Gun Control: Media Myth-Conception

  • Bookmark and Share

Here is another example of the poorly-researched mix of fact and opinion prevalent in today’s reporting.

A recent news article covering a defensive shooting in Florida highlights media bias against Castle Doctrine law: the right of the law-abiding citizen to use appropriate force to repel an attack without first seeking to retreat.

Dan Haggerty of the local NBC affiliate based in Fort Myers, Florida reported that Justin Marcoux (also spelled Macoux and Marcaux in the article) of Lehigh Acres was waiting for a ride to work early one morning when he spotted Victor Howren in the yard, carrying off Marcoux’s father’s generator. According to the reporter, Howren dropped the generator when he got between two cars on the property and Marcoux thought Howren was grabbing a weapon. That’s when Marcoux drew his (licensed) concealed firearm and shot Howren in the arm.1

So far, this article concurs with the press release by the Lee County Sheriff.2 It is in the concluding section where Mr. Haggerty diverges into editorial, promoting the myth that self-defense originated with Florida’s Castle Doctrine:

Investigators are now trying to determine if he [the shooter] is protected by the “Stand Your Ground law.”

It allows a person to defend themselves if they are in imminent danger.3 

The Sheriff’s press release does not mention Castle Doctrine and concludes on a more definitive note regarding the investigation:

Felony charges of burglary and grand theft against Howren are pending further investigation. Meanwhile, once the shooting incident case report is completed, it will be forwarded to the State Attorney’s Office for review.4

 

First, Haggerty should have done some background research before reporting his opinions as truth. Florida statutes from 2004 show that before Castle Doctrine a person was allowed to “defend themselves if they are in imminent danger”:

776.012  Use of force in defense of person.–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 defend himself or herself or another against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force. 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 imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.5

 

Second, Haggerty implies that Castle Doctrine somehow complicates law enforcement’s investigation by requiring satisfaction of certain criteria imposed upon them by the law.

It seemed a phone call was in order. Based upon a discussion with Sergeant Larry King, Public Information Officer for the Lee County Sheriff’s Department, Castle Doctrine updated self-defense law by removing the defender’s need to retreat if such option existed. In this aspect, it toughened self-defense law in favor of the defender. As to whether law enforcement pursues and issues a warrant, they perform the normal procedures of taking statements and interviewing witnesses to determine the merits of the case. Generally, in an apparent defensive shooting they let the state decide how to proceed rather than immediately arresting the shooter. In any case, the State Attorney’s office retains the ability to file charges against the shooter should probable cause exist.6

In a follow-up email, Sergeant King notes:

The only additional clarification may be to note in this incident there are just two witnesses – the man who shot and the man who was wounded.  We may find circumstances to make an immediate arrest in cases where witnesses have consistent statements contradicting that of the shooter.  It’s safe to say you have to look at these types of shooting incidents on a case-by-case basis.7 

 

In fairness, the NBC article is conditionally true on one point: Castle Doctrine protects the shooter from having to justify not retreating. But this is only true if the shooting itself is ruled justified. From both Sergeant King’s comments and the Lee County Sheriff’s press release, other than deleting the criteria determining the defender’s ability to retreat, Castle Doctrine has no inhibitory affect on the Sheriff’s and State Attorney’s ability to complete an investigation, determine if the defensive use of deadly force was justified, and press charges against the shooter, if deemed appropriate.

It is one thing if NBC wants to write an editorial against Castle Doctrine and label it as such. It is another when, under the guise of supposedly fact-based news reporting, media instead choose to embark upon social engineering to convince people that Castle Doctrine is bad because anybody who claims self-defense is somehow exempt from thorough examination of their behavior by police and prosecuting attorneys.

Endnotes

[1] Dan Haggerty, Resident shoots robbery suspect in the arm, NBC2, August 8, 2007. http://www.nbc-2.com/articles/readarticle.asp?articleid=13940&z=3&p=

2 Burglary Suspect Shot By Victim, Lee County Sheriff’s Department, August 8, 2007. http://www.sheriffleefl.org/news/gendetails.aspx?id=4984

3 Ibid.

4 Burglary Suspect Shot By Victim, Lee County Sheriff’s Department, August 8, 2007.

5 The 2004 Florida Statutes, Title XLVI, Section 776: Justifiable Use of Force. http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0776/ch0776.htm

6 Phone conversation with Sergeant Larry King, Public Information Officer, Lee County Sheriff’s Department, August 9, 2007. http://www.sheriffleefl.org/

7 Email from Sergeant Larry King, Public Information Officer, Lee County Sheriff’s Department, August 9, 2007.

 


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Good grouping

His mistake was shooting him in the arm...good grouping was needed.

v

Yeah, logic, reason, facts play less of a role now in the way we make decisions in America. – Al Gore

vrwc13

Actually, an excellent grouping for one round.    

 

        "If it ain't broke, why screw it up."

~me~

It allows ...

It allows a person to defend themselves if they are in imminent "danger"

very nice of the law to recognize an inherent right that all creatures have on this earth. This right is a very part of our nature and no law can take it away. This right overrules all laws to the contrary.

 

Which Law?

Castle Doctrine does not grant any right of self-defense. Self-defense law predates the Constitution, which acknowledges God-given rights that government is supposedly prohibited against infringing. Do I need to edit the post? The media has now gone from marketing Castle Doctrine as the law that lets people "shoot if they feel threatened" to the law that "allows a person to defend themselves." Was this not clear enough? I would like to know.

self defense is a law of nature

i'm happy to say i met a technician just the other day who works at dillon armory and noticed my combat search and rescue shirt i was wearing then invited me to a tour of their facility. he noticed because dillon built much of the firepower that is mounted to our helicopters.

 

i'm looking forward to this more than a kid waiting for a red rider pump action bb gun with a compass on the stock on christmas morning. i'm not even a gun nut that liberals hate so much, but i might seek to change my career path if they even have a broom sweeper position availible.

Broom sweeper.... you must

Broom sweeper.... you must not be an American since that's one of the jobs Americans won't do... =P

Norman Borden

The recent case of Norman Borden illustrates the danger of a quick arrest by the police.

 Norman Borden was tried for first degree murder in Palm Beach, FL in June 2007  Borden was walking his dogs at 2AM when he was attacked by three men.  He fired 14 shots. At trial the prosecutor said  the first 5 shots were self defense. The next 9 constituted murder.Borden had words with members of a street gang. The gang members returned in a jeep, carrying baseball bats and tried to run him over. Borden fired 14 shots, killing two of the three occupants of the vehicle and wounding the third. The prosecution admits that five of the fourteen shots were self defense. However the prosecution contends that the nine shots fired after the vehicle came to a rest constitute murder. Borden is on trial for first degree murder.  Killed was Saul Trejo reputed local leader of the street gang Sur.  The survivor of the shootings Juan Mendez testified:  

“We probably needed another person if we were going to rough him up a little bit”

It took a normally tough Palm Beach County jury only two hours to acquit Borden.   Afterwards the prosecutor admitted that his star witnesse's testimony had damaged his case.  He indicated he might not have brought the charges if he had known his witness would make the above statement.

Borden ended up spending eight months in jail. His house was destroyed by fire a few days after he was arrested. After his acquital Borden fled Palm Beach County

fire...???

Any idea on the fire? My initial guess would be a gang-related fire. His arrest may have saved his life though it appears that his life has been damaged.

[He should have not had a gun and he should have taken his beating like a good and submissive liberal. </sarc]

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.
Thompson/Rice

Fire

The Palm Beach Post, attributed the fire at his house to gang activity.   The paper reported on threats of gang reprisals against Borden. The identities of the jurors were protected to prevent gang reprisals.

Good story, proving another

Good story, proving another example of courtroom bias/agenda trying to take away legal guns from honest people trying to defend themselves from those with illegal guns only out to commit crime.

I can't help but wonder what this prosecutor would have done in the same situation. Call the police? file a report? and then what, wait around to become a statistic because he believes the law will come to his aid. The law he appears to use only for his interpretation isn't working so well, otherwise this gang would have been in jail, thus preventing the entire incident (RICO).

Maybe RICO only applies to Italians, yet another act of discrimination!

"Dear Libs: Please remember that conservatives have guns, they are watching you, and know how to aim. Sincerely - rob6677"

Grizzley Bears

I'm wondering if Castle Doctrine applies to when you or one of your children are in imminent danger from a Grizzley Bear attacking.

Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell

Hmmmm....

I bet if it was a polar bear there'd be hell to pay!

"I'm interested in the fact that the less secure a man is, the more likely he is to have extreme prejudice." Clint Eastwood

}}---> MMM HMM

Or a BIPOLAR bear.  Just doing jobs penguins won't do.

~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~

Where on earth do you come

Where on earth do you come up with this stuff? lol

"I'm interested in the fact that the less secure a man is, the more likely he is to have extreme prejudice." Clint Eastwood

}}---> In truth

Stuff like this just hits me and somewhere on the net, somebody has made the same connection with different results.

~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~

Have you given any thought

Have you given any thought to going to a linkers anonymous meeting? They helped me reduce my linking by fifty percent in the first week alone. lol

"I'm interested in the fact that the less secure a man is, the more likely he is to have extreme prejudice." Clint Eastwood

BeanMan, I figure your

BeanMan, I figure your wondering is in jest.  If it is, perhaps it should not be.  I recall a news item from a few years back where in Colorado a man shot and killed a mountain lion that was attacking his young child.  PETA and other idiots went batsh*t over it.  I guess they thought that since this man and others were encroaching on the animals territory, then children should be fair game for the poor animal.  Does anyone else remember this incident?  There are other incidents of attacks by predators on humans.  For example, a four-year-old girl was attacked on Vancouver Island.

"A communist is someone who reads Marx.  An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx."  Ronald Reagan