Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

    Originally posted by amherstblackbear View Post
    Once he started following TM, he was no longer acting in any capacity as a community watcher. He was just a redneck cracker with a gun. So he confronts TM anyway. Then TM jumps Zim and starts pounding him into oblivion - ramming his head repeatedly into the pavement (which, more and more, seems like a reasonable reaction . . . if it had happened).

    From seeing the police video, though, it's kind of hard to believe that happened. The police say they took him directly to the station. Nowhere in their report does it mention about taking Zim home to put on some clean clothes, then taking him to a clinic to have his head trauma examined, or his facial lacerations cared for. There was no time for him to get stitches, never mind get stitches removed. Yet the guy shows up at the station without a scratch on him and without a thread on any of his clothes out place?

    All of it points to a couple possibilities. Either Zim has a screw loose, and has no business walking the street packing heat.

    Or he's the Terminator. Circa Terminator 2.
    One question I've had about this whole episode... Zimmerman is claiming "stand your ground" priveledge, yes?

    Why can't TM claim the same thing, had he been alive? Think about it- you are walking around some where, arguably in a place you should not be, and some guy is following you around, and we don't know if he's being threatened. One could easily claim that TM was standing his ground, too. Just in this case, the guy with the better weapon wins.

    That's what I'm confused about this while "stand your ground" argument- if it takes place in an open space, and has nothing to do with your own property (either side), and a fight breaks out, the law will defend the person who wins via death. Something seems odd by that easy to point out scenario, which is pretty close to what happened here.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

      Originally posted by alfablue View Post
      One question I've had about this whole episode... Zimmerman is claiming "stand your ground" priveledge, yes?

      Why can't TM claim the same thing, had he been alive? Think about it- you are walking around some where, arguably in a place you should not be, and some guy is following you around, and we don't know if he's being threatened. One could easily claim that TM was standing his ground, too. Just in this case, the guy with the better weapon wins.



      That's what I'm confused about this while "stand your ground" argument- if it takes place in an open space, and has nothing to do with your own property (either side), and a fight breaks out, the law will defend the person who wins via death. Something seems odd by that easy to point out scenario, which is pretty close to what happened here.
      The references to "stand your ground" have come mainly from media types, who clearly disapprove of the law. I doubt it will be a major line of Zimmerman's defense. However, you are permitted to defend yourself against a violent assault, which is what he says happened.
      Last edited by Old Pio; 04-12-2012, 07:26 PM.
      2011 Poser of the Year & Pulitzer Prize winning machine gunner.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

        Originally posted by alfablue View Post
        One question I've had about this whole episode... Zimmerman is claiming "stand your ground" priveledge, yes?
        No. It's not at all clear that that is the case.

        Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post
        As an outsider I get your point and even agree, but not sure I'd be thinking clearly if I thought someone murdered my son.
        Me neither... But it's not the parents who are saying things like that. It's the outside idiots like the Black Panthers, Spike Lee, etc.
        Last edited by WeWantMore; 04-12-2012, 07:23 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

          Originally posted by WeWantMore View Post
          No. It's not at all clear that that is the case.



          Me neither... But it's not the parents who are saying things like that. It's the outside idiots like the Black Panthers, Spike Lee, etc.
          Let's not forget Mike Tyson. Jesse Jackson. Al Sharpton. MSNBC, et al

          "Let me tell you, the things that's about to happen, to these honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, these ---- people. It has been long overdue. My prize right now this evening ... is gonna be the bounty, the arrest, dead or alive, for George Zimmerman. You feel me?"--Michelle Williams, "Chief of Staff" for the New Black Panther Party. She's got a rap sheet as long as your arm.
          Last edited by Old Pio; 04-12-2012, 07:40 PM.
          2011 Poser of the Year & Pulitzer Prize winning machine gunner.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

            Also, I think a little reality ought to be brought to the discourse about Stand Your Ground laws.

            In Florida, the bill passed the Senate 39-0 and the House 94-20. Jennifer Granholm, who now sees fit to rail against such laws on her show on Current TV, evidently had no such qualms when she allowed such a bill to become law in Michigan in 2005.

            Lord knows, strong bipartisan support for a bill does not make it good policy, any more than narrow support makes it bad, but let's just address the facts here.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

              Originally posted by WeWantMore View Post
              ...but let's just address the facts here.
              Why?
              CCT '77 & '78
              4 kids
              5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
              1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

              ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
              - Benjamin Franklin

              Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

              I want to live forever. So far, so good.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                Originally posted by Old Pio View Post
                The references to "stand your ground" have come mainly from media types, who clearly disapprove of the law. I doubt it will be a major line of Zimmerman's defense. However, you are permitted to defend yourself against a violent assault, which is what he says happened.
                Again, if you are allowed to defend yourself, why isn't TM given that benefit of the doubt? He could have been "standing his ground" as well- but all we are talking about is what Zim did.

                That's where the whole point of the law seems confused- in a situation like this, both sides can claim "stand your ground" had they won. And technically, both could have been given the immunity under the law. So it seems as if the law would allow a fight that concludes in a death. That just seems odd.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                  Originally posted by WeWantMore View Post
                  Also, I think a little reality ought to be brought to the discourse about Stand Your Ground laws.

                  In Florida, the bill passed the Senate 39-0 and the House 94-20. Jennifer Granholm, who now sees fit to rail against such laws on her show on Current TV, evidently had no such qualms when she allowed such a bill to become law in Michigan in 2005.

                  Lord knows, strong bipartisan support for a bill does not make it good policy, any more than narrow support makes it bad, but let's just address the facts here.
                  It all depends on how the law is written. If you are at home trying to keep out an attacker, that's one thing. But if the law isn't very specific, and allows one to claim the law if you use deadly force in an ordinary fight, that's totally different. And it's an important debate.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                    Originally posted by alfablue View Post
                    Again, if you are allowed to defend yourself, why isn't TM given that benefit of the doubt? He could have been "standing his ground" as well- but all we are talking about is what Zim did.

                    That's where the whole point of the law seems confused- in a situation like this, both sides can claim "stand your ground" had they won. And technically, both could have been given the immunity under the law. So it seems as if the law would allow a fight that concludes in a death. That just seems odd.
                    First off, there is no indication that Zimmerman will be making a claim of Stand Your Ground. If his story is true (which I personally don't believe), it would seem he might be protected by traditional self-defense laws, without even bringing Stand Your Ground into play.

                    Consider this:
                    Even under the old retreat duty, prosecutors needed to show your route of escape was truly safe; the rule did not require you to turn your back on someone who might well catch up and do you harm. By many accounts, Trayvon had the upper hand in the scuffle between the two before the gunshot (according to his attorney, Zimmerman had a broken nose).

                    If Zimmerman claimed he had no safe way to disengage from the beating, prosecutors might have had trouble establishing the "safe line of retreat" required under the old law.

                    There's a pattern here. If Sanford police lacked probable cause to charge Zimmerman under the post-'05 law, they most likely also lacked probable cause under the older law. (Whether they should have worked harder to develop evidence of probable cause is a separate question.)

                    As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh argues — and contrary to many press accounts — "most American states rejected the duty to retreat even before the recent flurry of new 'stand your ground' laws." At this point, a large majority of U.S. states join Florida in rejecting the duty, which still prevails in England and elsewhere.
                    For the record, here's what the Florida law actually says:
                    A person is justified in using 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 the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

                    (1) 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; or
                    (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                      Originally posted by alfablue View Post
                      But if the law isn't very specific, and allows one to claim the law if you use deadly force in an ordinary fight, that's totally different. And it's an important debate.
                      You bet, it's an important debate. But once again, the bolded is decidedly not what SYG laws allow you to. To quote the FL law again
                      a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
                      (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself...
                      I don't think that covers "an ordinary fight".

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                        The main problem, as I wrote in the other thread, is that stand your ground only applies to people of age. We need to lower the age requirement for lawfully carrying firearms.

                        If Martin had been armed, sure, he could have stood his ground, capped that crazy basterd, and saved the country a lot of heartache.

                        /nra
                        1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1995 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2012(!)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                          Originally posted by amherstblackbear View Post
                          The main problem, as I wrote in the other thread, is that stand your ground only applies to people of age. We need to lower the age requirement for lawfully carrying firearms.

                          If Martin had been armed, sure, he could have stood his ground, capped that crazy basterd, and saved the country a lot of heartache.

                          /nra
                          A black man killing a white man in Florida? Chair.
                          CCT '77 & '78
                          4 kids
                          5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                          1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                          ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                          - Benjamin Franklin

                          Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                          I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                            Zimmerman's lawyer says he'd going to plead not guilty under the Stand Your Ground law. Shows what I know.
                            2011 Poser of the Year & Pulitzer Prize winning machine gunner.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

                              Originally posted by Old Pio View Post
                              Zimmerman's lawyer says he'd going to plead not guilty under the Stand Your Ground law. Shows what I know.
                              From what I read, the SYG defense is a pre-trial motion to dismiss. If the judge grants it, there's no more trial, it's all over right there. If not, they proceed to a trial where he could make a conventional self-defense argument.
                              Last edited by Twitch Boy; 04-12-2012, 08:33 PM.
                              Michigan Tech Huskies Pep Band: There's No Use Trying To Talk. No Human Sound Can Stand Up To This. Loud Enough To Knock You Down.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Old Pio View Post
                                Zimmerman's lawyer says he'd going to plead not guilty under the Stand Your Ground law. Shows what I know.
                                Yep, that's me shown as well.

                                Still don't believe he'll be protected by the law though.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X