Florida did it again

Gunslinger45 said:

aiformula said:

If there is a grave danger of loss of life of other people, it is NOT your duty to shoot the bad guy.

Click to expand...

No it is not our "duty" but Florida law (I live here and I'm a liscensed "Concealed weapon of firearm liscense" Instructor) states that if you feel eminenet deadly danger toward yourself or another innocent Citizen by someone in the commision of an assault or battery or in the commision of a felony then you can meet force with force to defend yourself or others. There was a case in the Kissimmee area were a guy pulled up to a "Stop&Rob" and saw a bad guy through the front window wielding a gun around. He got out of his car with his carry gun and entered the store, shot the bad guy dead and saved 5 people from possible serious injury or death. He was not charged.

In Orlando a fireman from another State here as a tourist came upon a man straddling a woman in the parkinglot of a restaurant stabbing her. The Fireman pulled his Concealed firearm which he was legally carrying and yelled at the man to stop for about 40 secs. while the man stabbed the woman. She died. The fireman held the killer at gunpoint untill the police got there. The fireman was not charged. If the Fireman had shot the attacker in the head as soon as he drew his gun and possibly saved that womans life he still would not have been charged.


I can't see a good, upstanding, law abiding armed person just standing by and doing nothing or running the other way while an attack on an innocent person is taking place.

What the new Fl. law (Which goes into effect on Oct. 1st 2005) does is limit prosecution for killing a bad guy with bad intent toward good people. It arose from an incident that took place during our Hurricanes were an elderly man was staying in his camper because his house had been damaged and a bad guy came in and tried to rob him with a knife. The elderly man shot and killed the bad guy and the local anti-gun, Liberal Prosecutor filed charges against the old guy stateing that since he had a gun he could have fled and should have done so. The Prosecutor charged that the camper was not the mans "vehicle" or "perminent residense" therefore he had the duty to attempt to flee. Our State Government has called Bullshit on this kind of "Attack on the Innocent" and fixed a long standing glitch in existing self defense guidelines.

Click to expand...