• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Eric Holder Wants 'Stand Your Ground' Laws Reviewed

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
Wow! Feds want to meddle unnecessarily again and for good reason. Holder gives a clue: "But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely," Holder said. "By allowing -- and perhaps encouraging -- violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...an-battle-calls-for-review-stand-your-ground/
 

pkbites

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
773
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
Wow! Feds want to meddle unnecessarily again and for good reason. Holder gives a clue: "But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely," Holder said. "By allowing -- and perhaps encouraging -- violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...an-battle-calls-for-review-stand-your-ground/


How are state laws any f@#$ing business of the feds?

Or are they proposing to do like what happened with the national speed limit, drinking age, BAC limit, etc. and withhold some kind of federal funding so states comply with what the feds want?

I realize that on a gun owner site it will be hard to convince many of this, but the 2nd Amendment is NOT the most ignored/disobeyed Amendment. The 10th Amendment is!
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Wow! Feds want to meddle unnecessarily again and for good reason. Holder gives a clue: "But we must examine laws that take this further by eliminating the common sense and age-old requirement that people who feel threatened have a duty to retreat, outside their home, if they can do so safely," Holder said. "By allowing -- and perhaps encouraging -- violent situations to escalate in public, such laws undermine public safety."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...an-battle-calls-for-review-stand-your-ground/
There is a requirement in the law for people not to commit criminal acts against other people, too. There is no "duty to retreat" when one is attacked, the personal duty is to survive that attack. Put the blame where it belongs - on the perpetrator of crime, not on the victims. Boo-hoo for Trayvon, but Zimmerman was declared not guilty by "a jury of his peers" within the requirements of the law.

If we need to "review" anything, there are millions of Americans who would like to see Obama's eligibility to hold the office of POTUS openly reviewed by Congress. There is probably an equal number that would like to see Holder's abuse of power in the DOJ reviewed by Congress... but then, he's already demonstrated his contempt of Congress and gotten away with it. Pax...
 
Last edited:

3FULLMAGS+1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Messages
86
Location
far sw corner of stark co. OH.
I'd like to know how "permantly" taking a violent perp. off the streets "undermines public safety"?:confused::banghead: Holders thinking , not ours!

Gil223......WELL said.......couldn't put it any better than you just did!!!
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
I would love to see Holder pulled into hell by the devil himself..but we cant have everything we want.
 

mark-in-texas

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
319
Location
Richmond, Tx
My version of Texas AG Abbot's reply.....

"Dear Mr Holder,
We have reviewed our law and like it just the way it is.
Mind your own damn business!

Good Day, Sir"
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
My version of Texas AG Abbot's reply.....

"Dear Mr Holder,
We have reviewed our law and like it just the way it is.
Mind your own damn business!

Good Day, Sir"

OR

Dear Mr Holder,
At your request we've reviewed our SYG laws and found them lacking as they are too weak and restricted the rights of our citizen's by restricting their rights of self defense. Rest assured we have rectified this.

Again thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. ....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
Firstly as has been pointed out, this is none of the business of the federal government and they have no power over the states to restrict or eliminate any SYG laws, statute or otherwise. (yes I know, purse strings).

Secondly, duty to retreat emboldens the criminal element because that limiting line over which they are not supposed to cross must move before it can move no longer. Fear is put in the hearts of the good people instead of the bad people where it really belongs.

Thirdly, this man has a lot of gull when viewed in the light of his department's Fast and Furious operation. That along is grounds for a charge of high crimes and treason.
 

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
I'd like to know how "permantly" taking a violent perp. off the streets "undermines public safety"?:confused::banghead: Holders thinking , not ours!!

I think that strong SYG laws would allow for civilians to defend themselves during "late night visits" from those in authority. This is not a good thing if you are in the "stack" at the door. Disarm the people(that includes laws, not just weapons) and they are safer.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I think that strong SYG laws would allow for civilians to defend themselves during "late night visits" from those in authority. This is not a good thing if you are in the "stack" at the door. Disarm the people(that includes laws, not just weapons) and they are safer.

Castle laws, not SYG.

But yes, law enfarcement have definitely, willfully and intentionally, placed our rights between the job and "getting home at night". Having intentionally created this conflict, they must now eliminate those rights.

The primary purpose of no-knock raids is to slowly erode the 4th amendment to nothingness. That, and because the raids are (I quote) "better than sex".
 
Last edited:

Black_water

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
125
Location
On The Border in AZ
This administration is in love the Euro socialist model. Look to the UK and you will see what they are shooting for. The UK has laws that punish you for self defense in certain circumstances...I think they want that here.

Also, just like Sandy Hook and background checks, the Zimmerman case which has motivated this discussion has nothing to do with the law or retreat. Zimmerman was on his back being straddled by Martin and couldn't retreat.

More bait and switch from the "most transparent" administration ever.
 
Top