Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: AL Senate Bill (SB420) to Strip Self-defense Immunity

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Huntsville, AL, ,
    Posts
    181

    AL Senate Bill (SB420) to Strip Self-defense Immunity

    As I read AL Code 13A-3-23 (d) & (e) now, I cannot be arrested at the scene if it appears I acted in a justifiable manner.

    (d) A person who uses force, including deadly physical force, as justified and permitted in this section is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the force was determined to be unlawful.

    (e) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force described in subsection (a), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.


    The new law (first reading attached) appears to say that you will now be charged up front and will have to prove self-defense at a pre-trial hearing in order to have the charges dropped. This is a huge step backwards. I JUST heard about this today and have included a link to a news article below.

    http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/in..._self-def.html
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    Regular Member DeSchaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    604
    So much for innocent until proven guilty. I thought the burden was supposed be on the state to prove that it was NOT justifiable in any sense, rather than the other way around.
    Guard with jealous attention the public liberty.
    Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel.
    Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force.
    Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
    -Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratification Convention, June 5, 1788

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Now you understand why I want laws that read that if guy is on your property that you can shoot and kill. And, no, it will not lead to wholesale slaughter (that's the argument that antis made about carry and it is not so).

    No you have to prove a guy was there to ABOUT to rob, rape, etc you?

    You gotta wait until his pants are off ladies ! Don't laugh, this will be a state argument for some unfortunate lady sooner or later.


    My idea is better than this bill-o-crap.

    Ask these politicians when is it clearly evident that a guy is going to rape a lady? Well? Some may say "when penetrated" . Lets face it, these guys hate America.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 05-04-2016 at 10:24 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Since the legislature adjourned today, ending the regular session, I suspect this bill and SB14 are dead. SB 14 would have removed the requirement to have a pistol permit to have a loaded handgun in your car.

    The original statute in the Code of Alabama (13A-11-73) was, if I am reading the cites correctly, renewed in 1956 in response to the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Guess which group could not get a pistol permit until recent years.
    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  5. #5
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Road to hell, good intentions, and all that.

    Glad to hear the bill is dead. If anything, it should have been a hearing where the persec.... prosecution laid out their argument for why immunity does NOT apply, at which point the charges could simply be dismissed if the prosecutor was simply trying to punish a lawfully armed citizen.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  6. #6
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    In Missouri a citizen must claim SD, affirmative defense is the term. Cops are pretty good about knowing a justified use of force when the first see it...in liberty centric states that is. It is good that the proposed law is not going to the Alabama governor's desk.

    Be vigilant, those politicians will be back and I fear that Bamers will need to defend against this legislation in the future.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    In Missouri a citizen must claim SD, affirmative defense is the term. Cops are pretty good about knowing a justified use of force when the first see it...in liberty centric states that is. It is good that the proposed law is not going to the Alabama governor's desk.

    Be vigilant, those politicians will be back and I fear that Bamers will need to defend against this legislation in the future.
    And that's all BS too ... now you have to spend $$$$$$ to show you just defended yourself ... retardation. You should work to have that law changed.

  8. #8
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Our problem in the Great State of Alabama is the fact that there are several PACs joined at the hip with the law enforcement "unions". One of the "unions", which is also a PAC, is the Alabama Sheriffs' Association.

    In the past, that group has fought almost every pro-Second Amendment bill introduced into our state legislature. There are several reasons for this, but the two most glaringly obvious are the fact that many of the sheriffs do not want to lose any part of their "powers" over the citizenry and the fact that almost any change to the pistol permit requirements will cost them fees. FWIW, those sheriffs who journey to Montgomery to speak against bills they oppose do so at taxpayer expense. According to the Code of Alabama, that is an ethics violation, but I have yet to see one charged with it.

    I will also admit that we do have good sheriffs as defined by the fact they remain true to their oaths of office.
    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    Even better: the ASA dues can be paid by the county. We don't know what those dues are, but I suspect they are sizeable since ASA is active.

    Yes, a violation of the state constitution -- taxpayer money being used to pay for a lobbyist who works against the taxpayers and represents 67 registered voters over the interests of the thousands of members of the various gun rights groups in the state.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Lynchburg
    Posts
    591
    So did that bill make it through, signed by Gov or lost on the ash heap of history?

    Nemo

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    This calls to mind a great quote by Justice Brandeis... " The greatest danger to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

    Regards

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •