• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

WV man standing his ground, except it wasn't his

KatieG, was this thread really just you jabbing at the pro gun around here, or are you really not aware of what stand your ground means?
In my experience not one single person who is against SYG has any idea what it actually means, including Eric Holder.

eta:
If you fear them you can. That is why stand your ground laws are perhaps the most idiotic bits of legislation that have ever been implemented by so called first world societies.

If we had a stand your ground law my uncle Richard wouldn't be in prison because he really did believe all Latino people are rapists and thieves and thus he had good reason to shoot two teenagers through his front door.
See what I mean? Yet another anti-SYG person who has no idea what it is.
 
Last edited:
In my experience not one single person who is against SYG has any idea what it actually means, including Eric Holder.

eta:
See what I mean? Yet another anti-SYG person who has no idea what it is.

And that is why it is a really, really bad idea!

How many knuckleheads are there who own guns who now think it is A-OK to shoot anybody you like because of news coverage of Zimmerman? Regardless of living in another state. Here we have Travis and KatieG both purportedly not understanding the actual content of the law or where it applies, and they are educated, informed, intelligent people. How many others without those admirable traits have similar notions in their heads? How many of those are gun owners?
 
Is there any chance the title is simply a play on words based on the literal question of whose literal ground they were standing on, rather than a nuanced analysis of the SYG law?

Naw......
 
Last edited:
http://gawker.com/man-shoots-new-neighbors-he-thought-were-stealing-from-1509601587

A West Virginia man faces two counts of murder for killing a pair of men from a distance with a rifle after he wrongly assumed they were on his land. The victims, it turns out, were his new neighbors, checking out their property for the first time.

He's being charged with 1st degree murder. Lesson here: Know your property lines!

How about the lesson be: don't be a douchebag, especially when a gun is involved.
 
Is there any chance the title is simply a play on words based on the literal question of whose literal ground they were standing on, rather than a nuanced analysis of the SYG law?

Naw......

Actually, despite the tragedy, I was trying for a play on words. After a certain high profile trial last year, I do understand SYG laws. Take that as you will.
 
And that is why it is a really, really bad idea!

How many knuckleheads are there who own guns who now think it is A-OK to shoot anybody you like because of news coverage of Zimmerman? Regardless of living in another state. Here we have Travis and KatieG both purportedly not understanding the actual content of the law or where it applies, and they are educated, informed, intelligent people. How many others without those admirable traits have similar notions in their heads? How many of those are gun owners?
99.9+% of gun owners know when it's not cool to shoot, that's why stories like this make national headlines and the 140 million other gun owners who didn't shoot anyone ever don't make the news. IMHO people like Travis and KatieG are just pretending to be ignorant in order to make an anti-gun point. It's been explained to them, and far too many times for it to be the result of actual ignorance.
 
Actually, despite the tragedy, I was trying for a play on words. After a certain high profile trial last year, I do understand SYG laws. Take that as you will.
A trial in which SYG was not even an issue, as there was never an opportunity to retreat in the face of criminal activity.
 
It's murder, plain and simple. He's going to die in prison. The victims' family must feel beyond awful. I'm sorry that this happened, and it was totally senseless and pointless.
 
I guess not shooting first, asking questions later is just too much to ask of gun owners.



If you fear them you can. That is why stand your ground laws are perhaps the most idiotic bits of legislation that have ever been implemented by so called first world societies.

If we had a stand your ground law my uncle Richard wouldn't be in prison because he really did believe all Latino people are rapists and thieves and thus he had good reason to shoot two teenagers through his front door.

He was afraid, on his ground and executed his 2nd amendment rights gosh darn it. It's not his fault the rest of us fail to see that all Latino people need to be killed before they rob and rape you.



But what if he was afraid? He had that darned gun there to make it so he wouldn't have to be afraid any longer and he took advantage of it.



Easy, he thought the men needed killing because of fear. Fear justifies everything. Fear is why he had the damned gun in the first place.

Travis, I understand you don't like guns and you have told us why and I understand that too, but consistently misstating how SYG laws actually work gives the implication that you actually think that is how they work. I do not think you are anywhere near lacking in intelligence sufficiently to believe that. If I am wrong and you do truly believe it as opposed to just looking for something else to support your beliefs about guns then I have overestimated your intelligence and I apologize for that but you definitely are not correct re:SYG laws.

Just in case, I will give it a last try: because in a number of states and many cities prosecutors/DAs used shooting cases where a person was in their home when an intruder came into the house - often armed to try to advance their careers (and it wasn't just shooting). After the homeowner/resident shot/knifed/coshed the intruder, the DA/prosecutor would charge the homeowner/resident with murder or manslaughter - even though it was clearly self-defense - because the h/o /res did not get out of the house instead . And other similar.

The SYG laws simply remove that duty to retreat law - though before these came along I did instruct people how to get around the DTR rules and have freely admitted it. Unfortunately some prosecutors actually even went after people who were truly forced into the situation I taught people how to manipulate the bad guy(s) into. Glad I do not need to go that far anymore. YMMV.
 
Even if this idiot thought they were on his property, a *********** gun???

He couldn't have, you know, spoken to them? This event speaks volumes about US gun culture. The biggest issue is the use of guns, time and time again, as problem solvers. Someone cuts you off with their car? Get your gun. Somebody staggers to your door by mistake? Where's the heat. Time and time again.

I just heard in a news story that 10,000 children in the US are wounded or killed per year by guns. Not pools.

Do something about this, or stand condemned by the rest of the world US.
 
If you fear them you can. That is why stand your ground laws are perhaps the most idiotic bits of legislation that have ever been implemented by so called first world societies.
I'm curious. What other "so called first world societies" have SYG laws?
 
From the "I have nothing else to do so I'm going to post too much about this file."

At one time I probably knew more about West Virginia's homicide jurisprudence than anyone else. It is a horrible subject in that the code doesn't define anything. It just sets forth penalties and classifications for different types of homicide. Everything else is in case law, and WV's appellate court has not exactly been dedicated to any sort of logical consistency.

This seems textbook first degree murder as read. If his personal justification is only "they were on my land," then he's just ignorant about the law, which isn't a defense/mitigation to murder. Premeditation, intent, malice, gang's all here. I'll admit I've never come across a cold blooded killing where the killer honestly thought it was legal, so an argument that this is somehow not malicious would be a new one, but I don't think it legally flies. Malice is a weird animal in that under the common law (which WV uses) it is mostly defined in terms of absence, as I get to in a few paragraphs. One can read all sorts of old definitions of malice and not really get a clear picture of what it means. It basically means, in this context, that you meant to kill someone without a good reason. Although not quite that simple. Most sane states have rewritten criminal law to remove these sort of archaic and vague terms, but a few haven't. WV is one.

Which is the thing here, absent some other mental process we don't know about, believing it is legal to kill someone doesn't make the act any less loopy because it isn't like he would have a duty to kill someone. He's acting with malice, killing those no immediate threat to him, legal or not. That the statute doesn't bail him out is of no accord as to that.

Depending on additional facts, who knows. He might possibly have an insanity plea; if I were handling the case the first thing that happens is I have him evaluated in case he is actual legally psycho whacko rather than just way too much right wing gun propaganda whacko.

Second degree is right out, as there is clear premeditation here. I'll not bore with the details, but in essence the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has defined Second Degree out of existence anyway. Not worth worrying about. Maybe I'll bore anyway. Second Degree is basically First Degree without premeditation. Problem is, in practice the time frame for "premeditating" as per court decisions can be more or less almost an instant so the concept is meaningless.

I could perhaps come up with a few silly arguments for manslaughter. For manslaughter you have to negate malice, which usually happens in two ways. One is imperfect self defense, where a person uses deadly force honestly believing it to be in self defense when same is not justified. The other is heat of passion. The classic example here is the husband come home, sees his wife in bed with another man, and starts shooting.

So if he decides to claim he was somehow scared for his life or that he was in a blind rage for some reason, maybe manslaughter, but this seems a massive stretch.

It will probably plead out to something anyway. My guess at this point would be plea to one first degree murder with a recommendation of mercy, meaning the prosecutor asks the judge to give the guy 15 to life rather than life with no parole. Maybe plea to two seconds which would be a 20-80 year sentence. Generally plea deals revolve around trying to engineer a sentence acceptable to both sides, so that this is clearly not a second degree murder wouldn't matter...

All of this is subject to further data, of course.

I read that with interest. Over here, we need 'malice aforethought' for murder and it is defined to mean intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm. There is no 'without good reason' element although that may just be a matter of categorisation as there are general defences to murder (self defence being the clearest) that don't negate the presence of malice, as defined, but sort of trump it.
 
Even if this idiot thought they were on his property, a *********** gun???

He couldn't have, you know, spoken to them? This event speaks volumes about US gun culture. The biggest issue is the use of guns, time and time again, as problem solvers. Someone cuts you off with their car? Get your gun. Somebody staggers to your door by mistake? Where's the heat. Time and time again.

One wonders how many people in the US, have actually been killed by intruders (with or without guns).
 
Even if this idiot thought they were on his property, a *********** gun???

He couldn't have, you know, spoken to them? This event speaks volumes about US gun culture. The biggest issue is the use of guns, time and time again, as problem solvers. Someone cuts you off with their car? Get your gun. Somebody staggers to your door by mistake? Where's the heat. Time and time again.

I just heard in a news story that 10,000 children in the US are wounded or killed per year by guns. Not pools.

Do something about this, or stand condemned by the rest of the world US.

Regarding the 10K children, I think they used a wide definition of "child".

That is, a 16 year old gang banger killed in a drug deal is probably simply counted as a child who was killed by a gun. Which is technically true.
 
A survey to find out how many gun owners properly understand SYG/CD laws would be interesting.
 
A survey to find out how many gun owners properly understand SYG/CD laws would be interesting.

The other factor is that the prosecutor and/or the courts have a major role in the way in which SYG/CD laws are interpreted.
 
The other factor is that the prosecutor and/or the courts have a major role in the way in which SYG/CD laws are interpreted.

I also suspect that an international survey of when it is appropriate to shoot another person would show the USA to have more people who would shoot over minor disputes than anywhere else. There is a life is cheap and my life is way more important than yours culture in the USA than elsewhere.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom