Dayton City Commission Says No To SYG

This is a discussion on Dayton City Commission Says No To SYG within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Dayton City Commission say "No" to Stand Your Ground law, pass resolution (VIDEO) I hope others don't follow....

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 19
Like Tree7Likes

Thread: Dayton City Commission Says No To SYG

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array Manderinobyebye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,029

    Dayton City Commission Says No To SYG


  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array BenGoodLuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,801
    "“We have to take a stance when you look at the work we’ve put him in the city in an effort to try and reduce gun violence this kind of flies in the face of it,” City Commissioner Joey Williams told local news affiliate ABC 22."

    Besides sounding like a complete idiot, this guy has no idea what SYG really means. It's Dayton's attempt to prevent law-abiding citizens from defending themselves.

    Here's a great video in which Massad Ayoob explains SYG:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=irnD34P2l1w

    We should send the Dayton City Commissioners this news article:
    http://www.reagancoalition.com/artic...wrong-rob.html
    Ben

    Cogito, ergo armatum sum. I think, therefore I am armed. (Don Mann, The Modern Day Gunslinger; the ultimate handgun training manual)


  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array Dan060's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    S.C.
    Posts
    1,265
    I realize it's hard to know what anyone had to do,in a case of SYG.I fully believe people has the right to self defense.They should be able to live their life in peace.

    That said,i worry more may look at this.Defending yourself in a real case of self defense is one thing,but if there is no immediate danger,not giving LEOS a chance to do their job first,and acting like one,doesn't help.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Kennydale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Richmond/Rosenberg, TX
    Posts
    3,219
    Commissioners? More like Commissars !

  6. #5
    Ex Member Array IndianaSig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    733
    A quick perusal of Ohio's state law suggests that this ruling may bump up against their preemption restrictions. We'll see.

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    15,890
    From the article:
    “This is a dangerous law,” said Bishop Richard Cox of the S.C.L.C. “It’s a law that will affect every African-American male in this city and I’m glad you’re sending a message to Gov. Kasich and the legislators.”

    It just might affect them if they try to commit violence on an armed citizen.
    tdave and darbo like this.
    Retired USAF E-8. Remember: You're being watched!
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,615
    Dayton cant change state law nor prosecute anyone because of this because of state prememption. Its a self admitted symbolic gesture by those who passed it.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array OutWestSystems's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost1958 View Post
    Dayton cant change state law nor prosecute anyone because of this because of state prememption. Its a self admitted symbolic gesture by those who passed it.
    You mean like those states passing "Federal Gun Ban Nullification Laws"?

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,615
    Apples and oranges in the extreme but nice try LOL

    But even if it werent. What the city is doing is a violation of 2A. When any level of government upholds 2A its what they are supposed to be doing. When they arent they are breaking their oath of office and by rights should be removed from that office. Simple as that. Not hard not complicated though im sure some will try to smoke and mirror those plain facts.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  11. #10
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    983
    Quote Originally Posted by OldVet View Post
    From the article:
    “This is a dangerous law,” said Bishop Richard Cox of the S.C.L.C. “It’s a law that will affect every African-American male in this city and I’m glad you’re sending a message to Gov. Kasich and the legislators.”

    It just might affect them if they try to commit violence on an armed citizen.
    Obviously he's not seen the stats that SYG has benefited African-Americans in FL to a greater degree than whites. But then, we can't let facts enter the discussion, they just distract.
    oneshot likes this.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array Cokeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    961
    I like this one. The attackers became the "victims themselves". The police do not encourage victims to take matters into their own hands. Are the victims in danger of possibly facing any charges for beating up these suspects?

    Gun-wielding robbers bloodied and beaten by book-toting students (VIDEO) - Guns.com
    Glock 23 - CZ 452 ZKM Special
    Walther P22 - LMT STD 16
    Mossberg 500A - Kahr P380
    Henry H001Y - Winchester 12
    Smith & Wesson M&P Shield
    Mossberg 500B - Marlin 336Y

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,841
    A couple of quotes from the article made me think and it occured to me that we're really seeing a pattern here:
    “This is a dangerous law,” said Bishop Richard Cox of the S.C.L.C. “It’s a law that will affect every African-American male in this city and I’m glad you’re sending a message to Gov. Kasich and the legislators.”

    “One of the fundamental rights is a right to life,” explained Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl.

    “Do we really want to encourage situations where someone who is In position to take a life could remove themselves but instead stands their ground and ultimately take someone’s life is that really what we want?”
    A couple of days ago, I was part of a discussion and Q&A session with my county Sheriff and he made the comment that more than 75% of the jail population is black. Similarly, numerous statistics show astoundingly high percentages of black males at some point having contact with the legal system because of crimes. We have "leaders" like Sharpton, Jackson, and others who do nothing but stir up more violence and encourage aggression. We have a "hip hop culture" (or whatever it is called) that encourages some of the worst forms of interpersonal violence. And I could go on.

    So in response, almost unilaterally it is the Black community that opposes lawful, justified self defense, because they are concerned about their boys getting killed. They want people to have to comply, retreat, or even die instead of putting one of their precious "men" at risk for their criminal actions. At the same time we're hearing constant outcries about violations of "civil rights". How about other people's civil rights.

    Folks, there is a problem here.
    TVJ likes this.

  14. #13
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,913
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaSig View Post
    A quick perusal of Ohio's state law suggests that this ruling may bump up against their preemption restrictions. We'll see.

    ^^^^This is exactly what I was thinking^^^^^^^

    These knuckleheads in Dayton have no idea what they are doing.
    This will not go anywhere legally.

    And besides, with a name like "Joey", how the H.E. Double Hockey Sticks can anybody take him too seriously?
    I would take "Joey" Tribbiani more seriously.

    In Mi., @ least, this would be challenged directly by the Attorney General.
    Here's our law, which is very similar to Florida's evidently.



    MCL 600.2922b, MCL 600.2922c, &
    MCL 777.21c
    The Self-Defense Act
    Effective October 1, 2006
    Public Acts 309 – 314 of 2006 comprise the “Self-Defense Act.” The Act affects criminal and civil liability for those who use force to defend themselves or others. Prior to this Act, the law of self-defense was gleaned primarily from the common law (judge-made law).
    General Provisions of the Act
    A person may use deadly force with no duty to retreat if (PA 309):
    1. They are not engaged in a crime
    2. They are in a place they have a legal right to be
    3. They honestly and reasonably believe deadly force is necessary
    4. The deadly force is used to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault of the person or another
    A person may use force other than deadly force if (PA 309):
    1. They are not engaged in a crime
    2. They are in a place they have a legal right to be
    3. They honestly and reasonably believe force is necessary
    4. The force is used to prevent imminent unlawful force against the person or another
    Self-Defense Act, continued

    Honest and Reasonable Belief
    The Act (PA 311) creates a rebuttable presumption that a person using force has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault will occur if the person using force honestly and reasonably believes the person against whom force is used is any of the following:
    1. In the process of breaking and entering a dwelling or business
    2. In the process of committing a home invasion
    3. Has committed a breaking and entering or home invasion and is still present in the dwelling or business
    4. Is attempting to unlawfully remove a person from a dwelling, business, or vehicle against his or her will
    The presumption created by the Act does not apply in the following circumstances:
    1. The person against whom force was used has a legal right to be in the dwelling, business, or vehicle
    2. The person being removed from a dwelling, business, or vehicle is a child in the lawful custody of the person removing the child
    3. The person using force is engaged in a crime or using the business, dwelling, or vehicle to further a crime
    4. The person against whom force is used is a police officer attempting to enter a dwelling, business, or vehicle in the performance of his or her duties
    5. The person against whom force was used has a domestic relationship with the person using force and the person using force has a history of domestic violence as the aggressor
    Effect on the Common Law
    In circumstances not addressed in the Act, the common law of self-defense still applies with one exception: There is no longer a duty to retreat when a person is “in his or her own dwelling or within the curtilage of that dwelling.” This exception applies even in cases where the rest of the Act doesn’t apply (PA 313).
    Civil Liability
    A person who uses force in accordance with the Act is immune from civil liability for damages caused by the use of such force (PA 314). Additionally, courts must award attorney fees and costs to an individual who has been sued for using force and the court finds that the force was in accordance with the Act (PA 312).
    Criminal Liability
    Under the Act (PA 310), no crime has been committed when a person uses force as authorized. If a prosecutor believes that the force is not justified, he or she must provide evidence that the force used was not in accordance with the Act. Such evidence must be presented at the time of warrant issuance, preliminary examination, and trial.
    Effect on Law Enforcement
    The overall effect of the Act on police practice is minimal. Officers should still process suspected crime scenes as in the past. However, because of the duty imposed upon prosecutors by PA 310, officers should immediately consult with their prosecutor when investigating a case where self-defense has been claimed by the suspect or where the circumstances indicate that such a defense might be used at trial.
    In the absence of guidance from a prosecutor, officers should attempt to gather circumstantial or direct evidence that might show that use of force was unjustified, i.e., the circumstances listed in PA 309 did not exist.
    ccw9mm likes this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,913
    Quote Originally Posted by OutWestSystems View Post
    You mean like those states passing "Federal Gun Ban Nullification Laws"?

    ^No^^^^

    Because that would be a states rights issue, between the Federal government and the state in question.
    If a state is following the Constitution, (regarding firearms) and no laws regarding firearms are being broken according to it(the Constitution) they can disregard the feds "ruling" which would be somehow circumventing it.
    Most states have their laws written that an individual city, county or township cannot overrule the state law.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,530
    Quote Originally Posted by noway2 View Post
    ...

    So in response, almost unilaterally it is the Black community that opposes lawful, justified self defense, because they are concerned about their boys getting killed. They want people to have to comply, retreat, or even die instead of putting one of their precious "men" at risk for their criminal actions. At the same time we're hearing constant outcries about violations of "civil rights". How about other people's civil rights.

    Folks, there is a problem here.
    I'm not so sure about that. I think much of the opposition to SYG laws is motivated by the desire to curtail the ability to exercise second amendment rights and a reluctance to accept that self defense is a natural right. Not just black civil rights figures opposing SYG; lot of putative East and West coast white liberals opposing it too. The SYG kerfuffle is just another opportunity to keep 2A rights in the spotlight. The introduction of the racial component has inflamed the debate, yes, but I do not think that alone would be enough to sustain it.

    The opposition to the 2A folds into the "benevolent authority" view of a large Government. Many people in this country believe in cradle-to-grave government support and oversight. The thought of people thriving in the absence of government protections is a threat to their views. People should rely on the police to protect them; they should not take matters into their own hands, as the individual cannot be trusted to make the right decision. - So some believe.

    If we look at this as just a black/white issue, then we lose focus on the larger issue. That's my take, anyway.
    noway2 likes this.
    -PEF, a Framer with a Steelie...
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    1. All guns are always loaded.
    2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
    3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
    4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •