For whom SYG were written and for whom they were written against...

[MrScorpio]

[Turbineguy]

1. None of the above.

SYG is to boost gun sales. Those sucked into the justice system are meat for the meat grinder. Two seperate things.

[starroute]

17. They were written by ALEC to place property rights above human life

Stand Your Ground laws are a libertarian's wet dream. They were written for people who believe that the only legitimate function of government is to protect property -- and, by implication, that any use of coercive force to protect property is legitimate.

The racism and the gun-hugger appeals are just the red meat thrown to the conservative base. The real function of these laws is not much different from that of corporate personhood. It's to stick all of us in a system where private property is the ultimate right and everything else is subordinate to it.

[We People]

30. + 1000

Your explanation is the one that makes the most sense. The nra benefits, but mainly its serves alec goals - seizing and controlling the power to attain, accumulate, and keep wealth/possessions of the 1%.

[Skittles]

2. they were written for gun humping paranoid racists

[ceonupe]

3. Misrepresenting facts in the first two cases

Do disservice to your overall message.


The reason for person #1 is gun control pushed mandatory min sentencing that prevents the judge from looking at facts of the case before sentencing. (Also note she fled retrieved gun returned shot above ex partner head with kids beside him. Then once on bail for the shooting charge she again assaulted and battered the ex partner and plead guilty to it.

Her case is more about mandatory min. Because she had no SYG case at all and that was just an attempt by her lawyers to avoid the charge. (I don't agree with the 20 year sentence but u can blame the gun controllers for that)


Read online the further details of case 2 and many details are missing from your graphic

[upaloopa]

5. Gun controllers have nothing to do with this

[hack89]

21. Do you support tought sentences for using a gun while committing a felony?

Many gun controllers do - why do you think such laws are so common? Chicago just toughened their penalties today for example.

[ceonupe]

35. Yes but i dont support mandatory min sentencing laws

Guidelines are ok but judges and prosecutors should have the option to push for modified sentences based on the specific facts and circumstances of a crime.

Right now the system heavily applies long sentences without looking in the details. This case is a perfect example.

yes using a gun in a crime should be an enhancer option but adding 10 years min in a case like this is just wrong but there is nothing the judge could do about it and there is no way the jury knew the sentence she would get because the law forbids it.

[hack89]

38. She should have taken the offered plea deal

it was very generous.

[Hekate]

7. Really. This is not the fault of those of us who want gun control. This is the fault of ...

#1 her abusive asshole husband

#1 the fact that she's a woman and not a man

#1 the fact that she is a black woman

#1 the fact that she lives in the Deep South

#1 the fact that after all these centuries we still have that kind of sexism and racism in this nation of ours

All of the above. She has no right to stand her ground. She has no right to defend herself. She has no right to defend her children. SHE HAS NO RIGHTS.

Hekate

[heaven05]

11. I

did read about macdonald and your statement implying detail missing makes macdonalds case different is disingenuous. Macdonald who is black was denied proper defense by the judge same as Trayvon Martin. Neonazis were involved in this one. They struck first and macdonald ends up in prison. geez

[Zoeisright]

15. Oh fuck that.

God, you win for the fucking dumbest post of the year. Gun control caused her sentence? I can see that logical reasoning isn't your strong suit.

[ceonupe]

34. how gun control/crime mandatory

sentencing

10 year min for having a gun during a crime of domestic violence (not an option for the judge or jury really by law if u have gun with u during the act)

10 year min for using gun involving children (state claims she fired in-front of kids as they were beside him)

Mandatory Min sentencing in all cases is a bad idea. You take the ability of the Judge and even the state to recommend less sever sentences based on the unique circumstances of a case. Specifically in this case had the judge had the power she may have gotten only probation or shorter sentence but the judge had no choice and State Atty Angela Corey was proud of the 20 year sentence.

and yes the gun control movement has pushed aggressively for Mandatory sentencing in any crime using a gun preventing judges from weighing the specific of the cases that come before them.

[RedCappedBandit]

47. Do you have a link backing up your assertion

that the gun control movement is responsible for mandatory minimum sentencing?

[Gregorian]

4. Guns = power.

That's also why this is such a slow god damned mess to turn around.

I believe this has absolutely nothing to do with fear. I never met a gun owner who was fearful. I met a lot who seemed like people with a grudge.

Regardless of what it's about, the racism in this country is about to be addressed. And it's way past time.

[upaloopa]

8. Here's how it goes down:

These gunners are chicken shits.
They buy a gun and carry it because it gives them a sense of power.
They start an incedent and when they find themselves on the losing end they shoot their unarmed opponent. Then claim self defence or SYG.
Without the gun they would have never started the incedent and no one would have been killed.
They buy a gun to give them the guts the lack without it.

[tblue]

16. But if you're black

you better not have a gun or you're automatically guilty

If a white person attacks you, you'd better not lift a finger, or you are either guilty or dead or both. It's your fault.

Don't even say a word. That's a provication. And you better not run either, because that just means you are a punk trying to get away.

Just stand there and take what's given to you or you are subject to arrest or worse.

Whatever happens, it's your fault.

[davidn3600]

9. This isn't entirely accurate

Zimmerman waived the stand your ground defense. His trial was just straight and simple self-defense. Had Zimmerman argued stand your ground, he would have lost.

Alexander lost her stand her ground defense when she retreated and was no longer in danger. She left the scene by going out of the house. At this point, she removed herself from danger. She then grabbed a gun, and then re-entered, and fired two shots. One of those shots deflected in such a way that it thankfully missed her kid in the next room. Had that bullet not deflected, it would have killed the kid. Under the law, the fact that she retreated and re-entered, makes her the "aggressor."
Alexander would have the right to stand her ground had her husband chased her and then she turned around and shot him. That would be self-defense. The husband stayed in the house. Her correct move should have been to call the police.

Even if you had never passed stand your ground, Zimmerman would still be not guilty and Alexander would still be in prison. The problem is Florida's draconian minimum sentencing laws (which were pushed hard by Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist). These laws prevent judges from looking at the situation. Yes, Alexander was being abused by her husband. Had the law allowed flexibility, the judge certainly would have made this a light sentence. But these laws don't allow judges any leeway anymore. The judge had no choice.

[noiretextatique]

10. alexander did not kill anyone, zimmerman did

that's the only difference that matters.

[billh58]

13. SYG and Zimmerman

apologists are still defending the "right" to practice vigilantism and the subsequent murder of innocent people. The bottom line is that the Florida judicial system is corrupted by racism and inbred crackerism.

These cases show only one thing about Florida justice: if you are not white, you are guilty.

[tblue]

18. Yup.

As simple as that.

[hack89]

22. Florida hammers anyone that uses a gun while committing a felony

they think it is a good way to reduce gun violence.

[Hoyt]

12. The SYG law changed the definition of self-defense significantly. And

Even juror B37 admitted SYG had everything to do with the acquittal.

He didn't need to evoke SYG, because the new definition of self-defense is SYG.

[tblue]

19. She probably thought she was protecting her kid.

The woman was under extreme duress. If anything, she misjudged, but she did not AIM the gun at anybody and she did not hit anybody. Her husband admitted that and he admitted he beat her up all the time. I was a battered spouse. Fortunately we didn't have a child or who knows what I might have had to do to, in my mind, protect my child and myself.

The jury should have found her not guilty of assault. If they found her guilty of any crime, the judge should have sentenced her, at most, to community service.

Sometimes the letter of the law actually undermines the spirit of the law. This is one of those times. What kind of danger is this woman to society that she needs to spend 20 years in prison? Murderers don't serve half that long in many cases.

[davidn3600]

23. And I agree 1000%

However, the voters in Florida dont agree. Voters keep electing people who are "tough on crime" and favor longer sentences and more laws. They want people to stay in prison and suffer for as long as possible.

People keep electing guys like Jeb Bush, Rick Scott, Charlie Crist, Pam Bondi, etc... And the legislature is a joke. So it's not going to change any time soon.

[tblue]

27. Sucks.

Do you live there?

[HardTimes99]

43. "The judge had no choice". That sounds suspiciously like "I was just

following orders".

Of course the judge had a choice. He or she could have resigend rather than perpetuate injustice. In this case, though, the judge clearly placed his or her career above the requirements of justice. That's the American way.

[tblue]

14. Bring all black ppl to California as refugees

Or asylees from these nuthouse states.

[locdlib]

20. It's not complicated at all.

SYG gets black people jail sentences or graves. This country basically says that black people have no ground to stand. And hell no, I don't have to respect the jurors' decision. They did NOT do their job. They did exactly as O'Mara requested in his closing argument. He told them not to rely too much on common sense and guess what? They did not use one ounce of common sense. The excuse that the instructions were confusing is tired. The fact is that creepy profiled, stalked, and killed an unarmed child. I don't want to hear about the state overcharged. The jury had a choice of 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, or to let a murderer go free. They CHOSE to let a MURDERER go free. Screw the apologists who keep coming on here to defend this messy ass law.

[hack89]

24. SYG allows Black shooters to also "get away with murder" in Florida

I got to thinking about the impact of SYG laws in Florida. There are many that think that they disproportionately impact blacks and allow whites to get away with killing young black men.

That didn't make sense because murder is primarily an intra-racial phenomena - whites kill whites, blacks kill blacks - so there should be very few white on black SYG cases. So I did some digging and this is what I found:

In Florida to date there have been 61 white on white SYG cases. There have been 11 white on black, 10 black on white and 26 black on black cases.

The results:

For white on white: 32 justified, 25 convicted, 4 pending

For white on black: 6 justified, 1 convicted, 4 pending

For black on white: 4 justified, 2 convicted, 4 pending

For black on black: 16 justified, 6 convicted, 4 pending

Notice that there are just as many black on white SYG cases and it would appear that black shooters "get away with murder" just like white guys do.

It would appear that in Florida, the true impact is that all races get the benefit of the doubt in SYG cases. The proper lesson is that SYG favors the shooter regardless of race.

http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases

[ThoughtCriminal]

25. What your sample shows.

Your chances of conviction are significantly lower if the person you shoot is black.

How much SYG favors the shooter, does depends on the race of the victim.

[hack89]

28. No it does not

the conviction rate for black on black is less then white on white.

The sample sizes for white on black and black on white is too small for any meaning analysis - there are only 3 total convictions for interracial SYG shootings.

[ThoughtCriminal]

29. LOL. Gungeon Math

Removing the pending cases:

White shooter / white victim. Odds of conviction ~ 44%
White shooter / black victim. Odds of conviction ~ 14%

Black shooter / white victim. Odds of conviction ~33%
Black shooter / black victim. Odds of conviction ~27%

So, a white shooter is over 3 times as likely to get off if the person they kill is black
A black shooter is also less likely to be convicted if the victim is also black.

Bottom line. In both cases, it is exactly as I posted. If the victim is black, there is higher chance of getting off.

And this is the part I love. You site statistics, and then when they don't support your argument - you claim they are not statistically significant enough to be meaningful. If the victim is black, a white shooter is still half as likely to be convicted than a black shooter.

[bettyellen]

31. THANK YOU!! It also says that black men aren't deemed credible enough to even try for SYG

these stats are filtered for people who were credible enough or had decent enough lawyers to use SYG. I bet there are many more who weren''t given the benefit of the doubt.

[hack89]

40. There were 36 cases of SYG with a black shooter

that is a large group relative to the total number of cases.

[hack89]

36. 2 convictions vice 1 conviction

I said statistically that the difference is meaningless - the sample size is too small.

[bettyellen]

41. why did YOU bring the stats in then, LOL. you liked them when you THOUGHT they made your point LOL

[hack89]

42. They do support my position

which is that in general SYG favors the shooter regardless of race. That is what the large data samples tell us. The small data samples don't tell us much one way or the other except they are not proof that whites get away with shooting blacks. If anything the data is inconclusive.

[bettyellen]

55. until they don't and then they are not valid. Mighty tasty word salad you serve up, LOL.

no credibility, just like your BFF Georgie. LOL

[hack89]

56. Do you understand the statistical validity of extremely small sample sizes?

we are talking about difference of a single conviction. Three total convictions and that is what you are using to prove that SYG favors white shooters?

The larger samples show that SYG favors the shooter regardless of race. The smaller samples tell us nothing one way or the other.

My point is all we can say is that the evidence points towards SYG favoring the shooter regardless of race and saying nothing in regards to intra-racial shootings.

Answer this question for me. There are four pending cases in the white on black category. If one of them is deemed not justified and there is an equal number of convictions, does that prove that SYG is racially neutral? If two of them are deemed not justified, does that prove that SYG favors black shooters?

[hack89]

57. Show me a case where SYG does not favor the shooter

the database is searchable.

[hack89]

39. How do you explain the black on white case?

if SYG was racially motivated, how do black men get away with killing white men?

[telclaven]

45. I see math and data analysis are not your strong

With a sample size that low, deriving predictable statistical inferences is impossible. Any correlational representations are weak at best.

[bettyellen]

32. yeah, it absolutely does, LOL.

[hack89]

37. 2 conviction vice 1 conviction

the sample size is too small to be meaningful.

[uponit7771]

52. What is the sample size critical mass? regards

[hack89]

54. If you are going to hang your hat on a difference of one conviction

to prove that SYG favors white shooters - well good luck with that.

We are talking about difference of a single conviction. Three total convictions and that is what you are using to prove that SYG favors white shooters?

Answer this question for me. There are four pending cases in the white on black category. If one of them is deemed not justified and there is an equal number of convictions, does that prove that SYG is racially neutral? If two of them are deemed not justified, does that prove that SYG favors black shooters?

[uponit7771]

51. Can you calculate percentages?! tia

[hack89]

53. Do you understand the statistical validity of extremely small sample sizes?

we are talking about difference of a single conviction. Three total convictions and that is what you are using to prove that SYG favors white shooters?

Answer this question for me. There are four pending cases in the white on black category. If one of them is deemed not justified and there is an equal number of convictions, does that prove that SYG is racially neutral? If two of them are deemed not justified, does that prove that SYG favors black shooters?

[uponit7771]

50. +1

[BainsBane]

26. 11 to 1

is the statistic for SYG used successfully by whites over African Americans.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/nra-alec-stand-your-ground
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/stand-your-ground-task-force-rick-scott-trayvon


http://www.democraticunderground.com/125524055

[telclaven]

46. No N number

Statistically meaningless chart.

[RedCappedBandit]

48. Maybe click the link first.

[telclaven]

49. I did

I don't see where the data is presented on either link.

[Matariki]

33. It's a nightmare

the 'Justice' system in this country. Makes me weep.

[HardTimes99]

44. It is way past time that American blacks (and white

sympathizers) bring back the Black Panthers in a MAJOR WAY, as least in Florida.

The justice system no longer provides equal protection under the law and, as these cases demonstrate, often provides exactly the opposite. In such a setting, when the state is no longer able or willing to protect all citizens equally, self defense becomes imperative.