NRA Promotes "Self-Defense" Laws; Orlando Shoots Itself

A note for Wisconsin's tourism industry:

Orlando sees the writing on the wall as murder rates soar. A year ago I told my college age children that they are not going to do a spring break in Florida. The headlines are graphic:

Orlando's deadliest year

Orlando breaks murder record, continues pace for bloody year

And then there is this - Orlando Murder Rate Attracts National Attention:

It's not just local citizens and officials who are noticing Orlando's disturbing trend. Sunday's New York Times had a story on it, telling all of its readers that the City Beautiful is on pace to have one of the 15 worst murder rates in the country.

Both the San Francisco Chronicle and the Detroit News have also published stories about Orlando running up big-city crime stats.

The Chamber of Commerce and the Visitors and Convention Bureau can put on a happy face but they are in agony.

The New York Times got to the bottom of it last week. 15 States Expand Right to Shoot in Self-Defense:

The first of the new laws took effect in Florida in October, and cases under it are now reaching prosecutors and juries there. The other laws, mostly in Southern and Midwestern states, were enacted this year, according to the National Rifle Association, which has enthusiastically promoted them...

The central innovation in the Florida law, said Anthony J. Sebok, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, is not its elimination of the duty to retreat, which has been eroding nationally through judicial decisions, but in expanding the right to shoot intruders who pose no threat to the occupant’s safety.

“In effect,” Professor Sebok said, “the law allows citizens to kill other citizens in defense of property.”

...Many prosecutors oppose the laws, saying they are unnecessary at best and pernicious at worst. “They’re basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review,” said Paul A. Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association.

The irony is that the murder rate is even higher, but because of the new 'self-defense' law, those deaths are not reported as homicides.

This is the same legislation that the NRA and some of our legislators want for the Badger state.  It starts with 'conceal and carry.'

It ends on the streets of Deadwood. and the Castle Doctrine., As I wrote last February:

...The concept is simple. Confronted with violence, once is always expected to retreat. Retreat is the rule, not the exception. Then an exception was carved out allowing the use of deadly force if reasonably used in self-defense. But always, there was first an obligation to retreat.

A thousand years ago our ancestors realized that if civilization was to move forward, the obligation was on everyone to retreat...

The intent is straightforward though not honest. 

...First, the Castle Doctrine now becomes the rule, not the exception.  At the grocery, the ball game and the tavern, there is no longer a requirement to retreat...

...laws like the Castle Doctrine, which guarantees your right to defend yourself against criminals anywhere you have a right to be.

...A dispute with the next guy over the parking space? Bam! Bumping into the other shopper's cart? Boom! Didn't like the way he was looking at you? Blam!

All one of the parties has to do is perceive that the other is not backing down; from there we have the physical confrontation with no obligation to retreat, and permission to use deadly force if you believe your own life is in danger.

Employers in Florida and other states want firearms out of the parking lots and workplaces. The NRA is claiming that their Property Rights allow them to take their gun (property) wherever they go. Whatever happened to the the person who owns the property, the real property?

Comments

[Chris]

I was with you up until you described the law as allowing a person to kill another for bumping into their shopping cart and so on. If that has indeed happened and the person was not convicted even with this, law I would like to see it. Like I said I was with you and agreeing with you up to that point, then you and your entire argument lost credibility. It seems clear that rather stated that fact you would prefer to created unreasonable fictional possibilities.

[The Gun Guy]

I agree with the previous comment. Florida's law (and the law amendments being championed by the National Rifle Assn [NRA]) certainly does not make it legal to use deadly force against someong who is guily of "Bumping into the other shopper's cart." For deadly force to be used, the victim must feel that inaction will likely result in severe bodily harm or death for themselves or another person being attacked. Whatever level of force is used, the victim must show the need for that level of force to counter the attack. As an NRA-certified firearms instructor, I always make it clear that all optons should be exhausted before deadly, retaliatory force is used for defense. The law being backed by the NRA removes the legal requirement for retreat if attacked. It does not authorize the use of deadly force unless that level of force was demonstrably required.

[JB]

You say "The irony is that the murder rate is even higher, but because of the new 'self-defense' law, those deaths are not reported as homicides."

Your statement basically contradicts your premis that the castle docrine has increased the number of homicides. Homicides are not linked to self defense incidences by you own statement.

[Julie]

Am I the only person on the PLANET who gets annoyed when someone uses homocide instead of murder?

Homocide -- means HUMAN DEATH. If I drop dead right now, it's a HOMOCIDE. If my co-worker sends me to my maker, that's MURDER.

So, technically, you're all incorrect. What you want to find out is the number of HOMOCIDES that are attributed to the use of a gun and compare that to the actual murder rates. Then, you will be able to tell approx. how many shootings are marked as self-defense.

[Mr. Forward]

"...The concept is simple. Confronted with violence, once (sic) is always expected to retreat. Retreat is the rule, not the exception."

French rules?

[Joy]

My issue with Orlando as the example: How many of the people doing the shooting are doing so in "self-defense?" The way I read it (and correct me if I misread the articles), the majority of the affected are poor, black men involved in some other criminal activity (robbery, drug related, personal vendetta, etc). I just don't see the argument in this particular example. How many of the shooters had their guns legally? How many of them even claimed self-defense? It seems to me there is a deeper societal problem going on. When I opened the second link, the ad that popped up was for a video game and featured some guy with a machine gun firing. Rather sad funny. How can you desensitize a culture to violence and then expect them to value life? Gun laws won't fix it - it's just not that simple.

[rj]

Please explain to me how I am to determine, at 3 in the morning, if an intruder "poses a risk to my health"?
Or how many intruders there are/might be?
Would ANYONE consider it a reasonable expectation to engage them in dialog?
Would you like a cup of coffee, Mr.criminal?
Please......
The fact is, the victims of crime are ALWAYS at a disadvantage.
Most victims only have a split second (if any time at all) to recognize a threat and ATTEMPT to react to it.

[NB]

There is nothing interesting here, just the usual blather. Castle doctrine will result in minor events exploding into shootings, with the resulting homicides ruled as justified.

So the author must believe that the average citizen at minimum has no self control or reasonable judgment, and at worst believe the average citizen is looking to murder anyone he can get into a confrontation with. And that this menovolent population will maintain respect for others if we simply outlaw guns and the castle doctrine.

The article says much more about what the author thinks of other citizens, since his “fear” simply is not real. Sure, gang bangers are offing each other over “respect” issues, but just how many gang bangers are jogging on down to get their fingerprints taken and for a background check (required to get the concealed handgun license). Anyone with the mindset and lack of self control he projects on the public at large isn’t going to respect any gun laws.

“Gee, I was going to go get a CHL and then find someone to shoot today but then they revoked the CHL program and castle doctrine. I guess I’ll go work towards world peace now, thanks government for saving me from myself.” I don’t think so.