bookoocash t1_j0u7vqr wrote on December 19, 2022 at 1:33 PM

Duty to retreat. I feel like people are interpreting this as you can’t defend yourself until the other person is literally attacking you and by that point it’s too late, but all it is saying is that you need to exhaust all options to escape. Chased into an alley blocked off by a fence? Guy still coming after you? You have exhausted all options to flee. You can defend yourself. (Extreme example, I know, as I feel like I only see this in movies)

I just think “Stand Your Ground” opens too many doors to shooting first and asking questions later. Arguments and verbal altercations can quickly escalate into armed conflicts because of perceived threats, be they real or not. At least with duty to retreat, the threat is there. It is real. It has manifested itself physically and re-manifested itself each time the victim attempts to flee and the threat continues to be present.

Just as a little aside, I don’t think a lot of people grasp the grave impact of killing or seriously injuring another person, not just on the person they have defended themselves against, but on themselves as well. Stuff like that fucks up even seasoned police officers in instances of completely justified use of force. We have a severe mental health crisis with our armed servicemen, partially for these reasons as well. An attempted robbery, assault, etc is already traumatic enough. Do you really want to add to that? Of course if it comes down to it, you have to do what you have to do, but why not try to avoid taking a life if you don’t have to? Your mental health will be better for it.

TheCaptainDamnIt t1_j0vdm9a wrote on December 19, 2022 at 6:28 PM

> Just as a little aside, I don’t think a lot of people grasp the grave impact of killing or seriously injuring another person, not just on the person they have defended themselves against, but on themselves as well

It's astonishing the amount of CCW advocates that will 'look down at me' or call me 'weak' or 'willing victim' for being glad I didn't kill the kid who robbed me once. They put NO value on other peoples lives.

wbruce098 t1_j0wxe1c wrote on December 20, 2022 at 12:52 AM

Amen.

There’s a statistically probable chance that, if I stay here long enough, I’ll get robbed at least once. But the chance of me getting straight up murdered (without being an agitator or involved in drugs/gangs) is much, much lower. That kid’s life is more valuable than the inconvenience to me of replacing some cards, maybe a phone, or $40 cash. Assuming I actually have cash on me.

bennyfloggins t1_j0urpty wrote on December 19, 2022 at 4:04 PM

I'm curious how many times the distinction between DTR and SYG is even relevant. I would assume in nearly all instances of self defense, either law would result in the same outcome. I would also be curious if there is any research into whether the law changes behaviors - like do people even know what the law says? If they do, are they acting on that knowledge in the heat of the moment? We only hear about the one or two cases a year where someone gets off on what seems like an obvious murder because of SYG laws.

I obviously don't have enough information to form an opinion on this, but my gut says that the law isn't going to change many of the outcomes. It's just a matter of what can be prosecuted after the fact.

wbruce098 t1_j0wwf4y wrote on December 20, 2022 at 12:44 AM

Agreed. I’d rather lose my wallet and making take a punch to the face than have someone’s death on my conscience. If it comes down to it, sure I’ll defend myself, but I, personally, wouldn’t want to live with that decision if I can avoid it. Besides, SYG ups the stakes in a real situation where many of us say deadly force is justified: by whipping out that gun, I could also be a lot more likely to get shot myself. Am I as fast, accurate, and desperate to kill as the other guy?