Quantcast

Stand Your Ground Law Signed by Napolitano For Arizona In 2006?

Heffeweizen 2012/04/15 06:01:40
They were for the law before they were against it.
They are under the progressive spell.
Politics is hard!
Surely there's a logical explanation!
Undecided
All of the above
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos
The plot thickens! Apparently Janet Napolitano and Jennifer Granholm signed similar laws during their Gubernatorial terms. This could be interesting!

Amid Democrat attempts to use the Trayvon Martin shooting as a means to push for the repeal of Stand Your Ground laws, it’s been interesting to note how many Democrats have a past that includes support for them.

For example, on April 2nd, I had a post on Big Government that highlighted how former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat, used her Current TV show to lambaste Stand Your Ground laws, and to blame Republicans for the existence of such laws in the first place. However, as I showed, the dirty little secret is that Granholm signed Michigan’s Stand Your Ground bill into law in 2006.

Now it’s been discovered that an even more prominent Democrat, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, signed Arizona’s Stand Your Ground bill into law while governor of that state in 2006. And it’s important to note that Napolitano didn’t sign the bill half-halfheartedly, rather, she even countered anti-gunners’ opposition in the signing.

See the full post below:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/14/janet-napo...

Read More: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/14...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • jeane 2012/04/15 06:04:30
    None of the above
    jeane
    +16
    Nothing about our government officials makes any sense to me.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • AL 2012/06/10 05:27:16
    None of the above
    AL
    +1
    LOL! There's no hypocrite- like a liberal hypocrite thats sure sure!
  • Evan 2012/04/16 13:50:29
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Evan
    +1
    Wouldn't it be great if there were some good old fashioned horse sense somewhere in this present administration? Forget logic. Plain old horse sense works for me, but I don't see any, other than their goal. That is where the logic is: In order to establish a "philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy, and a sharing of misery" other than on the part of the ruling class, one has to tear down the existing founding documents, principles and precepts. (Am paraphrasing Winston Churchill here, who defines "socialism" as what is between my quote marks.) It is evil logic, certainly, but they are following Saul Alinsky's blueprint for an establishment of a socialist state where individuals and private property no longer matter, among other things.
  • POWERSHAKER 2012/04/16 06:07:30
  • Marvelous Wildfire 2012/04/16 05:19:22
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Marvelous Wildfire
    +1
    The only thing certain about Progressives, is uncertainty, and the only thing they are consistent about, is change.

    The proof that the Stand You Ground Law is a good law, is that the Libtard/Progressives dislike it.
  • Peewee ~PWCM~ 2012/04/16 03:11:24
    All of the above
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    Just like the Democrats were for the Iraqi war before they were against it....
  • Uranos7 2012/04/16 03:10:58 (edited)
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Uranos7
    +2
    The stand your ground law is a good idea it was just poorly written and implemented in Florida. AFAIK Florida is the only state with a version that gives total immunity against prosecution. They need to fix the one in Florida and educate people that passing this law is not a liscence to kill.

    states w syg

    My state has it (minus the immunity clause) and we have not had a problem with it.
    For more info on the law itself and what is wrong with it.
    http://www.sodahead.com/unite...
  • no1badboy56 2012/04/16 01:19:50
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    no1badboy56
    +2
    Janet and Jennifer, both as dumb as a bag of hammers.
  • Peewee ... no1badb... 2012/04/16 03:14:51
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +2
    Tell me about it, we had to live with 8 years of Jennifer.
  • Heffewe... no1badb... 2012/04/16 11:34:36
    Heffeweizen
    +1
    At least there is a use for hammers!
  • The Electrician 2012/04/16 00:03:58
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    The Electrician
    One of the most misunderstood Laws ever written.
  • RogerCoppock 2012/04/15 23:04:00
    Undecided
    RogerCoppock
    +1
    WOW! It's no secret, some Democrats are in the NRA's pocket too.

    Good post.
  • The Ele... RogerCo... 2012/04/16 00:08:35 (edited)
    The Electrician
    +1
    The NRA didn't write that Law. Hand gun laws have nothing to do with the Right to stand your Ground. Hand gun legislation is entirely different from Rifles and Shotguns.
  • RogerCo... The Ele... 2012/04/16 00:23:02 (edited)
    RogerCoppock
    The original model provisions for the "Stand Your Ground" law appeared in the NRA's "American Hunter" magazine. That was before ALEC got it and before any state passed it.
  • The Ele... RogerCo... 2012/04/16 01:23:24
    The Electrician
    But the Law doesn't specifically apply to the use of guns. The Law says that you may use deadly force to protect yourself, in New York the Law says that if you have any reason to believe that you are going to be attacked, or mugged, that's even more vague. It was suggested to me to carry a knife and gun, in the event I have to shoot someone, I'm to put the knife in their hand and claim self defense, how crazy is that ? It's a tough call either way. What it boils down to is, that you have the right use "Deadly Force." I don't think any state is going to repeal it. I'm of the opinion that this case in Florida is racially charged, like I said Zimmerman opened up a can of worms and he'll probably get away with it, if he is convicted, that will make it two victims, because the Law only says you need reason to believe your life "may" be in danger. I'm defending this Law, but I'm annoyed that some people are accusing Democrats wrongfully.
  • I Am The Beast Sssotlohiefmjn 2012/04/15 22:52:43
    None of the above
    I Am The Beast Sssotlohiefmjn
    +2
    I think everyone should have lots of weapons and use them in need
  • Pat 2012/04/15 22:47:36
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Pat
    +2
    Liberals never met a lie they weren't ready to lie about.
  • The Ele... Pat 2012/04/16 00:50:59
    The Electrician
    +1
    My friends both Liberal and Conservative are gun owners, the difference is that you don't hear from us, This law has nothing to do with guns, it has to do with misunderstanding of this Law. I carry a gun and don't want to lose that privilege. Every time some over zealous fool pulls of one of these stunts, it jeopardizes our right to own guns. Democrats are in favor of "Stricter Gun Control", nothing else, as should be every self respecting American. This Law applies in 26 states, Democrat as well as Republican states. As I've said it's misunderstood, I doubt if it will ever be repealed in any of those states. Zimmerman opened up a can of worms for us all. As did Loughner when he went on a rampage with 30 round magazines.
  • Peewee ... The Ele... 2012/04/16 03:18:50
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    If they only enforced the laws on the books....Criminals will get guns if they're outlawed or not. The always go after the law abiding citizen and they aren't the problem.
  • Pat The Ele... 2012/04/16 22:15:27
    Pat
    +1
    To me, gun law WOULD be the "stricter gun law" we need if laws on the books NOW were enforced.
  • Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA 2012/04/15 22:22:41
    All of the above
    Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA
    +4
    Incompetano is probably getting chewed out by her boss. obama napilitano
  • Evan Torchma... 2012/04/16 13:56:05
    Evan
    Nah, BHO is standing there in support of our Janet, who looks very put upon, and beset with such difficult problems, while he looks so sincere and determined to "do the right thing". (He actually is determined to do the right thing...for BHO and the rest of his ilk.) LOL, BTW, I did get a good laugh once, thanks to Ms. Napolitano: I had to laugh when JUDGE Napolitano came on FOX news one day and said that he was absolutely no relation to Janet Napolitano! LOL!
  • Red Branch 2012/04/15 22:21:56
    None of the above
    Red Branch
    +4
    Maybe it should have been all of the above. I don't know. But as libs, they will not be asked any questions.
  • Evan Red Branch 2012/04/16 13:57:51
    Evan
    +1
    True, Red, just like Hilary won't be questioned about the 147 million dollars she just gave the enemies of Israel.....overriding the U.S. Congress to do it. (She "over-rode" Congress to do it, but they allowed it.)
  • Red Branch Evan 2012/04/16 14:09:24
    Red Branch
    The enemies of Israel are also the enemies of the US and whatever happens to Israel will also happen to all infidels in due time.

    Congress has allowed way too much.
  • Icono1 2012/04/15 22:11:46
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Icono1
    +3
    Hey whatever gets votes and keeps them from getting a real job.
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2012/04/15 21:24:44
    None of the above
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +5
    And she was right to sign it - she said we have 'the fundamental right to self-defense." - she was right then and it is right now.
  • CA Gal 2012/04/15 20:20:02
    Undecided
    CA Gal
    +3
    The "Stand your Ground" law is not the culprit in the Trayvon Martin case...it was the abuse of the law by George Zimmerman that created the problem. If a person misuses the law, they should be held accountable just as Zimmerman is now.
  • Peewee ... CA Gal 2012/04/16 03:21:10
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    We don't know that...let the investigation be made and justice prevail. I seriously doubt someone would just shoot to kill for no reason.
  • CA Gal Peewee ... 2012/04/16 04:32:48
    CA Gal
    +1
    It's hard to imagine someone doing that but it's certainly a possibility. Zimmerman was told by the dispatcher to not pursue Trayvon but chose to follow anyway. Why? That's the question we need answered.
  • Peewee ... CA Gal 2012/04/16 04:44:10
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    Exactly. None of us peons are going to know what's really going on anyway. Network news is milking it for all the advertising dollars they can. You know Zimmerman is in hiding for his life, maybe even worse than being in isolation in jail. Let's just hope the truth comes out and justice prevails.
  • Evan CA Gal 2012/04/16 14:00:16
    Evan
    Redneck, the one I want answered is what was Treyvon doing in that community? Was he there to visit a friend? It is a gated, well-to-do community, and he was dressed like the robbers who've been seen in there. If he was there to visit a friend, or for some other legitimate reason, I'd like to hear it. Zimmerman might well have been a trigger-happy, wanna-be cop, and shot the boy "because he could", but I want to know why Treyvon was in there in the first place.
  • CA Gal Evan 2012/04/16 19:38:03 (edited)
    CA Gal
    He was walking home to his father's house from the store to watch a basketball game. His father lived in the gated community. He'd just purchased Skittles and Iced Tea and had the receipt on his persons when he was shot. He was just walking....which is certainly no crime. He was wearing a hoodie at the time with the hood up because it was RAINING at the time. To Zimmerman he took this as suspicious behavior although, I was wearing my hoodie in the rain this weekend and was not shot!
  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/04/15 20:07:53
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +6
    They are opportunists. Now that they're in different offices...!
  • stevmackey 2012/04/15 19:41:11
    None of the above
    stevmackey
    +3
    She is the same person that raided and killed two groups of peaceful, armed to the teeth, law abiding citizens. Two faced isn't she?
  • Peewee ... stevmackey 2012/04/16 03:21:50
    Peewee ~PWCM~
    +1
    Excellent point!
  • Evan stevmackey 2012/04/16 14:03:48
    Evan
    But Steve, you don't understand. Those groups of peaceful, armed, law-abiding citizens MIGHT have done something the powers-that-be did not want them to do. One never knows. One has to be pro-active, you know, and punish the innocent while they ARE still innocent, because, well, "one never knows" what a person COULD do. (After all, they could very well have defended themselves, and very POSSIBLY, against gov.org. Janet could not have that, now could she???)
  • MR. 2012/04/15 19:38:01
    They were for the law before they were against it.
    MR.
    +1
    I've never been an intellectual, but I have this look. (Woody Allen)
  • Louisa - Enemy of the State 2012/04/15 19:36:01
    Undecided
    Louisa - Enemy of the State
    +1
    The law should stand. But ANYONE who KILLS another person should be in custody until the investigation is exhausted and the authorities can offer proof of self defense. You just can't send someone home after they've killed another human being!

    The LEAST I would expect is that the killer is in custody until they appear before the Grand Jury. where it would be decided if there is any evidence that a crime has been committed.
  • Dan Louisa ... 2012/04/15 22:29:17
    Dan
    +1
    so, guilty until proven innocent?
  • Louisa ... Dan 2012/04/15 23:05:36
    Louisa - Enemy of the State
    Never said that at all and don't believe that either. However, I don't think that if I killed someone at the mall right now, that I should be allowed to go home tonight because I SAID it was self defense.

    I should be questioned again and again and again. We now have TWO cases that are very similar. Trayvon and a dude in Arizona. The Arizona guy is still walking the streets even though he said that the kid he shot had a lead pipe (no lead pipe was found at all).

    In both of these cases the 'killer' is NOT denying that they killed. They say they killed in slef defense.

    W

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/24 15:15:29

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals