0
   

Dems try to kill Washington States's self-defense law

 
 
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 07:17 am
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/rep-hunter-pushes-11th-hour-anti-self-defense-measure-hearing-wednesday

Quote:

A bill that would strip Washington citizens of a unique self-defense protection is being fast-tracked by its sponsor, anti-gun State Rep. Ross Hunter (D-48th District), who unveiled the measure on Saturday and has it scheduled for a hearing before the House Ways & Means Committee – which he chairs – on Wednesday at 3 p.m. in Olympia.

Both the National Rifle Association and Bellevue-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are furiously alerting their members. CCRKBA is issuing a press statement that calls the move “an outrage.” Both alerts have the names, phone numbers and e-mail addresses of Ways & Means members.

Quote:

“The Legislature is scratching for money anywhere they can find it, but in this case, Hunter is trying to balance the budget by jeopardizing the self-defense rights of law-abiding citizens. That’s unconscionable, and the fact that he is trying to ram this through at the 11th hour with very little public notice is outrageous.”—CCRKBA Legislative Director Joe Waldron



House Bill 2067 would repeal RCW 9A.16.110, which protects citizens from “legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting by any reasonable means necessary, himself or herself, his or her family, or his or her real or personal property, or for coming to the aid of another who is in imminent danger of or the victim of assault, robbery, kidnapping, arson, burglary, rape, murder, or any other violent crime…”

Current law provides for reimbursement by the state of all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense.”

The statute has been in place for more than 30 years. Gun rights advocates insist there is no reason to repeal it, especially if the reason offered is to remove the state from financial liability.

Quote:

“It is traumatic enough that a citizen must forcefully defend himself or herself, their family or some other person who is being attacked. For that citizen to be subjected to a legal nightmare that could wipe them out financially is a moral insult. Our existing law protects citizens from this kind of legal abuse.”—Joe Waldron



But the real issue here is best defined in the NRA’s member alert, which noted, “The repeal of HB 2067 would remove an important check and balance in Washington’s legal system.” The NRA contends that the law can discourage overzealous prosecution by forcing prosecutors to think hard before filing charges in a case where there is clearly a viable claim of self-defense.

This statute provides a strong legal protection to citizens in much the same way that another self-defense statute provided legal protection from prosecution for former Seattle police officer Ian Birk. He escaped prosecution in the shooting death of woodcarver John T. Williams, which this column discussed here.



  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 400 • Replies: 4
No top replies

 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 07:21 am
@gungasnake,
This one might as well be called an "Unscrupulous District Attorney Protection Act" since the same thinking could be used to try to deny those Duke lacrosse players their rights to sue the city of Durham. My own feeling is that the American "adversarial" system of justice has outlived any usefulness it might have ever had and needs to be replaced by something closer to the French "inquisitorial" system in which the common objective of all parties involved in any criminal investigation is to determine facts. I don't like the idea of anybody having money/career incentives to put people in prison.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 07:30 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:

Current law provides for reimbursement by the state of all reasonable costs, including loss of time, legal fees incurred, and other expenses involved in his or her defense.”


Looks to me like they are trying to save the state money. Are you proposing higher taxes gunga?
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 08:03 am
@parados,
Quote:
Looks to me like they are trying to save the state money. Are you proposing higher taxes gunga?


I'm proposing that they get rid of the present 'adversarial' system of justice in favor of the French Inquisitorial system, including getting rid of the job of DA and THEN, if they still need money to compensate victims of wrong prosecutions for some reason and if no other way exists to obtain such money, then sure, raise taxes. I doubt it would come to that.

The recent history of Washington State includes one gigantic case of prosecutors run amok, which includes a psychopath sheriff and a town (Wenatchee Wa) which ended up with so many legal liabilities that at one point it appeared it might become uninsurable and be disincorporated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions

parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 13 Apr, 2011 08:37 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
I'm proposing that they get rid of the present 'adversarial' system of justice in favor of the French Inquisitorial system, including getting rid of the job of DA

Oh... you are anti-American. OK..
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Dems try to kill Washington States's self-defense law
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/12/2024 at 02:25:56