Home › Main Category › Personal Defense
Jayhawker
ModeratorPosts: 14,837 Senior Member
The problem with "Stand Your Ground" laws...
Jayhawker
ModeratorPosts: 14,837 Senior Member
is not the concept. The right to "defend yourself anywhere you have a legal right to be" isn't the issue. The problem rather is that the ones most effected by the law just HAVE NOT GOT THE MESSAGE. "If you are a thug/gang banger and prone to threaten or commit violence on random persons, there is a distinct probability that you are going to get shot. " A simple enough message, but one that some are just not able to grasp...
They (and their parents) fail to see that their (or their children's) fate lies in their own hands...treat folks with a little common respect, leave people alone, don't attack, rape, rob, or commit any other form of mayhem and your chances of ending up on a slab in the morgue with some big leaky holes in you are virtually nil...
They (and their parents) fail to see that their (or their children's) fate lies in their own hands...treat folks with a little common respect, leave people alone, don't attack, rape, rob, or commit any other form of mayhem and your chances of ending up on a slab in the morgue with some big leaky holes in you are virtually nil...
Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
0
Replies
Jerry
ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
I just ejected into my underpants!
:that: Of course, it's the votes of the ignorant that keep these politicians in office and they will pander to it everytime. They would much rather have the votes of the easily persuaded than those who can think for themselves.
And lets remember folks that avoid trouble and lead a boring life.
and a sash!
Quite true.
This one idiot did a lot of damage to the cause.
Of course they get the message. It's usually delivered at 800 to 1200 feet per second. I'm not sure why you perceive this as a "problem".
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
It comes with a sash? Nobody told me it came with a sash! :worthy:
Now I have to get one. :roll2: :rotflmao:
Not sure which idiot you are refering. IF the facts eventually bear out that the watch captain was observing and reporting when he was savagely attacked then what happened next is a good thing. The most unfortunate aspect is that the media will ignore the facts to advance their anti-gun agenda and ordinary people will not challenge what they are told. When Joe Horn, here in Texas, killed a burglar in broad daylight in front of his own house the media planned a field day. Their initial reporting enraged liberals from coast to coast. But Horn was not charged because the facts indicated he had broken no law. Eye witness testimony did not appear in the mainstream media because it did not further their agenda. Such is a good thing to remember before accepting the news reports at face value.
John Doe is visiting his father, he walks from dwelling on X street to a mini mart on Y street, there he purchases skittles & iced tea, pays cash, gets change and exits the store, he walks back to residence on X street, so far so good right ?
John Doe has committed no crime or offense of any kind, is there any real reason to follow or stop John Doe or question him ?
How we address people can have a negative effect too, what right does a non LEO or even a Security Guard have to ask ID of a person not in the act of some sort of crime ?
Somehow as much as a thug as any John Doe can be, it is hard to imagine that this young man simply beat down Zimmerman without some type of foul language or hard words.
To clarify, Zimmerman says Hi there ! and the young man started beating him ?
Or did Zimmerman ask in a crude way, what are you doing in this neighborhood ?
The real question that may be impossible to answer should be: What words passed between those two men, when things went from a verbal confrontation and escalated into a PHYSICAL ASSAULT.
And I sadly admit to having been in one too many brawls and fisticuffs, only a scant 50 or so were for absolutely no reason at all, drunk folks.
And if I may piggyback on this comment, I'm drawn to the fact of the 911 call that Zimmerman placed which indicates that Martin did not engage him as he was walking. It is clear from the call that Zimmerman got out of his car and followed Martin. As I've said before on this case, that's where I draw my line. Zimmerman could easily have stayed in his vehicle and reported his observations; if he had done so, I think it is reasonable to believe that none of what followed would ever have occurred.
If only he did that. He engaged a man that was just walking home against dispatcher instructions.
:that: This guy didn't "stand his ground", he PURSUED somebody, at night. In the same situation, I probably would have shot Zimmerman. This case will harm 2nd Amendment legislation and debate for years. All because "Charles Bronson" Zimmerman aka Batman had to get involved, and go over the top. :bang::bang:
+1 on that. This case is getting more out of hand by the day.
Well said, pilot. The media is acting like a lynch mob, feeding the anti-gun crowd misinformation, and inciting emotion instead of reason.
DPRMD
Just a year or so some gang bangers (both felons) got into a gun fight with AK's. A young girl was killed in the cross fire; one of the accused claimed "stand your ground " believe me it did not apply. So the issue can be discussed just like monday night quarterback's do, but the law is clear, there is precedent and case law already since 2005 and prior that prompted the law change. Zimmerman had no reason to follow the young man, he's a cop wanna be that now has put a strain on a statute that took a long time to get passed and the possibility of it being revoked to please a few.
I can go on for a while, my CCW course lecture is about 6 hrs just on the statute, which is only 2 pages (one side and back) and is available on line. Let us all be vigilant of our rights and be sure that when a weapon or firearm is drawn for lawful self defense we are within the confines of the law. My 2 cnts.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Even if Zimmerman initiated the actions (which he may have done, we don't know yet,) if he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and was unable to escape, the provisions of the statute will apply. Supposedly Zimmerman was on his back getting punched in the face with his head beating against the concrete as Martin was on top of him. In that situation, the threat of imminent danger or great bodily harm was present, and Zimmerman's chance of withdrawing was taken away, see (a) Furthermore, there is one witness who said that at some point the two were separated but alive. If that is true and Martin re initiated contact, then Zimmerman would be cleared under (b).
Lots of political pressure is being applied.
This trial is going to be a historical one for sure.
Teach, both yours and Jayhawker's points well taken here. These mutton heads think they can get away with anything they wish. Well, they did for many years, but now the law is giving the victim or would be victim the right to defend themselves, which they should have had all along, but they haven't realized it yet. Now the bully's are being killed. I look at it as we, the law abiding citizens are improving the gene pool one at a time.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Well put , and well said! We can't let people who act carelessly/recklessly give the anti-gun crowd ammunition to take our rights away. Even if he gets off, the "Stand your ground" law will more than likely be repealed. Which will be another blow to gun rights.
I don't think 21 states are going to repeal their respective laws...however, we'll have to wait and see....
The reports I heard stated Zimmerman was talking to the 911 operator and Zimmerman said he got out of his truck and was following an unknown person in a hoodie. The dispatcher advised him to quit following and Z. said OK and claims he returned to his truck when he was attacked by Trayvon Martin, who punched Z. in the nose and knocked him to the ground and started to pound his head into the sidewalk.
Now if this if proved during the trial, he did not continue to pursue and therefore the Stand Your Ground law will prevail. According to Alan Dershowitz, a well respected lawyer. [URL="http://www.alandershowitz.com
/biography.php"]http://www.alandershowitz.com/biography.php[/URL]
He has claimed, on several talk shows, that the State Attorney overcharged Zimmerman with 2nd Degree, as she will not be able to meet the requirements for 2nd degree murder. Read http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/second-degree-murder-overview.html
She has to proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman intended to shoot Trayvon without provocation vs. in self defense. If you listened to the bail hearing the Detective that did the report was questioned and asked if he had any evidence that would disprove what he investigated and Zimmerman's statements and his wounds at the scene.
I will not be surprised if during the pre-trial the Defense attorney request the Stand Your Ground law be invoked and the Judge dismisses the case. Even is not, Self Defense will be presented by the Defense Attorney and stands a good chance for acquittal.
My next opinion is Stand Your Ground will not be repealed in FL. Time will tell :up: