FEATURE ARTICLES. SELF- DEFENSE, AND STAND-YOUR GROUND LAWS. PT 2.

As I explained in Part One, once the threat of physical harm has been removed, the claim of Self- Defense may no longer apply.  In the example I used, the Attacker has been disarmed, and is fleeing the scene.

You would be legally justified in pursuing and physically restraining the suspect, holding him until the Police arrive and make a formal arrest.

However, the force you use to detain the suspect must be reasonable, and does not include inflicting physical harm if no resistance is offered, and there is no longer a threat to you or anyone else.  For example, pinning the individual against the ground is probably perfectly legal, but pounding the head repeatedly against the ground may leave you open to Prosecution for using excessive force.

Yet , Stand-Your Ground Laws are being used to destroy the concept of Justifiable Self- Defense, allowing individuals who instigate a Physical Confrontation (An Attacker) to Claim Self- Defense when the Victim has no choice but to confront the aggression.  What is even worse is excusing the ATTACKERS BEHAVIOR BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED THEIR LIFE WAS IN DANGER, EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE VICTIM DID ANYTHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED THREATENING BY ANY REASONABLE STANDARD. 

This is incredible. For the first time, we have a system of justice that protects the Attacker, against VICTIMS WHO MAY BE GUILTY OF NOTHING.  

Look for PT 3.

Date-  5/7/2014.

FEATURE ARTICLES. THANKS...MOM.

Thanks...Mom.

You were always there, from 

day one.

Thanks...Mom.

You believed in me, when at times,

I didn't believe in myself.

Thanks...Mom.

You sacrificed to give me a better life.

Thanks...Mom.

You were a parent first, and a friend second.

Thanks...Mom.

When it seemed that I was alone,

you were there.

Thanks...Mom.

Your love is pure, and asks nothing

of me.

Thanks...Mom.

When I was a child you protected me from evil,

because I was helpless.

Thanks...Mom.

When I was a Teenager, you tried to protect me

from myself.

Mom, as an adult, I find myself realizing what you

gave up for me.  You did it for no reward, other than the

hope that I would become a good man.

Mom, as much as I love, respect, and care about you,

there are many others who are neglected and forgotten.

THIS IS A TRIBUTE TO ALL MOTHERS OUT THERE,

THOSE WHO DID THE RIGHT THING.  THANK YOU.

YOU MAY NOT BE APPRECIATED NOW, BUT YOUR

LEGACY WILL STAND THE TEST OF TIME.

Thanks...Mom.

YOU TAUGHT ME THE GREATEST AND MOST IMPORTANT

LESSON OF ALL:  THE MEASURE OF A PERSON IS NOT THEIR

WEALTH, BUT THEIR WORTH.

Thanks...Mom.

Date-  5/8/2014.

BLAST FROM THE PAST: RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE; HERE WE GO AGAIN. Pt 1.

With the debate over raising the Federal Minimum Wage becoming more contentious, opinions both Pro and Con, are coming fast and furious.  Politicians, Economists, Historians and members of the Media are pulling no punches, portraying the opposition as irrational and out of touch with the realities of Modern Economic Theory.

However, are there certain things we can know regardless of what is said by either side?  Yes, and that is where we must start, in finding the solution that has the greatest positive impact on our National Economy, and the Quality of Life for every American.

Question #1-  Will raising the Minimum Wage to $10.10/HR  from the now Federal Minimum of $7.25 result in the loss of thousands of Jobs?

Before I discuss that question directly, we must look at one topic that seems to be constantly ignored, yet lies at the heart of the question;

LAYING OFF EMPLOYEES MAY ELIMINATE THE TOTAL # OF JOBS, BUT IT DOES NOT REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE FOR COMPANIES TO REMAIN PROFITABLE.  FEWER WORKERS DOES NOT MEAN FEWER GOALS/RESULTS THAT MUST BE MET.

Historically, when lay-offs have occurred, it was because the amount of work that needed to be done had decreased.  The # of employees was too high to justify, in terms of profits, the amount of work that was being done at the time.  This is basic economics:  Hire more to match increased work load, or lay- off because of decreased work load.

However, those who object to increasing the Federal Minimum Wage, are not able to use this line of reasoning. The production numbers are still there to meet consumer demand, whether it is Cooking Meals, Delivering Goods, Retail Sales etc.

Those who oppose raising the Minimum Wage are left with only this-  That the cost of these pay increases cannot be absorbed by businesses, in that they will lower profits to an unmanageable level to keep companies economically viable.

Is this true? Look for part two.

BLAST FROM THE PAST. SELF-DEFENSE, AND STAND-YOUR GROUND LAWS. PT 1.

The recent courtroom verdicts in Florida have brought to light an often misunderstood part of the U.S. Criminal Justice System.  This is the concept of Self-Defense, which is basically any physical act a potential victim uses against an attacker to prevent them from harming the individual or another. 

This action is used to justify any injury suffered by the assailant, holding the potential victim blameless.

This is not as straight forward as it seems. (Especially when we consider Stand- Your Ground Laws). 

The problem is that there are principles in law that are not applied uniformly, and may differ depending on the State, Locality or Jurisdiction. 

However, there are a few concepts that seem to be universally applied;
-  Much more discretion is given to the victim if they are attacked in their Home or Place of Business.

-  Generally, the claim of Self- Defense is much more credible if the Attacker is armed, with the assumption that it is more likely to lead to Catastrophic Injury or Death.

-  You can use the amount of force necessary to stop the attack, or to remove the potentiality for physical harm. However, the victim can be held liable if the Danger is eliminated, but continues to use physical force beyond neutralizing the assailants ability to cause physical injury.  

For example:  You are walking down the street, and an individual suddenly approaches you demanding money.  Pulling out a Knife, the would be Robber lunges.  However, you are able to Disarm him, and a strike to the face breaks the Attackers nose.  The Danger is now gone, and the assailant turns and runs in the opposite direction.  Up until now, everything you have done is perfectly legal...

LOOK FOR PART TWO.

Date-  3/18/2014.