Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)
19. Illinois Law is not the same. There is a duty to retreat outside the home.
Thu Nov 8, 2012, 07:36 PM
Nov 2012

There is a movement to make Illinois like Florida. This guy says it better than anyone "SYG laws circumvent the fundamental duty to avoid conflict"

Illinois currently does not have a similar law, but Illinois lawmakers continue to push for a similar version of the law. The basis for "Stand Your Ground" laws is that individuals should be able to use deadly force when they believe their lives might be in danger instead of seeking to avoid conflict at all cost. Duty to retreat is a fundamental principle of the law which asserts that if individuals are physically confronted with a clear and present danger while outside of their homes, they have the obligation to remove themselves from harm's way if at all possible, thereby avoiding the need to use deadly force in self-defense. The main difference between Illinois’ self defense law and Florida’s stand your ground law, is that in Florida, an individual is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if they reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to themselves or another, or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. In Illinois, the statute does not carve out a specific exception to the duty to retreat. Therefore, had the event occurred in Illinois, Zimmerman would likely be held liable for his failure to avoid the situation. As such, individuals in Illinois should retreat whenever possible, and only resort to force and deadly force when faced with imminent injury or death.

The “Stand Your Ground” laws circumvent the fundamental duty to avoid conflict, and the enactment runs the risk of creating a Wild West mentality when it comes to mitigating violence and gun deaths. In states that have enacted "stand your ground" laws, individuals who evoke this defense are, in effect, acting as judge, jury, and executioner. With Illinois already suffering from high incidences of violence, the “Stand Your Ground” law is not a viable option.
http://lavellelaw.com/criminal/stand-your-ground-law-trayvon-martin
Sounds like the law is working, trial forthcoming.nt Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #1
Sounds like the judge is working. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #5
That doesn't even make any sense glacierbay Nov 2012 #6
Which demonstrates my point. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #10
It surely didn't confuse the judge glacierbay Nov 2012 #11
Exactly! Judge made a good call. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #16
Wow! Are you against all motions by defense or just any using SYG? aikoaiko Nov 2012 #7
No, I would have made the same motion. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #12
Why does it need rewriting? ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #20
Quite simple. No DTR. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #22
the burden of proof should always be on the Crown/State you prove that a crime was committed by gejohnston Nov 2012 #23
Absolutely. And it is. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #26
no, because gejohnston Nov 2012 #31
Only when there is evidence to the contrary. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #39
unless there is political pressure gejohnston Nov 2012 #42
DTR would be a repeal, not a rewrite ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #24
I agree with the Illinois law Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #30
it still involves having to prove your innocence. gejohnston Nov 2012 #37
As is any affirmative defense ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #46
how is the law not working? gejohnston Nov 2012 #8
How does that example relate to anything? Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #13
my point was gejohnston Nov 2012 #14
You know what my problem with the law is. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #17
that is not actually true either gejohnston Nov 2012 #18
Illinois Law is not the same. There is a duty to retreat outside the home. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #19
that is castle doctrine, there is a difference gejohnston Nov 2012 #21
Look at it again. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #25
that would involve having to prove yourself innocent of a crime gejohnston Nov 2012 #29
Wrong! The onus is always on the prosecution. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #34
So at least it is clear you do not support Castle Doctrine either ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #40
Even under DTR, shouldn't the burden be on the state to prove that you failed to retreat? petronius Nov 2012 #41
Actually any claim of SD is effectively an affirmative defense ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #44
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that to succeed with a claim of self-defense, the shooter petronius Nov 2012 #49
You are quite correct, they are separate issues before the court ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #50
The poster has a long history of conflating the two and calling it SYG ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #38
Not these lies again ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #28
You want to travel the ugly path of personal insults? Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #32
Sometimes the facts are ugly. Your continued posting of clear misinformation needs countered ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #35
Wow! n/t TPaine7 Nov 2012 #9
The accused try to "hide" behind any law they think will work in their favor. Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #52
Very true. Meanwhile, we'll await the next guinea pig. Starboard Tack Nov 2012 #53
Isn't this why we have a justice and court system? Remmah2 Nov 2012 #2
Video is inconclusive sarisataka Nov 2012 #3
The system seems to be working the way it is supposed to. ManiacJoe Nov 2012 #4
Sounds like SYG is working. ileus Nov 2012 #15
Sounds Like Stand Your Ground Laws are Used to Defend Themselves Against Criminal Charges fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #27
Its called an affirmative defense ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #33
Unnecessary fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #36
Absolutely Necessary ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #43
Clarified Nothing fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #45
Actually it did, often codifying what was precedent in many states ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #47
Two Defenses When One Would Do fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #48
If it was that simple, there would not have been the need for CD nor the whining over SYG ProgressiveProfessor Nov 2012 #51
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Judge denies 'stand your ...»Reply #19