How to commit the perfect murder

Not that I condone such things, but the State of Florida and several others with their stand-your-ground laws have given us a perfect formula for getting away with murder. If you need to kill someone and live in one of these states or can get your victim to meet you in one of them, just follow these simple steps:

  1. Pick a fight. Apparently it doesn’t matter how you do this, so feel free to be creative! You can haul off and hit your victim, call him or her names, or even just follow them around in the rain. As long as you can get them to start physically attacking you, you’ve completed this step.
  2. Wait until they start kicking your ass. You need some kind of evidence to support your claim of self-defense, so you’ll need to let yourself get injured. Be careful! There’s a fine line between corroborating evidence and actually being in danger.
  3. Pull your gun and shoot. I should note, it’s a good idea to find a time and place with few or no witnesses. You don’t want any one contradicting your story when the police get there or you have to face a jury (worst case scenario).
  4. Make sure you shoot to kill. History is written by the winners after all. And firing a warning shot is not self-defense.

By the same token, if you ever get into a fight in Florida, your best bet is to kill the other person as quickly as possible by whatever means you have available. There’s a chance the other person won’t realize that two survivors can charge each other with battery and have to fight it out in court, but I wouldn’t recommend taking that chance. If they do realize, their best bet is to kill you so you can’t tell your side.

One other caveat, be careful not to attack a higher class of citizen than your are. Preston Sharpnack in Austin, Texas learned the hard way that self-defense doesn’t work if the dead guy is an architect and you’re homeless. It’s possible that Stand-Your-Ground only works one direction.

 

Advertisements

A letter from my Congressman

About three weeks ago I posted a letter I world-wide-webbed (not sure if it’s really email or not) to my congressman and yesterday I got a response:

I am very concerned about the operations of the NSA and strive to uphold the Constitutional rights of my constituents. I believe it is crucial that law enforcement officials along with the intelligence community have all necessary resources to help prevent terrorism and protect American citizens. However, we must ensure those resources do not fringe on the protections within the Constitution.

Please be assured I have read your comments and share your concerns regarding these issues and am looking into this matter.  I will continue to monitor this situation and keep your thoughts in mind over the next few months as congressional inquires take place on this important issue.
Okay, so I’m glad he’s concerned and I’m glad he has read, shares, and is keeping in mind my concerns. I’m glad he’s looking into the matter and monitoring the situation, but I was really looking for something a little less passive.
In the bigger picture, this is a fascinating look at the multiple personality disorder of the modern Republican/Tea Party. On the one hand, ever since 9/11, the GOP has been about protecting the homeland and there has long been a strong national security focus in the party. So he can’t risk angering those voters. But recently, there’s been this resurgence of Constitutional ardor especially amongst the Tea Partiers, not to mention the distrust/fear/hatred of Barack Obama as a person that bring a big tapestry of “what the hell is this government spying all about?” (I am so frustrated that no one in this crowd worried about this during the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping adventure). My largely-rural Texas district, deeply red, hotbed of the most extreme forms of modern conservative thought, must be a difficult puzzle for the congressman who has to represent it. How does he thread this needle? By being wishy-washy, of course.
He really has no good options here. I almost wish he would come down firmly on the side of National Security. At least that would give his campaign a handle I could grab and shake during the primaries.