35 posts in this topic

Posted

Firing a warning shot into the air gets you 20 years in prison o_O. I mean, I could see jail but 20 years? When no one was hurt? Seems pretty steep. I'd except that if you were actually trying to hurt/kill someone that the minimum time would be 20 years.

Threatening someone with a gun is legally attempted murder, without ever firing the weapon. The fact that she fired it makes it worse. That is how the law is written nation wide. It is one of the first things they teach you when you take a carry and conceal course. Flashing your gun at someone, even while holstered and unloaded, can successfully be argued as attempted murder in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Threatening someone with a gun is legally attempted murder, without ever firing the weapon. The fact that she fired it makes it worse. That is how the law is written nation wide. It is one of the first things they teach you when you take a carry and conceal course. Flashing your gun at someone, even while holstered and unloaded, can successfully be argued as attempted murder in court.

 

Domestic violence can easily be argued as attempted murder. Who knows if he would have stopped beating her.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

She should've just shot him and she could've got scott free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I could see this happening in California, there if you use a gun in any situation self defense or not you're in deep **** but Florida  :rolleyes:. I could see her getting in trouble for this but 20 years for a warning shot? give her like a year in jail..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I could see this happening in California, there if you use a gun in any situation self defense or not you're in deep **** but Florida  :rolleyes:. I could see her getting in trouble for this but 20 years for a warning shot? give her like a year in jail..

 

 

Why give her any jail time? Wasn't she just standing her ground?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If I remember correctly, she was in an argument, left because she "felt threatened" grabbed her gun from the car, came back inside and fired off the shots. That's why it was unlawful discharge.

 

This part bears repeating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 

 

Alexander argued that she had acted in self-defense after her husband Rico Gray attacked her at their home on 1 August 2010. Gray grabbed her by the neck, Alexander said, after finding texts from her ex-husband on her phone. She said she ran to the garage, returned with a gun and fired the gun into the air as a warning shot.

 

Source

 

 

On Thursday an appeals court ruled that Alexander would get a new trial, however. Judge James H Daniel said that the burden had been improperly placed on Alexander to prove that the firing was in self defense.

"The defendant's burden is only to raise a reasonable doubt concerning self-defense," Daniel said, according to MSNBC.

"The defendant does not have the burden to prove the victim guilty of the aggression defended against beyond a reasonable doubt."

 

 

So, unless I am misunderstanding this, it doesn't matter if she went and got a gun and came back it still falls under self defence. She simply has to argue she felt her life was threatened and she acted accordingly. Do people only get punished if they don't kill someone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I did. And that justifies 20 years, how? He was abusive, she should have just shot him dead.

Because she should have left. She should have gotten in the car and left not retrieved a weapon and threaten him with it. Hell call the cops!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If she had the gun with her and he came at her and she drew and fired then it's ok. But when you claim to fear for your life, retreat and retrieve a firearm, then purposely return to the hostile situation then it is safe to assume that your life wasn't really in danger especially if you use a warning shot. Warning shot means it is not a viable threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This part bears repeating.

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.