badlatitude
Soros-backed
- 33,460
- 7,197
This is the best reason for a gun ban. Extremely graphic. Viewer cautioned.
The twatter thinks it has something to do with CWP's but maybe if we emulated Vermont's gun carry rules we could be blessed with their crime rate?This is the best reason for a gun ban.
Governor Ron DeSantis went to the Florida capitol earlier this month to sign a bill behind closed doors with a handful of his allies. The bill, one of many hard-right proposals that Florida Republicans hope to pass during this legislative session, has stoked fear and outrage among gun grabby advocates: Vermont carry.
...
Gun grabby groups have provided bullshit suggesting the permitless carry law will contribute to an increase in violence.
...
...
The State charged Burns with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon
for his response to a verbal confrontation with a five-man tree-cutting crew
that occurred in the yard of the home he leases as a residence for himself
and his family, which includes his fiancée and her son. After one crew
member made sexually suggestive gestures towards his fiancée and
another waved a running chainsaw towards his dogs with the apparent
threat to dismember them, Burns demanded that the crew members leave
his property. Following their refusal to immediately leave, Burns retrieved
his handgun from his residence and openly carried it in his yard while
loading it by advancing a bullet into its chamber.
Burns moved to dismiss the aggravated assault charge on grounds that
he used a justifiable level of force during the incident. After considering
the evidence presented at the immunity hearing prompted by the motion,
the trial court found that Burns neither pointed the firearm at any member
of the tree-cutting crew nor did he verbally threaten any of them after
loading the weapon. Instead, as the trial court determined, Burns simply
“held the firearm by his side and continued to engage in a verbal
confrontation demanding that the workers leave.”2
Relying on Little v. State, 302 So. 3d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020), the trial
court denied Burns’ motion on grounds that his “menacing” act of
chambering a round in the firearm, coupled with the display of the weapon
without pointing it at anyone, constituted an unjustified threatened use of
deadly force. The trial court determined that, because Burns was not in
reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm at the time of the
incident, his actions were not justified under the circumstances.3 We
disagree.
The display of a firearm constitutes non-deadly force as a matter of law.
See, e.g., Cunningham v. State, 159 So. 3d 275, 277 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
(recognizing that “the mere display of a gun is not deadly force as a matter
of law” (emphasis in original) (citing Carter v. State, 115 So. 3d 1031, 1037
n.3 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)); see also Howard v. State, 698 So. 2d 923, 925
(Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“[E]ven the display of a deadly weapon, without more,
is not ‘deadly force.’” (citing Toledo v. State, 452 So. 2d 661, 662 n.3 (Fla.
3d DCA 1984))
...
welcome to Capitan Ron’s Free Stite of Florida.