You are here

The Gangbanger Protection Act of 2015

The circus returned to Lansing recently. The Gangbanger Protection Act of 2015 (Senate Bill 611) is an attack on everyone's fundamental human right to self-defense. This bill starts by repealing Michigan’s Self-Defense Act, which became law in 2006 with broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by then Governor Jennifer Granholm (D).  This bill would also repeal Castle Doctrine, which provides legal protections when defending oneself from a home invader. SB 611 would even make individuals who lawfully and reasonably defend their own lives or the lives of others, vulnerable to costly, damaging and often frivolous lawsuits.

While this bill has about zero chance of passing into law, it's important to highlight the corruption and ignorance of those that oppose your basic human right to self defense. These laws are not about guns, they are about defending life and livelihoods, and they apply regardless of the tool used.

Senator Warren, representing the entitlement capital of Michigan, introduced this bill. While Warren claims to be a champion of women's rights, a critical component of this bill would repeal the legal protections for defending yourself against a rapist. When Warren isn't busy complaining about the need for endless free stuff at other people's expense, she now finds it necessary to force women to justify their defense from rape rather than require a prosecutor to prove it was unreasonable. Not just once, but twice.  As if the emotional trauma from surviving such an attack and the resulting criminal prosecution isn’t enough, Warren must think that it’s also reasonable to allow the failed rapist, or their family, to sue for damages. Yes you read that right. Allow a rapist to sue the victim that stopped them.

Imagine for a moment if the civil protections were repealed. Picture “slip and fall” lawyers  having a field day suing homeowners every time a burglar falls down the steps while carrying your flat screen TV out the door. Even if they lose, you are still stuck with a large legal bill without the protections that these senators want to repeal.

Representing the voice of the gangbangers of Flint and Detroit are Senators Coleman Young and Jim Ananich. I understand that one of the jobs of a senator is to represent his or her district, but is it necessary for Young and Ananich to take the side of rapists, gangbangers, and other degenerates who wish to cause havoc on the people of Michigan? The vast majority of violent crime in Michigan takes place in Detroit and Flint. For some odd reason, it seems that Young and Ananich have had enough of their thug constituents being met with defensive force when they try to take an innocent life or rape vulnerable woman.

The reason for Stand Your Ground legislation is because survivors of violent attacks or of attempted murder have historically had to face a second assault by rogue prosecutors, resulting in tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees, ultimately forcing them into poverty and ruining whatever life they have left. Stand Your Ground legislation was passed to primarily protect middle class and poor people from having to prove their innocence. A recent example was in our neighboring state of Wisconsin.

Many states have recognized this severe miscarriage of justice and have passed laws to protect us from those in the legal system who would attack you all over again. Even States like California and Illinois have stand your ground legal precedent. The same for Washington DC and all U.S. Territories.

Either these 4 senators are extremely ignorant or they actually want to empower the criminal element to ruin the lives of innocent people. Thankfully, The Gangbanger Protection Act of 2015 has zero chance of becoming law; however, it's concerning that these four senators would rather see vulnerable women and struggling people die as the expense of protecting the degenerate class of citizens known as violent criminals. I guess every vote does matter, even those of rapists and robbers.


You have to wonder what goes through some people's minds.

I believe the Progressives are preparing the road for ISIS to attack us and not have a right to defend ourselves

My brother inlaw stabbed 3 people in self defense after a mob of 30 pummeled him and beat him to a bloody pulp. He killed an 18 year old child and two others were critical but survived. It was complete self defense and he got off. None the less he had to spend 1 year in the county jail while going through trial and even though he was not convicted he has to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars because he did nothing wrong but defended himself. The injustice system is flawed at best and these idiots that bring in legislation for criminals have to be ejected immediately

Well damn how is that fair or just for me or my family to whom I can't legally protect with a firearm because of a domestic charge I got when I was 18 dealing with a bipolar girlfriend and 3 kids later I can't bare arms in me and my families defense!?! #that'sbs

Well damn how is that fair or just for me or my family to whom I can't legally protect with a firearm because of a domestic charge I got when I was 18 dealing with a bipolar girlfriend and 3 kids later I can't bare arms in me and my families defense!?! #that'sbs

Ridiculous bill, ridiculous politicians,,anyone who supports this bill should be ashamed and retire, or better them out...

A couple points to make. 1. The title of the Bill is horrendous and wreaks of prejudice. 2. The Bill makes no sense whatsoever. Say the now stereotypical term "gangbanger" ( It's not the 90's ) was dropped for "home invader" would it appear different?
I did not bother to read the whole bill I am just going by what is posted here. Is there anything in the bill that would imply protection of citizens from home invasion? If not then the title of the bill literally implies it is the home invaders the bill seeks to protect. Could that be correct? I can't imagine a better way to prevent home invasion than having arms in the home itself and being able to legally and reasonably defend yourself; that doesn't mean being able shoot someone in the back as they're running off your property (unless they had caused you great bodily harm or worse).

This is mind boggling. A white (I am assuming) Ann Arbor liberal introduces a bill that at the title (prejudiced) may appeal to the right then it is supported by Senators from Detroit and Flint? And lo' and behold the bill is overt attack on the ability of the citizen to defend themselves from violent crime (Castle, MSDA). So what we have in essence is the "Criminal Protection Act". I live in Macomb County but all three of these people should be voted right out of office. That the Senator from Ann Arbor wrote this bill does not surprise me, I find these Clintonians to be the worst and most damaging of the political cliques take Rahm Emmanual for example.

The surprising thing (noted in the article) is that Senators from Flint and Detroit would support this atrocity. It's a slap in the face to all those hardworking and reasonable law abiding citizens who love their towns and have stuck it out through thick and thin. These residents should be the most upset and I imagine they would be if it was common knowledge.

These senators if looking to protect "criminals" should be addressing the problems that cause crime such as poverty and education as well overzealous sentencing for non violent crimes. The Flint Senator should be raising hell considering the whole city of Flint has now been lead poisoned while under state control. What the hell is going on? Speaking as a Native American and person of colour. The second amendment, castle doctrine and the MSDA should be totems in these communities as a means of shedding the criminal elements that are very real threats to these communities. If one looks at the example Monroe County, North Carolina under Robert F. Williams who got an NRA charter and with his communtiy proted themselves from the Klan. In this case the Klan is very much Black on Black crime and the same model and approach (Robert Williams) should be used to solve this problem. That is not to say ignore illegal police killings but time and energy must be put into solving the underlying issues all of which and more I mentioned above starting with LEADERSHIP!

The title of the bill is not the "Gangbanger Protection Act" - that's the sarcastic, racist name that this blog has assigned to it. It reeks of prejudice, not "wreaks".

Recent comments