Ever see an episode of COPS? You could get pretty wasted if you had a drinking game based around suspects explaining (once caught) that they ran because they were scared. It's a reoccurring theme,
Under the DO NOT Stand Your Ground law, a suspect could run slap outa his shoes and, when caught, explain that he ran because he was scared and the cop would have to- according to the law- understand that. Likewise, so would a jury if the case ever got that far.
Let's face it: If you just committed a crime, the last person you want to see is a cop! You see one, you get scared, and you...RUN! Duh!
Hey- I'm a middle-aged man and while driving, if I spot a cop behind me, I feel like I'm 17 and I got some weed on me. Don't you? I mean, no weed or any illegal substances on us but we feel guilty.
And scared.
So, in these circumstances, who can blame me if I just put the pedal to the metal and just take off like a bat out of Hell? "I was scared, officer..."
"That's why I ran over those people crossing the street, officer...."
Life itself is pretty scary at times. What if people broke out running or driving any time they were *afraid* . Well, as a natural extension to the Stand Your Ground law which says you have the right to use deadly force if you feel your life is in danger or you fear bodily harm, we should have a law that says it's OK to run if you're scared, because, it makes perfect sense to run if you are scared! DUH! Cats know this. It's perfectly natural for them to wake up from one of their hundreds of naps in a day and just bolt into another room. You could ask them why but, they're cats, ya know... Chances are, they are afraid. Aren't we all?
Well, I gotta run! Not literally, mind you. I ain't skeered!
Should I be?
14 comments:
I know a woman who ran from the cops to avoid arrest for her first DUI. I thought it quite funny at the time.
The running part, I mean.
I hope the cops and courts understood!
Ferr~
Just curious---how come the comment I left yesterday (for Barbi) isn't here?
Was it too offensive?
I thought what I wrote about Persephone and Sublime was pretty accurate.
Accurate, sure! Not appropriate though. Even though those two are absolutely horrible, despicable... persons...this is not always the right venue for that. That's what Topix is for!
I remember running scarred on the inside when I agreed to get in the car with a intoxicated boy driving his parent's monster V-8. Mainly because that car could out speed a copper and 'boy' would have welcomed the chance to prove it. Didn't help when the boy decided to add crime to speed. Jumped the curb of a major Buff and Hensman and did a series of figure eights on the front lawn. Took out the sprinkler system. Maybe today such actions could be legally interpreted as standing (someone else's) ground. I was skeerder then my cat and bolted when said juvenile delinquent came to a full stop.
btw: Sorry GtrWiz. If you spent more time practicing guitar then trolling on Topix, I wouldn't have to ban your -account-
Something to think about while your in 'Time Out'
; )
An I here? Have I arrived? Hello!!!! Anyone hear me?
Ssh! Keep it down! I'm trying to watch TV! Just leave a message at the beep and we'll get back to you later...
Beeeeeepppp....
Sorry! I'll keep it to a whisper.
I had discussed this very topic with a friend of my wife's that is a lawyer. He echoes your sentiments about SYG. He goes a bit further though by saying that the law, as written, is quite possibly the single most dangerous law on the books today in terms of the defenses that can be used in justifying "murder".
In the scenario that he used, a rapist can be "justified" in "murdering" his intended victim if he was able to show that he was in fear of his life by the actions of the intended victim. And I hope all the ladies will take this to heart.
A woman is walking thru the park. She's listening to the birds, smelling the flowers, generally enjoying a lovely afternoon in the park. Suddenly, a man wearing a ski mask jumps from the bushes and grabs her from behind. He puts a knife to her throat and tries to pull her into the bushes. Armed with a stun gun, she quickly decides to not go peacefully. Upon seeing the TAZER, the would be rapist stabs her to death.
At his trial, the defense cites the SYG law as for the reason that the rapist had to use deadly force against his unwilling victim. Ready for this? The victim put the rapist in fear of his life because, if she had been able to employ the TAZER, he would have become incapacitated, thereby allowing the victim to seize control of the knife and cause bodily harm or death to himself.
Does this sound a bit far fetched? Absolutely. But as written, SYG could allow such a scenario to happen.
@ferrer
I've slammed a few people from Topix on here before and those comments got through--no problem.
Now you're saying this isn't the right venue and that's what Topix is for?
Hmmmm...
I'd rather not get trolled, thank you.
Have a nice day.
A grown man getting away with killing a teenage boy used to sound far fetched to me. People keep forgetting that it took activism to get Zimmerman charges. Under SYG, he was just going to pass go. If people think your scenario can't happen, they are wrong! If they think it WON'T happen, they are misinterpreting the intent of the law. The idea was to shoot criminals on the street with few questions asked. Dead men- and dead women- tell no tales. That's the way the law was written. Look at how rape victims have long been treated in the courts. Look how people in the threads and on Fox have treated Trayvon. SYG is supposed to eliminate the service after the sale part of killing someone.
I'm sure I will have a nice day, ANONYMOUS. You have an ANONYMOUS day!
Richard, I appreciate your comment. I've not thought about how dangerous SYG really is.
While this may be somewhat off the topic (sorry Fer) it makes me think of the zero tolerance laws re domestic violence. Or any domestic or civil dispute that can arise at any time.
I wonder if the old zero tolerance laws were the seed for SYG?
The intent of the law was it takes two to fight, so both are to blame.
Problem with that is nobody is protected.
I know this from experience. Not sure if I want to talk about it on here, considering the audience, but I might if Fer decides to post more on this subject.
I think zero tolerance should be extended to ALL crime. If the cops show up at a gas station that has been robbed and the robber is gone, the owner should be arrested. It only makes sense.
byline: Deer Whisperer/Luke
lol -- I do relate to the 'guilty' and 'scared' feeling when pulled over by a cop though the infraction was no more than a moving violation with nothing illegal in the vehicle or on my person.
COPS (and Judge Judy) -- when age-appropriate in early to mid-teen years, I encouraged my younger daughters to watch these programs for decision/action/consequence reinforcement.
When Zimmerman shot Martin, I remember former FL Gov. Jeb Bush stating that SYG wasn't intended for what happened. Well, he signed it, didn't he?! Gov. Scott is "standing his ground" on no special session for FL legislation to re-visit the law.
There is definitely some work to be done.
Post a Comment