Misc. Friday Ramblings...

Look ma, no hands.

• It's Photoshop Phriday!
  Mmmmm, delicious movie tie-ins.


• How one idiot with a camera can ruin it for the rest.
  If you're having fun with the opposite sex, the time to share is AFTERWARDS!


• Serenity starts today.
  Go see the movie about the best gorram show Fox ever farked over.


• Your shit don't stink?
  Here's the science that says it does.


• Cybersex is grounds for divorce.
  Good thing I don't live in Belgium.


• China is about to be penetrated by Longwang.
  I be he's a hit with the ladies.


• Woman Ticketed For Sitting On Park Bench With No Kids.
  Welcome to zero tolerance, which means zero thinking because laws are written with zero common sense.


• A beautiful, heavenly body.
  Get your minds out of the gutter, it's just Hyperion.


• A great new movie staring Jack Nicholson.
  Looks to be a great family movie!

Friday FIREPOWER!
Boys and girls, this weekend is a momentous occasion. The duty to retreat is gone. Read it and weep, anti-gun suckers!

The 2005 Florida Statutes

Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.--A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.--

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Dwelling" means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) "Residence" means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

776.031 Use of force in defense of others.--A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

Of course, there are those that do oppose such a thing...

Florida's 'Force with force' law sparks campaign to warn tourists about potential violence

Warning that Florida streets have the potential to morph into the O.K. Corral, gun-control advocates will launch an international campaign to alert travelers about a new state law that allows people to use deadly force in self-defense.

Because, you know, it would be bad to be able to legally defend yourself in any situation outside your home.

On Saturday it will become legal to use force on an attacker without first trying to escape the confrontation.

Only with the commission of a forcible felony. See the above listed statutes.

"Under existing law, you have a duty to try to run and maybe get chased down and beaten to death," she added. "Now, if you have a knife, firearm or pepper spray, you can use force to protect yourself."

It does a bit more than that. It prevents zealot prosecutors from using perfect hindsight and crime-scene analysis to nitpick a charge against someone because they didn't have time to try and open a door or window. Seconds count in the street, during a situation, not so much in a courtroom months later.

The Brady Campaign, established by former presidential spokesman Jim Brady and his wife Sarah, plans to aggressively advertise on the Internet to warn out-of-state tourists. Hamm said that as of Wednesday when the phrase "Florida Vacation" is typed onto some search engines a link to www.shootfirstlaw.org will pop up.

The group is also running ads in the travel sections of the Boston Globe, Detroit Free Press, Chicago Tribune and likely some London newspapers beginning Sunday. They will also be putting up billboards in places where they can be easily seen by tourists and passing out airport fliers in English and Spanish.

I will give the anti-gun blissninnies this, they do know their target audience. It is always easier to preach anti-gun messages to the choir of the disarmed.