|DATE:||June 26, 2016|
|TO:||USF & NRA Members and Friends|
|FROM:||Marion P. Hammer|
|USF Executive Director|
|NRA Past President|
Rep. Charles McBurney just keeps proving he is totally unfit for any bench, anywhere, ever.
McBurney's latest warped explanation of why he refused to hear the Burden of Proof bill is that it was a pro-criminal bill.
In an interview reported by WFSU, "McBurney says he doesn't regret siding with prosecutors and opposing the NRA's controversial proposal to expand the state's stand-your-ground law."
Further, McBurney said, “I think it was the right thing to do. I did not feel that that was a good bill. I felt that it was a pro-criminal type bill, to me, and sort of an anti-victim bill.”
To be clear, this was a bill to restore the presumption of innocence in self-defense cases. It is a fundamental right that the legislature ratified in the "Castle Doctrine/Stand/Your Ground" law but that prosecutors and anti-gun judges didn't like.
So, to circumvent the "Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground" law, a few Judges and prosecutors conspired to nullify the immunity and self-defense protections provided by the Legislature.
They created a special hearing for self-defense cases and removed the presumption of innocence by requiring citizens to prove they acted in self-defense.
It is an underlying canon of justice that anytime the state (prosecutor) charges a person with a crime, the burden is on the state (prosecutor) to prove that person committed the crime.
No person should ever sit on any bench anywhere who is willing to trade your rights and your freedom for personal gain. Particularly a person who suggests that legislation to protect self-defense rights is "pro-criminal."