Skip to main content

Question: If I was blind and ran over someone with my car, can I still keep my drivers license and keep driving too?

Answer: Only if the car was a 2nd Amendment Right! AND if it was in FLORIDA!

A blind guy in Florida got his guns back after being acquitted in the shooting death of his friend at his house.

Naturally... he was found innocent under the Stand Your Ground law. Funny how his "dangerous" buddy let him go to another to get a rifle. Wasn't he under attack the whole time?

Favorite quote of the article:

"The family has been through enough, and I have been through enough, and I would like to retire, put this behind me and move forward," Rogers said.

Four years ago, Rogers was accused of shooting at his cousin.

Florida. Go figure.

Originally posted to henryjones000 on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 11:23 PM PST.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA) and Shut Down the NRA.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Well, they say justice is blind (17+ / 0-)

    Now justice is blind... and heavily armed.

    The Onion is going to have to sue Florida for copyright infringement.

    Food processed to be nothing more than simple starches with two dozen flavorings and stabilizers added to make it appear to be food isn't "food". It's "feed" -- what you give to livestock to fatten them up for slaughter.

    by ontheleftcoast on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 11:31:48 PM PST

  •  I just read this story on Think Progress (13+ / 0-)

    and wow the gun trolls were thick in the comment thread. Which caught my attention because TP usually doesn't have that many rw trolls in its comments.

    Re: your favorite quote

    "The family has been through enough, and I have been through enough, and I would like to retire, put this behind me and move forward," Rogers said.
    Typical of gun advocates/addicts/trolls whatever ya wanna call 'em to always make about themselves.

    I don't love writing, but I love having written ~ Dorothy Parker // Visit my Handmade Gallery on Zibbet

    by jan4insight on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 11:59:57 PM PST

  •  I read this and wondered if he drove as well (6+ / 0-)

    The article I read (at C&L I think or Digby), stated that there is some controversy as to if the guy is really legally blind or if he is faking it for personal reasons.  It seems the judge would have at least have ordered a vision test to determine if he were capable of operating a firearm safely.
    After all, mental defect is considered grounds for suspending one's right to own a firearm.

    Alternately I note a guy who was demonstrating to his GF how safe his 3 guns were managed to shoot himself in the head and kill himself.  No gun is ever safe, the same as no explosive is ever "safe", and both should be handled with cared.

    However I note that most folks who are "gun trolls" are the ones who either own a gun they know very little about or are part of extreme owners groups such as the National Association for Gun Rights or NAGR  and who own weapons which are "extreme" weapons such as full auto "potato diggers" which are fully functional.

    I would like to think that most gun owners are reasonable folks who have little patience for the NRA or its various clones and who have no objection to reasonable gun registration requirements  

    •  And I would like to think that (3+ / 0-)

      the Easter Bunny will bring me lots of candy.

    •  No they are not otherwise we would have that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      Stuff.

      Gun owners want less rules because more guns means everyone is safer.

      nosotros no somos estúpidos

      by a2nite on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 04:21:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  gee, I did not know I thought that way (0+ / 0-)

        Don't you think your brush is a tad overly broad?

        •  Clearly we are losing (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          i saw an old tree today

          nosotros no somos estúpidos

          by a2nite on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 05:52:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  The loud gun owners, those that the NRA (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          i saw an old tree today

          marketing arm would find kinship with, are drowning out more reasonable voices.  IMHO.

          A broad brush seems the natural reaction to potentially dangerous politics of loud extremists.

          "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

          by wader on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 07:36:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  but you have to remember the vocal minority (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wader

            is the minority.  It is only when people with moderate views are persuaded that their best interests lie with the extreme fringe that you start to see this radicalization.
            So long as the discussion remains reasonable, there is hope for common ground among the various folks (excluding the radicals on both sides of the issue)

            BTW NRA is no longer an gun owner organization/advocacy group but is rather a gun manufacturer organization/advocacy group.  If you doubt this, check out their financials

            •  I am simply stating that it's a natural reaction (2+ / 0-)

              to the extremism which the NRA helps foster in the public square . . . on behalf of the weapons manufacturers, which I've railed about many times, thanks.

              Unfortunately, even groups such as RKBA at DailkKos have enough of the questionably on-edge, loud defenders of 2nd Amendments absolutism that this site is not immune to that symptom, I feel.

              Given the fact that gun violence is an easy thing to report on, attempts to make it appear that loosened gun ownership regulations add up to a betterment for society inevitably bring up subjects far beyond target shooting, hunting and even last-call protection against known, obvious threats in the USA's borders, I feel: the notion of "preparedness" starts to get into potentially more paranoid worries and is only perpetuated in a circular manner by more reports of gun-related, violent episodes.  Fear foments fear and goes beyond preparedness, seeping into everyday situations which should not objectively cause reasonable concerns for personal safety, IMHO.

              So, those calling for more restrictions on gun carry permits, or licensing + registration of guns to enable ownership, or better funding (and legal allowances) for studying manufacturing distribution to usage behaviors . . . all of these areas have been assumed as someone requiring fewer restrictions for the related, highly dangerous mechanisms involved because some view the 2nd Amendment as almost unfettered in scope - i.e., context doesn't seem to matter much when it comes to allowing for possession of guns, in the arguments of enough loud voices at this site.  Statistics (often obfuscatory) intended to neutralize any arguments towards more controls on gun ownership are offered in such assertions and it's a run to the races in comment streams after each shooting incident is reported.

              So, perhaps we can imagine that broad-brushing even at DKos may not be an unreasonable reaction: people want to feel their part of the world can be safe without the implicit requirement that highly dangerous weapons must become the basic assumption of such (i.e., equivalent to nuclear detente) in most areas of the country.

              "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

              by wader on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 08:12:06 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  No deadly weapon is ever not. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wader

      Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

      by 88kathy on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 05:31:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I would like to think that the (0+ / 0-)

      Great Pumpkin will come next Fall.

      "May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house." - George Carlin

      by Most Awesome Nana on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 08:04:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  well he went to get beer at 10am that morning (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sharon Wraight

      the three of them, so maybe he didn't drive

      DeWitt and his girlfriend had gone to Rogers' house to drink beer and had spent the night, according to his arrest report, and the next day the group had made a 10 a.m. trip to the store to buy more beer.

      The defendant testified that he asked DeWitt to leave but that the victim attacked him, so he went into the bedroom, retrieved his rifle, walked back into the living room and pointed it in DeWitt's general direction.

      DeWitt then charged him, he said, so he fired one round.

      DeWitt's girlfriend, Christina Ann Robertson, told Seminole County deputies that the two men had been "play fighting," something they sometimes did, when Rogers walked into another room, emerged with the rifle and shot DeWitt without provocation.

      http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/...

      But wait he won because of what? in Sanford FL?...

    •  The Gun Owners who have no objection to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      reasonable gun requirements ...

      My guess is they all live in Australia ... because they certainly aren't posting to RKBA here at dKos ...

      Here the mantra is
      No Registration
      No Licensing
      No negotiation.

      And I, too, was wondering how "blind", blind is, in this case.

       I've known people who were "legally blind" who certainly shouldn't be driving on the interstate, but who could
      recognize faces  and get around in the world, without the help of a cane or a dog.

      Since  other blind people didn't seem to think these people were "gaming the system" ... I didn't figure I got to have an opinion about it.

      •  I post to RKBA from time to time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        andalusi

        I don't remember opposing registration or licensing or negotiation.

        •  & I don't remember you ADVOCATING, for them either (0+ / 0-)

          Have you?

          Have you so much as recced someone who did ?

          Are you now here to swear and declare that in your considered opinion,  RKBA, as a group l does not hold to

          No Registration
          No Licensing
          No discussion

          And the whole  "any and all gun control proposals cost Democrats elections"  line ?

          •  I seem to remember commenting from time to (0+ / 0-)

            time in favor of reasonable registration and licensing regulations.  I also seem to remember advocating some sort of training being required to own a firearm, while noting such a requirement would present a difficulty in enforcement for heirloom or inherited weapons and for weapons currently unregistered.

            I see no problem with current registration requirements or current waiting periods or background checks or even with tightening down some aspects of ownership such as gun show purchases or more stringent background checks or training and education for gun owners.

            I do remember expressing some degree of concern regarding limiting ownership of guns so individuals on medication or undergoing treatment for "mental problems" are prohibited from owning guns, instead of taking such situations on a case by case basis.  Most recently, I think I questioned the wisdom of returning firearms to a blind man who had killed a friend with one of the guns and tried to kill another friend earlier with another gun.

            Again, most recently, I think I questioned SYG laws, particularly in FL and also "Castle" defenses where unarmed intruders are shot and killed by quick on the trigger homeowners.

            That is what I recall of my past discussions.  Perhaps you remember different comments by me?

            •  Well good for you --- I think (0+ / 0-)

              It IS always a case of  I, ME, MY, MINE with RKBA-ers isn't it?  Each one the center of their own solipsistic moral universe.

              But to tell the truth, I don't remember YOU, personally, all that much.

              What I remember ... what I come away with from all these discussions ... is the in incessant RKBA drumbeat of

              No Registration
              No Licensing
              No discussion

              Because -- you know -- ConsTEA-2-shun !

              And besides: " We Wants It Precious !"

              If you think your own personal  "case by case" judgement is a counter-force to that ...  

              "Godbless" .

              Maybe you'll take it up with some of them, in RKBA, someday.

              •  I do discuss it with RKBA members though I am not (0+ / 0-)

                a member and find many of them to be quite reasonable as I am also a gun collector and owner and have been for some time.  It seems to me that I find the unreasonable people to be on either extreme end of the spectrum in the debate.

                •  Bless your heart ... of course you do (0+ / 0-)

                  I didn't need to be told that ...

                  I don't know what makes people want to be "fig-leaves" ... providing cover for the more extreme and even dangerous examples of the group to which they give their primary loyalty.  But there are so many -- and so varied in their protectivenesses.

                  Recently, we saw a lot of it from "Young Evangelicals" ... having neither influence, nor authority in Evangelical or Fundamentalist circles ... they were nonetheless posting all over heck and gone that THEY weren't  racist, homophobic, or misogynist ... so why are WE being so nasty about Pat Robertson and Franklin Graham, who are also Evangelical (or Fundamentalist.)

                  Communist fig-leaves are now, for the most part dead of old age,  But as much as I loved Pete Seeger ... I can see now that he did provide an awful lot of  cover for Unreconstructed Stalinists and the "One-World" Internationale --  well into the 1960s.  

                  And how I remember all the "Good Klan" Southerners I met ... lovely, hospitable, friendly, family  people for the most part ...  who didn't hate Black Folks AT ALL GODFORBID -- but for whom "Heritage and tradition ... and the Democratic Party -- DO matter, you know."  (" And don't you be saying bad things about The South or the Bad Klan may have something to say to YOU !!" )

                  What I'm trying to say  here is "not all fig-leaves are THEMSELVES "bad,"  as such ... but they often serve agendas which I would hope they'd feel bad about,  if they came to realize hey had been doing so."

                  But, of course, they rarely do.

  •  Why focus on his blindness? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sharon Wraight, 88kathy, wader

    Although not recognized by the International Paralympics Committee for inclusion in Games, there is a class, SH3 for blind shooters in competition.

    Having said that, this guy is clearly an incompetent person to possess a lethal weapon for other reasons.

    "Come to Sochi, visit the gay clubs and play with the bears" - NOT a Russian advertising slogan.

    by Lib Dem FoP on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 02:52:17 AM PST

    •  I had a blind friend who was much in demand as a (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      pitcher. His dad had wanted him to live as full a life as possible so he taught his son to pitch to his voice. Chris was a gem of a pitcher as long as the catcher knew how to work with him with a string of patter.



      Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

      by Wee Mama on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 07:18:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The diarist attempted to make the automobile (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      driving linkage to allowance for gun ownership, as there are limitations on who can drive based on rather simple visual tests/criteria.

      And, of course, as dangerous as they can be, cars are not intended to damage or kill people/animals - unlike most guns.

      "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

      by wader on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 07:38:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Legally blind (0+ / 0-)

        It is possible to drive while legally blind in some juresdictions (in the case of severe tunnel vision for example.) Many legally blind have some remaining perception which is why at the Paralympics blindfolds are used, especially in team sports like soccer.

        You may also recall that Stevie Wonder drives and his favorite "party trick" is to meet his visitors at the gates to his home and drive them to the house. Of course he has the route well memorized.

        "Come to Sochi, visit the gay clubs and play with the bears" - NOT a Russian advertising slogan.

        by Lib Dem FoP on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 09:18:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  looks like partial impairment (to me) (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight

          but I'm only going from one picture, maybe he's totally blind and on pension

          and no, I did not know that about Stevie Wonder

        •  My spouse is legally blind in one eye (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          i saw an old tree today

          and she will not drive in conditions that are more challenging than clear visibility, among other things.  Won't drive in heavily populated areas, etc. - if someone/thing came out from her blind side, it would be easier to miss that angle and react too late.

          Cars are unfortunate necessities for her when it comes to commuting to work, the DMV still allows people like her to drive, because she can pass their eye test - still, she's very, very careful as a driver, being very sensitive to this issue and actually did smack the back of her car into a pylon once due to her blind side.

          She has no presumption that something meant to fire metal projectiles into soft tissue is something that she should be fooling with, even though she could own a gun, if desired.  She wouldn't trust being able to make a quick determination of who she is shooting at, for one reason.  It would strike me that people need to pass basic physical requirements for gun ownership, as well: beyond mandatory training classes, I'd offer that target testing might be considered for use of a gun.  We're talking competency in use of a dangerous weapon: if you can't use it reliably, why they heck should you have one around?

          "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

          by wader on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:00:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  the blind is one thing (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sharon Wraight, wader

        but

        winning on stand your ground (granted immunity) for being drunk* and shooting 'without provocation', with violent and armed priors, is sort of another

        *can't find the blood alcohol level but I have an impression they were rolling around on the floor 'play fighting' drunk as skunks

        now that's stand your ground

        did the judge ever explain why he gave Rogers immunity? is there something seriously wrong with Sanford?

  •  Another interpretation: (6+ / 0-)

    Drunk guy with a history picks up a gun and starts acting in a threatening manner.

    Four years ago, Rogers was accused of shooting at his cousin.
    Victim tries to take away the gun. Drunk guy 'stands his ground' starts blazing away.
    •  Should definitely give the drunk guy his gun back (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      It's a 2nd Amendment issue - killing someone in a drunken rage is no excuse to take away his guns.  Things will be better, next time.

      "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

      by wader on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 07:40:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just from the summary (4+ / 0-)

    the public reaction seems  off-base.

    If a blind man was acquitted, of course he should get his guns back.  That's the point of a trial.  Not guilty, no penalty.

    Now, how the hell does a blind person use a gun - designed to be aimed using eyesight -  to kill someone, and get acquitted??

  •  Must have been a white guy (5+ / 0-)

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 04:18:52 AM PST

  •  How does blindness suspend civil rights? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LilithGardener

    I don't see where being disabled requires one to tolerate a beating in one's own home.  Just like "no" means no, "get the fuck out" means leave.

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Gandhi

    by DaveinBremerton on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 04:41:13 AM PST

    •  I had mixed feelings too, about the limited (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i saw an old tree today

      facts of this case in isolation. The cousin's gf is not an impartial witness.

      But pat of butter on a sea of grits posted about is violent history, including a DV conviction. If that's true he should have a right to these guns.

      "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

      by LilithGardener on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 12:25:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  One conviction for domestic violence, (10+ / 0-)

    on probation for shooting at his cousin, and now he kills a guy with a gun. Sure, let's give him his weapons back. Sounds like a great day for his community.

  •  Only in Florida.............. (0+ / 0-)

    Happy just to be alive

    by exlrrp on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 06:19:55 AM PST

  •  I had a next door neighbor once... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wader

    ... who was legally blind.  He could see a little, but not much.  And every once in a while he'd walk a circuit of his yard with a pistol, shooting milk jugs as he stood over them, peering down at them with binoculars.  I have no idea what fun he was getting out of that, but he did it every once in a while.  He was a very strange guy.  I only talked to him once, when he came over to my house because he'd locked himself out and needed to call his wife.  Fortunately he didn't have his gun with him at the time...

    Luckily, he never shot anybody, but he did shoot a python that had been living in the woods next to his house (again, aiming through his binoculars).  It must've been someone's pet that they released when they moved, because pythons are not native to Mississippi.  The thing had been getting so fat off of rabbits and (possibly) stray pets that they had to cut it apart with a chainsaw to carry its body away.  Even being that big, I still don't know how he managed to spot the damn thing.

    Anyway, I don't know why blind guys would want guns.  The Zatoichi thing doesn't work very well with firearms.

    "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

    by Front Toward Enemy on Tue Feb 25, 2014 at 07:04:39 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site