George Zimmerman has been found not guilty!

[Dashel]

And the claim was made that Trayvon did exactly that - he circled around and blindsided Zimmerman after he had ended his entirely legal following of Teayvon, and there was no direct, eyewitness, or forensic evidence to the contrary.

For duty to retreat to attach you have to have already have been attacked, it doesn't apply to several minutes before the attack.

If, for example, you apply duty to retreat your way and claim that Trayvon was in fear of being followed then he too should have retreated (under the old rule) instead of turning to confront or attack Zimmerman.

DtR cuts both ways.

There was a case about 10 years ago here where a prosecutor charged a woman who was cornered in a blind alley by 2 hoods who had obvious ill intent. She wounded one and drove off the other, yet besides the one captured SHE was slso charged under DtR. Retreat to WHERE in a blind alley? And does it mean you need to gove up what little tactical advantage you may have to satisfy some mindless bureaucracy or ambitious charge everyone prosecutor?

THAT made NO sense, hence SYG.

Good points.  I still disagree though.  That they weren't able to prove what happened in those key moments is just more useful to the defense and the claim that it was an ambush.

 

DtR 1) is generally only for firearms is it not? (Trayvon didn't have one)

2) Again, I'm not sure if this is state differences but the 'assumption' of attack is clearly part of the equation here (if we are truly talking intent) - and critically absent in the Florida law.  Is that not why all prior laws have been based on a location and not 'wherever' the person happens to be standing?  I can't put myself in a knowingly dangerous situation (chasing robbers) then use it as an excuse if they turn on me and I'm 'forced' to shoot.  It creates a more dangerous situation for law enforcement and the public at large.

 

I fully understand that there are situations where DtR can make sense, or at least seems counter-intuitive, but I still say its the wrong approach in densely populated areas.

 

As to the story of the woman, the 'obvious ill intent' line strikes my eye, as that goes to the heart of the difficulty.  I mean, who wants to be dead right?

[DocM]

DtR was/is NOT just for firearms, it applies to any means of aggressive self defense including the martial arts. Even a found weapon like a stick, pipe or rock. Likewise, SYG applies across the board.

Also, to make DtR laws situation specific will fail because there are too many chaotic variables in these events to allow for understandable legislation. It would result in a huge set of ad-hoc definitions with tons of holes and omissions which would be unenforceable in a fair manner. That has always been the problem with "improved" DtR, and why Michigan and other states went for the more general SYG that defined principles, not specifics.

In general (states vary) SYG allows an aggressive defense when the victim / attacked fears they are at risk of severe injury or death, or in the case of sexual assault, or if a third party witnesses the attack / rape and defends the victim.

A separate part of Michigan law, established by the State Supreme Court, is the Fleeing Felon Rule. Under FFR a victim, witness, off duty or out of jurisdiction cop can use force, including deadly force, to facilitate the citizens arrest of a witnessed felon. An example would be a fleeing robber, home invader of rapist.

[ahhell]

They couldn't find him guilty under that ****ty law. who could? Still doesn't mean he was in the right, or did the right thing. Which is why it needs to be changed.

 

This wanna be cop stalked this INNOCENT boy, who had every right to be where he was, Trayvon was the only one (in a common sensed world) who had the right to actually defend themselves against some unknown predator.

 

Hopefully these idiotic NRA laws can be removed.

 

*facepalm*

 

It's over.  Let it go, man.

[Lord Method Man]

*facepalm*

 

It's over.  Let it go, man.

 

Its just comical at this point.

[Phouchg]

Whats funny about it? That you think you're right, and no one else is?

At least bring something into the discussion instead of silly vague posts about nothing.

 

It's all too funny. You rant pure yellow bird crap in all your posts, yet constantly tell others not to. Now please leave.

[necroxd]

*facepalm*

Sorry, i didn't know this forum was only for what you wanted to talk about ;)

No it's still an active debate, which will be over once these backwards looneytune laws are removed.

Be mad.

Yeah that worked out real well for New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Or Mexico for that matter.

[Lord Method Man]

Yeah that worked out real well for New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Or Mexico for that matter.

 

Self defense is still legal in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. There is no irregular law here that makes this case special, except in the minds of the deranged people still clinging to a fantasy scenario in the Trayvon case that has been proven to be nothing resembling the reality of what happened.

[HSoft]

... but can you please elaborate on what you seem to think has been "proven"?

He was found not guilty.  More proof than you or anybody else has.

[SupportGeek]

They couldn't find him guilty under that ****ty law. who could? Still doesn't mean he was in the right, or did the right thing. Which is why it needs to be changed.

 

This wanna be cop stalked this INNOCENT boy, who had every right to be where he was, Trayvon was the only one (in a common sensed world) who had the right to actually defend themselves against some unknown predator.

 

Hopefully these idiotic NRA laws can be removed.

 

SYG had nothing to do with the case. He didnt even need to use SYG as a defense. He was acquitted in the trial, so guess what, in the eyes of the law, the jury and the courts he DID do the right thing.

 

I love how you progs change the word "followed" to "stalked" in an effort to promote a negative connotation and smear Zimmerman for doing his job as a Neighborhood watch, (BTW, following someone is NOT illegal)

Oh and the "wanna be cop" spin garbage that the media has been feeding you was debunked in the trial too, as a community watch person, the police offered him a car and uniform to help carry out his job, this would have given him the opportunity to be the next best thing to being a cop, he declined. Additionally, his instructors testified that Z's future plans were to be an attorney, not a cop.

Your "innocent" boy, ambushed and assaulted someone physically, for no good reason, that flushes the idea he was innocent down the toilet. Martin was the aggressor, ALL the evidence supports this. Bury your head in the sand all you want, it wont change the facts that Martin was a thug who committed a felony assault on someone for nothing more than the act of tracking him around a gated community that he shouldn't have been in anyhow.

[heatlesssun]

SYG had nothing to do with the case. He didnt even need to use SYG as a defense. He was acquitted in the trial, so guess what, in the eyes of the law, the jury and the courts he DID do the right thing.

 

 

Read the jury instructions. SYG is the self-defense law in Florida, you can't claim self-defense and not have SYG apply. Indeed Juror B37 explicitly mentioned SYG in her interview with Anderson Cooper pertaining to this case. 

[Lord Method Man]

Read the jury instructions. SYG is the self-defense law in Florida, you can't claim self-defense and not have SYG apply. Indeed Juror B37 explicitly mentioned SYG in her interview with Anderson Cooper pertaining to this case. 

 

Without SYG it would still be self-defense. Zimmerman was in no position to retreat when he used deadly force. He was pinned to the ground.

 

Get. Over. It.

[Dashel]

Wee

[PGHammer]

That it did - thanks for sharing.

From what I am hearing, the protests against "stand your ground" (which never even came up in the trial) are a red herring.  What the real anger is about is the very idea of self-defense being used by someone with a gun against someone that is *supposedly* unarmed.  However, there is a problem with that premise - we are assuming that a person cannot (physically unable to, that is) kill without a helper (even something as simple as a rock or brick, let alone a knife or gun) at hand.

That premise as fallacious as it is, is widespread - even DOCTORS, who should know better, tend to fall into it.

 

Everyone is armed with a deadly weapon at all times - even when naked.

 

It's called the human brain.

 

Look at the violent crime (or even mere violent death - that includes non-criminal occurrences) statistics - how many times are folks killed without an obvious weapon?  How many cases of folks being strangled to death (without a rope or garrotte, even) are there.  And being beaten to death happens - everywhere.

 

Once you face the fallacy of the "unarmed person" head-on, don't you even begin to feel a bit foolish for even believing it?

[SupportGeek]

Read the jury instructions. SYG is the self-defense law in Florida, you can't claim self-defense and not have SYG apply. Indeed Juror B37 explicitly mentioned SYG in her interview with Anderson Cooper pertaining to this case. 

 

In this case, the jury was read instructions on SYG in case it did apply, it did not, Z did not need to claim it. SYG is not the end-all be-all of self defense in Florida, it simply removes the duty to retreat in proving valid use of self defense.

In this case, Zimmerman had no resonable means to retreat before he was ambused and assaulted, hence SYG did not apply.

[ahhell]

More like you guys are trying to lessen what it means, to make what happened "okay".

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stalking

 

and no, Trayvon wasn't the "aggressor", and no he didn't create this situation. He was simply just trying to walk home, which he had everyone right to do without being harassed by a wannabe tough guy.

 

Trayvon had everyone right to defend himself as you are saying Zimmerman had.

 

Who knows what ACTUALLY happen, but we know who caused it all, and who ignored instructions from the experienced 9/11 operator

 

That only proves that there are crazy laws that allows this to happen.

 

I'm still waiting for the info on what was "proven", i doubt it'll ever come, since it isnt so.

 

Do you randomly just pick pieces of info that you heard somewhere and treat it like gospel? 

 

You go on and on about what was "proven" yet you post pointless speculation about what Trayvon's motives may have been for being in the area.

 

Good lord. 

:s

[KingCracker]

In the United States of America, armed trigger-happy instigators are now protected.

 

It reminds of the U.S. foreign policy of picking up a fight with small nations by intimidating them and then parking warships in their harbour.

 

Juror: Zimmerman should have stayed in his car

Oh please, that's all I can say to that. 

[gameboy1977]

whoa this thread is so hot debate here! *shaking my head*

[c.grz]

Wow, where did that come from?

Are you suggesting he was doing something then other than walking home? Which there is no evidence of.

 

I don't know about you...but when I walk home...I do so by walking on the public sidewalk.  I never cut through people's private property.

 

If you see a stranger in someone's yard; do you assume that they're just walking home?

[Xerino]

no surprise, disappointing, but no surprise, wouldve been nice for him to atleast get a few years for involuntary manslaughter, but we will see when the family goes for a civil suit.. Then again, Im sure some vigillante moron out there will do the deed for the people.

[AWilliams87]

no surprise, disappointing, but no surprise, wouldve been nice for him to atleast get a few years for involuntary manslaughter, but we will see when the family goes for a civil suit.. Then again, Im sure some vigillante moron out there will do the deed for the people.

Why would anyone get charged with manslaughter for defending themselves? Do you not realize the dangerous situation you people are implicitly advocating for?

More like you guys are trying to lessen what it means, to make what happened "okay".

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stalking

 

and no, Trayvon wasn't the "aggressor", and no he didn't create this situation. He was simply just trying to walk home, which he had everyone right to do without being harassed by a wannabe tough guy.

 

Trayvon had everyone right to defend himself as you are saying Zimmerman had.

 

Who knows what ACTUALLY happen, but we know who caused it all, and who ignored instructions from the experienced 9/11 operator

 

That only proves that there are crazy laws that allows this to happen.

 

I'm still waiting for the info on what was "proven", i doubt it'll ever come, since it isnt so.

Naaah. It only proves that you're crazy. What is Trayvon defending himself from? Being watched? Trayvon's girlfriend said he throw the first punch and he was "whopping" Zimmerman's ass. At which point would you be happy for Zimmerman to defend himself?

From what I am hearing, the protests against "stand your ground" (which never even came up in the trial) are a red herring.  What the real anger is about is the very idea of self-defense being used by someone with a gun against someone that is *supposedly* unarmed.  However, there is a problem with that premise - we are assuming that a person cannot (physically unable to, that is) kill without a helper (even something as simple as a rock or brick, let alone a knife or gun) at hand.

That premise as fallacious as it is, is widespread - even DOCTORS, who should know better, tend to fall into it.

 

Everyone is armed with a deadly weapon at all times - even when naked.

 

It's called the human brain.

 

Look at the violent crime (or even mere violent death - that includes non-criminal occurrences) statistics - how many times are folks killed without an obvious weapon?  How many cases of folks being strangled to death (without a rope or garrotte, even) are there.  And being beaten to death happens - everywhere.

 

Once you face the fallacy of the "unarmed person" head-on, don't you even begin to feel a bit foolish for even believing it?

Everyone is throwing around the word "unarmed" as if it means the same a non-violent.

Without SYG it would still be self-defense. Zimmerman was in no position to retreat when he used deadly force. He was pinned to the ground.

 

Get. Over. It.

Not forgetting to mention that he was actually trying to escape, but Trayvon was actively preventing that from occurring.

[heatlesssun]

I don't know about you...but when I walk home...I do so by walking on the public sidewalk.  I never cut through people's private property.

 

If you see a stranger in someone's yard; do you assume that they're just walking home?

 

LOL! You see someone cut across a yard and start following them with a loaded gun? It can't get much more paranoid than that.

[c.grz]

LOL! You see someone cut across a yard and start following them with a loaded gun? It can't get much more paranoid than that.

 

I asked if you were to see that if you would think that person was just walking home.

 

So if George wouldn't of been carrying a gun; then it would of been OK and not paranoid to follow Trayvon?

[trag3dy]

LOL! You see someone cut across a yard and start following them with a loaded gun? It can't get much more paranoid than that.

 

Paranoid? Serious? There were break-ins in the neighborhood previously. Zimmerman had ever reason to be suspicious.

[Deihmos]

The dude called 911 on a guy walking home and is not bothering anyone. He isn't doing anything wrong but yet he calls 911. The kid was profiled and lost his life because of it. If he wore different clothes and looked different he would have been alive today. I need to be careful about how I address.

[trag3dy]

The dude called 911 on a guy walking home and is not bothering anyone. He isn't doing anything wrong but yet he calls 911. The kid was profiled and lost his life because of it. If he wore different clothes and looked different he would have been alive today. 

 

To clarify. The dude called a non-priority number on some one cutting through peoples yards and acting suspiciously during the night in the rain in a neighborhood that suffered recent break ins. And that person then attacked him "for no reason".

 

But yeah, basically what you said.