We need a "Florida" tag, kind of like Fark. Of course in this case, a "Dumbass" or "Scary" tag would work just as well.

I'm never going to Disney World after this.

awesome.

Well Florida has George Bush's brother as Governor, so i guess hes's a gun nut too...

I think we know where Gredo was from.

But...Han shot first!

I'm going to move there.

Once I get a bulletproof vest, that is.

Or perhaps I'll just walk around in a bulletproof glass bubble.

Or some other equally dumb idea.

That is ridiculous. If your life is not being threatened (i.e. - intention is theft, not murder) you should be held responsible for your actions even if it is in defense of your property.

Life, even that of a criminal > stuff

As I said before, in the case of your life being threatened, I agree with the shoot first ask questions later. However, I'm against having an armed populace at all. But since that's not going to change anytime soon, I'd rather let the good guys have more guns than the bad guys.

Criminal Life < Innocent Life

Look at it this way, it'll cost less to run jails as there would be less people in them

So wait wait, I wonder, if I break into someone's house and they pull a gun on me, can I shoot them and say "I felt threatened"?

uh... no. Because you were the "threatener." Being on someone else's property would prove it in that situation, too.

France. I come from France.

Heh, this will make home a little interesting.

Thieves have sued homeowners for hurting themselves in that person's home for being injured in the home, and they've won.

That's because Tort low places a degree of liability on home-owners that applies even to uninvited guests. Hence beware of dog signs, etc. The highest responsibility is toward invited guests (you have the responsibility to put duct-tape over tears in the carpet if a guest will be over, at a party you might have to go as far as to put warning signs if your stairs are steep, etc.).

In places like Texas and Florida such ideas as the rights of trespassers are not held in high regard by the courts, though.

In NY, for instance, if you attack or shoot a robber in the back while he's leaving your home, or if the courts determine no one's life was in danger, you will be charged with manslaughter if he dies, or assault if he lives.

The cops'd shake your still-bloodied hand in certain other states.

Florida already has a law in place that allows residents to "shoot to kill" any unknown people who invade their homes. IMO, that law is sensible enough already. This new bill may be a bit over the top.

*buys a gun and moves to Florida*

*waits for Jeb to piss him off*

*shoots Jeb*

*doesn't go to jail*

Oi.

I'm moving to florida

Makes you re-think going into someone's yard to get the puck, that's for sure.

I think some of you may misunderstand this law. I don't believe that Yahoo isn't wording it properly; you are not authorized to shoot someone because 'you think they might be scary.' In this case, "perceive as a threat" is toning it down considerably. Under the current law, you could be taken to court if you shot someone who pulled a knife on you. Under this law, you're legally allowed to defend yourself and your family without running away first. Makes sense to me.



This law isn't changing the proper application of deadly force; it's saying that you don't need to attempt to run from someone who's threatening you. Under the old law, unless you were at home (or in your car, IIRC), you'd have to try and evade your assailant before the use of deadly force was permitted. Under the new law, if someone pulls a knife on me, I can shoot him. I don't have to run. That's the way it should be.



Again..this isn't expanding the situations in which deadly force may be used..it's expanding the area. If anything, it will reduce crime.

+1 for Florida..not quite as good as Arizona yet (open carry without a permit is legal), but it's getting there.

I am moving to Florida.

*sees Rob, feels threatened, and shoots him*

Man..I'm ahead of the game this time..

PARTY!

*sigh*

Read my post..please..many people are going to blow this way out of proportion.

I guess we have to see what happens. But pretty much any issue involving guns forces some people to worry too much.

Dude, don't you think I know that? I was only joking.

*sigh*

You never can tell around these parts..

I still feel like moving to Florida, though. :p

Now if everybody would just /do/ it, we'd have an army..

I wish they had this in colorado :p

Good point.

If someone does threaten you, the sensible thing is to run away. The only thing this will do is to encourance people to stand and fight, which is dangerous and stupid for all involved.

I think it's great. Make some dip****s in this world think twice about messing with your stuff.

Is your stuff really worth killing someone over?

Depends what they wanna steal

For some reason, I'm reminded of the fight scene in Anchorman.

Even though that was Cali.

That's stupid. If someone's in my house that I didn't allow or invite in, I'm using a gun (or at least a baseball bat). Tell me, how do you plan to know the intentions of the person? They could be there to steal your plasma tv, or rape your daughter, and by the time you figure it out, it could be too late. What are you going to do, as them politely not to track any mud on the carpet?

It's a stupid law. If you're able to avoid shooting someone by simply, you know, trying to get away, there's no rational reason to legally protect you if you decide you'd rather kill your assailant.

right, until they stab you in the back when you turn away.