kill someone, I think their laws are extreme enough to actually hurt the cause of freedom of gun ownership. I'm a very firm believer in second amendment rights and get very concerned when laws seem to promote vigilante justice more so than gun rights. I believe it does more to harm the future of gun ownership than to protect peoples right to bare arms. Such extreme cases being upheld only embolden and fortify those who claim gun owners are nuts and dangerous IMO I don't want to see gun owners and lawmakers give them ammunition to work with.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
According to that link, the garage, even if separate, might qualify. It is defined only in connection to a burglary.
The legislature did very clearly not require a "burglary", at least not directly. No verification of "intent" was required. The "intent" to commit physical harm, or any other criminal act, was deduced from the "forcible and illegal entry". The entry alone was the ONLY requirement for lethal force to be authorized. "Forcible" was debated and discussed, "Illegal" was never questioned as being necessary.
By the linked definition, in Florida, ANY "forcible and illegal entry" is also a burglary, regardless of intent.
I do not recall the word "burglary" ever being used, though I only watched several hours worth of debate and not the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
I believe as we see in this case, the prosecutor here didn't see this guy as any direct threat and that the shooter actually left the safety of his own home to engage the intruder.
Yes, I know we aren't talking about Florida.
To me, this prosecutor most likely knows the law and sees the evidence as compelling enough to move forward with the case.
As you said, the laws vary from state to state. If in fact Florida would allow these circumstances to constitute the right to kill someone, I think their laws are extreme enough to actually hurt the cause of freedom of gun ownership.
I'm a very firm believer in second amendment rights and get very concerned when laws seem to promote vigilante justice more so than gun rights. I believe it does more to harm the future of gun ownership than to protect peoples right to bare arms.
Such extreme cases being upheld only embolden and fortify those who claim gun owners are nuts and dangerous IMO
I don't want to see gun owners and lawmakers give them ammunition to work with.
Well said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
That's a lot of pronouns... I'm really not sure what you're talking about at all because of them.
That's the point... By your logic any criminal should be shot dead. Also, I don't really care about Florida's law. None of this happened in Florida. This happened in Montana.
Yes... Did you come to that conclusion all by yourself?
lol
No, there is such a thing as a trap. For example your clearly moronic replies to get a rise out of people is a trap and it's working.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
I've studied a fair amount of neuroscience. What would you like to know?
What synapse misfire led to you insinuating that you wanted to sexually assault me with dairy products?
Probably what you were wearing. He just can't help himself sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
philly boy, you need to look at CHS's comparison. He is the one who brought lethal force into a speeding ticket, which is why my response, to him, referenced it.
Is there something about the configuration of your anus that would lead you to believe that inserting a quart of pistachio ice cream would be physically possible? Can you say "hypothetical"? Take your time, sound it out. We'll wait.
What deep-seated emotional trauma led you to fervently believe that anyone with a list which contained your name was actively seeking to end your existence on this planet? Not saying you're wrong, just curious why you would jump to this conclusion. Is this a common problem for you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Gopher, the "reasonable" in duty to retreat is about as well defined as the "forcible" in the illegal entry.
I explained this further is a subsequent post you may have missed. The point being made was that it certainly WAS possible that a judge would rule jumping out that second-story window was, in fact, both reasonable and preferable to shooting the assailant dead.
The burglary link would seem to indicate that the simple act of crossing an un-obstructed threshold, with intent to steal or commit any other crime, qualifies as a "burglary". Don't know how a Florida judge would rule on this. Here, as soon as the entry is made, intent to commit a crime is automatically established.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428 |
Quote:
Quote:
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/burglary-overview.html
Maybe this will help them out...
Uh oh. You may have just upset an apple cart with that.
The Views Expressed By Me Are Not Necessarily The Views That You Will Agree With, I'm In My Own Little World But They Know Me Here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,195
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,195 |
jc Victimization During Household Burglary Shannan M. Catalano, Ph.D. September 30, 2010 NCJ 227379 Presents findings from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) on the characteristics of burglary, with comparisons between households where members were present and not present. It also examines the extent to which individuals in the residence are violently victimized when at home during these encounters. The NCVS classifies victimization as personal, rather than property crime, when a household member is present and experiences violence during a household burglary. This report classifies these violent burglaries differently so that they may be compared to traditionally classified burglaries. It also discusses crime characteristics such as household structure, location and type of residence, method of entry, time of day, type of violence, weapon use, injury, and reporting to police. Data on nonfatal violent victimization (rape/sexual assault, robbery, aggravated and simple assault) are drawn from the NCVS. Data on homicides are drawn from the Supplementary Homicide Report of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Highlights: An estimated 3.7 million burglaries occurred each year on average from 2003 to 2007. Offenders were known to their victims in 65% of violent burglaries; offenders were strangers in 28%. Serious injury accounted for 9% and minor injury accounted for 36% of injuries sustained by household members who were home and experienced violence during a completed burglary. _________________________________________ Apparently you're twice as likely to be injured by someone you know and more than likely not a serious injury. Still wondering how breaking and entering should met with automatic death.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,195
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,195 |
Quote:
Serves him right after what they did at Pearl Harbor.
Wow!!!
I was wondering what the....? until someone mentioned Animal House.
Well Played! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,428 |
You being the OP of this discussion, was wondering what you would do if presented with a home invasion and also what you would expect others to do... I mean I can clearly gather you're mostly opposed to deadly force if possible but how long should someone wait and what needs to take place before you find it justified for someone to defend themselves? I would also be interested in any and all posters on here to weigh in on this question!
Last edited by Moxdawg; 05/05/14 08:22 PM.
The Views Expressed By Me Are Not Necessarily The Views That You Will Agree With, I'm In My Own Little World But They Know Me Here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Gopher, the "reasonable" in duty to retreat is about as well defined as the "forcible" in the illegal entry.
I explained this further is a subsequent post you may have missed. The point being made was that it certainly WAS possible that a judge would rule jumping out that second-story window was, in fact, both reasonable and preferable to shooting the assailant dead.
I saw the post, but I have learned over the years to not take a politician's words at face value. I also just can't realistically seeing a judge or jury convicting someone in a home defense situation because the home owner could have alleviated the situation.... by jumping out of an upstairs window. Let's just agree to disagree on that one.
Quote:
The burglary link would seem to indicate that the simple act of crossing an un-obstructed threshold, with intent to steal or commit any other crime, qualifies as a "burglary". Don't know how a Florida judge would rule on this. Here, as soon as the entry is made, intent to commit a crime is automatically established.
Florida law is often an exception in these regards and while I'd rather not get too deep into that discussion, I think a lot of it is the result of a lot of wacky 'what-ifs' that were never realistically a problem to begin with. See above.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Let me give you an example of an actual ruling on "reasonable".
Actual case law from an extensive work on this specific subject.
Under search and seizure law, with a suspect under arrest, with no search warrant, the law says that any area that the suspect can "reasonably" access is subject to a search, in order to protect the officers from a possible hidden weapon.
With a man arrested, handcuffed behind his back, face down on the kitchenà floor, a small man, the judge ruled it was reasonable that the man could jump to his feet, get the cuffs in front of him, overpower FOUR large, armed officers, stand on a chair, get a cookie jar from the top of the refrigerator, and open it and possibly retrieve a weapon. Search ruled legal.
"Reasonable", in the law, is a word that can be made to mean darn near anything that any particular judge wants it to.
Imagine CHS as a sitting judge. Jumping out that window looking any more "reasonable"?
The answer to your next question is "Yes, there are."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Again, please stop thinking about me like that. I'm just not interested in your icecream-anal fantasies.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
I'm not really interested in the babblings of someone who has demonstrated the math skills of a poorly-educated baboon, who then has the tremendous chutzpah to question my higher math skills.
Oh, just to clarify, CHS was never identified or even mentioned as being on the list. Cheer up, though, maybe soon philly boy will be gone and there will be room for one more!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Do you always lash out when you're turned down?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,406
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,406 |
Quote:
According to that link, the garage, even if separate, might qualify. It is defined only in connection to a burglary.
The legislature did very clearly not require a "burglary", at least not directly. No verification of "intent" was required. The "intent" to commit physical harm, or any other criminal act, was deduced from the "forcible and illegal entry". The entry alone was the ONLY requirement for lethal force to be authorized. "Forcible" was debated and discussed, "Illegal" was never questioned as being necessary.
By the linked definition, in Florida, ANY "forcible and illegal entry" is also a burglary, regardless of intent.
I do not recall the word "burglary" ever being used, though I only watched several hours worth of debate and not the whole thing.
A separate garage in Florida would not qualify as it is not a "dwelling."
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
Is any of this garbage necessary? By either of you?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... German student Diren Dede killed
in 'castle doctrine' case
|
|
