JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Thanks to my boy Jeb Bush, Florida is not one of these states! Laws that he supported are what got that "white" (Hispanic) cop off of murder charges from shooting that African American guy that made national news, although the verdict didn't get much attention luckily. I could be wrong but pretty sure I'm not.
 
The distinction between what is a continuation of a fight and what is a new fight is a big issue legally, and is determined by various nuances that don't necessarily make sense to us emotionally. And often don't seem fair to our sense of justice. The laws are trying to prevent revenge killings and assaults. And citizens "taking justice into their own hands", such as with lynchings. And feuds, such as Hatfields and McCoys.

What if our attackee tracked down one of his attackers weeks after the attack and chased him down and knifed him? It sort of feels emotionally right to me. But it's illegal for all kinds of reasons, and must be. Attackee could be wrong, for starters. And society did not grant attackee the right to be judge, jury, and executioner. It feels even more justified when attackee counterattacked right after attackers left, perhaps as soon as he was able to get a weapon. But the law has to draw the line somewhere, and that legal line can't be an hour or day or year after the attack. There is no practical place to draw the line other than as of when attackers left, and attackee was in no further danger.

I have to admit to being fond of fiction where there is a vigilante type good guy that uses illegal means to right wrongs. In the fiction, of course, the vigilante takes great care to make sure that he has the right bad guy, and the bad guy really is guilty.
 
Last Edited:
Interesting because the article in the OP says: "During the assault, Sumpter stabbed one of them in the leg."

Key word: DURING!

Do I hear someone slanting the news?

Also from the story: "After being assaulted inside the coffee shop, Sumpter ran outside and stabbed one of the men."

It's my understanding it was the stabbing that happened after he left the shop and went after the attackers, not the stabbing during the assault.
 
I have a hard time distinguishing it as 2 separate attacks .Had it been a police officer attacked while eating his favorite jelly donut you damn sure bet he would had the right to pursue and engage.
Hey. it was a black guy,:eek: a knife, and a stabbing. o_OWhat's not to convict?
Seriously tho, he went after the perps and stuck one AFTER the altercation was over, kinda hard to make self defense out of that. Maybe a better lawyer or jury and it might have been argued down- and who knows, maybe he blew off a plea bargain:rolleyes:..
 
A bit late to the party but ill throw a new wrench in the gears....

Even in a stand your ground state, its still illegal to chase down your attacker and use force. Furthermore, the bad guy now has the legal right to defend himself.
 
A bit late to the party but ill throw a new wrench in the gears....

Even in a stand your ground state, its still illegal to chase down your attacker and use force. Furthermore, the bad guy now has the legal right to defend himself.

True. And IMHO this is the way it should be, because the only thing different in a good guy and a bad guy is the situation...
 
It appears the spirit of George III is finally recovering his 'stolen' property. Now get to the fields you serfs...pay your taxes and obey!!
It occurs to me that we should just give New England back to Old... "May your chains set lightly upon ye, and may History forget that ye were ever our countrymen!"
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top