Skip to main content

View Diary: DA Angela Corey Now Seeks 60 Years Against Marissa Alexander In 2nd Trial (227 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You don't need a SYG law (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    It's pretty simple.  We don't need a SYG law to use a firearm in response to a serious or deadly physical threat.  

    Streichholzschächtelchen

    by otto on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 08:22:44 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Tell me... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy, FrankRose

      What is to prevent the "victim" of a legimate self-defense act with a firearm from suing the crap out of the shooter in civil court? They might not win, but they could still bankrupt the person who shot them. What could possibly prevent this sort of travesty from happening?

      Oh right. The wording in many of the SYG laws that you want to scrap in their entirety...

      •  What is there to prevent them? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FogCityJohn

        Nothing.  Why should there be something to prevent someone from using the court system to attempt to address a grievance?  

        Seems like a pretty pointless response.  

        Streichholzschächtelchen

        by otto on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:44:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You are assuming they would be using (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose

          the court system to actually attempt to resolve anything rather than to harass and bankrupt.  Remember, SCO was able to keep their case against IBM going in court for ten years without having to provide a single scrap of evidence.

          You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

          by Throw The Bums Out on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 09:48:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That would be an extremely rare case (0+ / 0-)

            That case would be very rare.  The question was what about who is the victim of a legitimate self defense.  

            If the court rules that they have standing, then they have standing.  

            But, how many judges do you think would take such a ridiculous case?  The person is harmed as a result of a defensive action against them by another person.  

            Honestly, I don't know the law on this.  It just seems like it's not really a big enough issue to use as a means of derailing the discussion.  That's pretty much all gun enthusiasts want.

            Streichholzschächtelchen

            by otto on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:38:51 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There are all sorts of tricks that can be (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FrankRose

              used in court to delay things and run up the costs for the defendant thus bankrupting them even if you don't have a case.

              You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

              by Throw The Bums Out on Sun Mar 02, 2014 at 11:58:10 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  You'd be mistaken (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FrankRose

              This is a paramount feature within SYG laws that is often times overlooked.

              Primarily, if a victim acts in a Bon a Fide act of SD, SYG shields him from having to mount a usually bankruptcy inducing criminal and civil defense BEFORE the process begins.  Why should a victim (who had a choice to live or die) who exercises his natural right to self defense, lose EVERYTHING he and his family ever worked for, in defending himself in court?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site