Comments on: Florida Supreme Court To Weigh If Felons Can Stand Their Ground

By: Gus

Gus — Sat, 11 Feb 2017 13:49:47 +0000

The only difference between a convicted felon and someone who isn’t . The felon was caught. In a lot of cases the state overcharged. The felon didn’t have the money for a defense lawyer and ended up taking a plea in his best interest. Now his life is ruined. He can’t get a good job, which means he can’t support himself let alone family. The state has a high recidivism rate because the profit off it. Where is the felons second chance? It doesn’t exist !!! Now you expect him not to defend himself !! That’s a basic right!!! We have to somehow wise up.. There are a lot of smart talented felons who can contribute if given a chance!!!

By: Jaylon Taylor

Jaylon Taylor — Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:24:10 +0000

I am a convicted felon. I work, pay taxes, went to school for what I do, God fearing and learned from my mistakes… If I was to own a gun I wouldn’t use it as an attacker, the aggressor, but I would be wrong, much less charged for defending my life?! These little white boys shooting up schools weren’t felons before they did what they did to become one so everyone should be a felon just for the simple fact we don’t know the true intent of any gun owner.. Everybody that robs is not a felon.Stand your ground should apply to everybody. I’m a felon but that doesn’t mean I haven’t changed how I think. Simple minded people think a felon will never change.. The law should look at all the evidence to base a ruling. Felons should be able to protect themselves jus like a non-felon. Times have changed.

By: Dennis HE Wiggins

Dennis HE Wiggins — Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:19:19 +0000

Fred, I have to agree with you. As I said, “as long as everything in his story checks out regarding self-defense,” then he should not be charged with anything except felon in possession. It would seem like, just by virtue of the fact both the offender and the “victim” were in vehicles, self defense would not stand. There are several questions that come to my mind but are not answered by this story. The answers to those questions could change the “appearance” of the self-defense not standing, though. Stand your ground is just an extension of self-defense laws.

By: Claire

Claire — Sun, 06 Jul 2014 15:45:40 +0000

We all can protect ourselves. I didn’t read the entire law, but does it say, does not apply to felons?

By: PensacolaEd

PensacolaEd — Sun, 06 Jul 2014 13:02:19 +0000

If they would start attaching an appropriate penalty for a felon being in possession of a gun, we wouldn’t have to worry about this so much. Stand your ground laws are NOT intended to prevent those in the midst of committing a felony from prosecution for their crimes. If you are actively committing a crime while armed, including possessing a firearm if you are a convicted felon, then you shouldn’t get the benefit of this law.

I say that Convicted Felons found in possession of a firerm should get 15 years in Prison – No If’s and’s or But’s.

By: Mark T

Mark T — Sat, 05 Jul 2014 00:44:58 +0000

Everyone has the Right to defend themselves from bodily harm ..

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 04 Jul 2014 01:57:03 +0000

I agree with Curious, a felon has no right to a gun, so if in any case he/she shoots someone, they are in violation of the law & subject to prosecution. We can’t have gangbangers running wild & at war, then using the law to slip the noose when they get caught killing.

It might seem absurd that this issue is even being heard, but this is America & every American citizen is entitled to due process of the law. Should a felon just let themselves be killed? No. But the courts must take this issue on in a case-by-case basis, reviewing all admitting circumstances. A headache for the court system, yes, but, again, due process trumps all arguments

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Fri, 04 Jul 2014 00:47:52 +0000

REGARDING:
“Oh wait…laws don’t mean anything anymore”

Most people obey most laws most of the time.
Convicted felons have been proven to have broken at least one law considered a major law, not a teeny, tiny misdemeanor. Outlaws don’t always obey laws.

It really gets twisted when seeking justice. Felons lose the right to carry weapons, along with their right to run for public office, vote, serve on juries. Surely that is why many of them want them restored as soon as possible. (mostly so they can run for governor, of course)

Procedures for having civil rights restored are in place but they include not getting caught breaking other laws for a time. If they obey the law during that time, they are not armed. If they are proven to be armed, they are not eligible to have their civil rights restored because they have shown their unwillingness to be good citizens.

For some of them — especially those who rile other outlaws — going unarmed might well be a death sentence. However, there is a fair chance our convicted felon was carrying a weapon to intimidate or possibly kill other people and just happened to use it in this instance. It is even conceivable — for all we know — that he was not threatened at all, simply killed the only other person who knew the truth.

Another problem with convicted felons is that not all of them are honest.
Go figure.

David for better felons
(or fewer)

By: fred

fred — Thu, 03 Jul 2014 20:34:45 +0000

I disagree with Dennis. here is a situation where the subject fired from one car into another car. What kept him from driving away? Maybe the full facts would bear out the necessity to fire his weapon, but I have to say he had no business with the gun in the first place, and because he was armed, he likely was emboldened to get into a confrontation and escalate to the point of using deadly force. If he had not been armed, he likely would have tried to avoid trouble. I do not agree that stand your ground applies when you got yourself into a confrontation when you could have avoided trouble. I think it should be narrowly applied to those situations where someone could not reasonably have avoided the situation.

By: Dennis HE Wiggins

Dennis HE Wiggins — Thu, 03 Jul 2014 14:24:38 +0000

As crazy as all this sounds, I think the Stand Your Ground Law should take precedence in this matter. Simply charge him with “felon in possession of a firearm” and let that be that – as long as everything in his story checks out regarding self-defense.