No duty to retreat – again
A while back, Florida got rid of the duty to retreat provision in its self-defense law. Even though this brought Florida in line with the majority of states, there was much ado made about blood in the streets and other such nonsense. Like the predictions of the same when the assault weapons ban expired, none of that has happened, of course. Now, Michigan is attempting to do the same thing and the anti-gun folks are unhappy:
Earlier this year, gun control advocates failed to block a Florida bill allowing people to use deadly force in the street to defend themselves.
The advocates vow not to let that happen in Michigan.
The battle in Michigan over the so-called deadly force legislation is important for both sides in the gun debate. It could open the doors to similar laws across the country — a top priority for the National Rifle Association — or stop the effort in its tracks.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Million Mom March are sending out news releases criticizing the legislation and are calling lawmakers in an attempt to keep the bills from getting out of the House Judiciary Committee.
“This is a byproduct of having missed the boat in Florida,” said Peter Hamm, director of communications for the Washington-based Brady Campaign. “We have been watching like a hawk for this to surface in other states.”
No, Mr. Hamm, it’s a byproduct of being on the wrong side.
September 23rd, 2005 at 9:06 am
Why is it whenever you have a situation with a mugger and a victim, the gun grabbers always side with the mugger?
September 23rd, 2005 at 9:48 am
I don’t understand how some people can believe that defending yourself should be illegal.
Heh –
It reminds me of a comment my dad made; “Some guys can’t get a hard-on unless they are being whipped. This may seem foreign to you, but you need to understand that there are people who are wired differently.”
I guess this guy is proof.