Trayvon Martin and "Stand Your Ground" in FL

[carlfense]

I haven't seen this discussed here yet.

 

This is a textbook example of legislators not understanding the full consequences of the laws that they pass. The person who introduced the bill on behalf of the NRA has stated that it wasn't intended to protect the actions of someone like Zimmerman. Unfortunately . . . the broad scope of the law seems to protect Zimmerman even though he was almost certainly the aggressor. It is unfortunate that this wannabe vigilante probably won't be held accountable for this murder because of the actions of a reactionary legislature.

[johnnyrodgers20]

I haven't seen this discussed here yet.

 

This is a textbook example of legislators not understanding the full consequences of the laws that they pass. The person who introduced the bill on behalf of the NRA has stated that it wasn't intended to protect the actions of someone like Zimmerman. Unfortunately . . . the broad scope of the law seems to protect Zimmerman even though he was almost certainly the aggressor. It is unfortunate that this wannabe vigilante probably won't be held accountable for this murder because of the actions of a reactionary legislature.

 

 

I am unaware of what went on in Fla, can you enlighten me?

[carlfense]

I am unaware of what went on in Fla, can you enlighten me?

There are thousands of articles about this story and this is kind of a random sample:

http://www.cbsnews.c...or-more-action/

 

The political tie-in is that FL had passed a law that basically allows people to shoot first and ask questions later. In this case, it appears that the shooter had been following a 17 year old who was only carrying candy and iced tea. Some sort of confrontation ensued and the shooter shot the 17 year old. The police declined to even arrest the shooter because of the "stand your ground" law. This, despite the fact that most seem to agree that the shooter was the original aggressor.

 

In short, the shooter began following and harassing this kid and the kid may have thrown a punch. The shooter then pulled out his gun and killed him. This is (apparently) legal.

[johnnyrodgers20]

I am unaware of what went on in Fla, can you enlighten me?

There are thousands of articles about this story and this is kind of a random sample:

http://www.cbsnews.c...or-more-action/

 

The political tie-in is that FL had passed a law that basically allows people to shoot first and ask questions later. In this case, it appears that the shooter had been following a 17 year old who was only carrying candy and iced tea. Some sort of confrontation ensued and the shooter shot the 17 year old. The police declined to even arrest the shooter because of the "stand your ground" law. This, despite the fact that most seem to agree that the shooter was the original aggressor.

 

In short, the shooter began following and harassing this kid and the kid may have thrown a punch. The shooter then pulled out his gun and killed him. This is (apparently) legal.

 

From what I have read it seems that Zimmerman should be arrested. I am sure if he hasn't been yet it is because they are working on the case and want to make sure they can win in court.

 

The bolded statement is a little misleading counselor as the defendent was on a neighborhood watch and the teen was a stranger in the community. Having said that I don't think Zimmerman acted appropriately and should have waited for the police to arrive to assist him. And if the young man was unarmed he should have been able to restrain himself and not pull the gun out, but I would like to know more information about the alleged crime.

[carlfense]

It's not misleading. Those are facts. The kid had an iced tea and Skittles. Zimmerman had a pistol.

 

I too would like to know more.

[VectorVictor]

The political tie-in is that FL had passed a law that basically allows people to shoot first and ask questions later...The police declined to even arrest the shooter because of the "stand your ground" law. This, despite the fact that most seem to agree that the shooter was the original aggressor.

 

Not to defend the law (as its implementation through Florida's legislature was suspect thanks to the fiscal lubrication of the NRA), but my understanding of it is that one is entitled to self-defense with deadly force if someone comes at you with deadly force--like for like, where you stand.

 

Unless the iced tea was laced with cyanide and the Skittles were evil nanobots, there's no reasonable way the boy's attack could be construed as deadly force.

 

---

 

And to make sure folks are aware, the Police really fouled this up from the beginning--Zimmerman was not drug or alcohol tested after the incident...but the dead body of Trayvon Martin was drug and alcohol tested as it sat in the Coroner's Office for three days before his parents were made aware of their son's death. No one from the Police bothered to inform Trayvon's parents, and they had already reported him missing.

 

The body had Trayvon's cell phone on it, including the most recent number dialed of his girlfriend who heard the whole thing go down from her end on the phone live. One would think the police could have looked up the last numbers on the phone and dialed his parents or girlfriend to let them know...

 

---

 

The bolded statement is a little misleading counselor as the defendent was on a neighborhood watch and the teen was a stranger in the community.

 

Johnny, it's already been out in the news that Zimmerman was a 'self-appointed' neighborhood watch captain, and that no organized Neighborhood Watch program (read: registered w/local police) existed in this community. I haven't seen any retractions on this point yet.

[carlfense]

Not to defend the law (as its implementation through Florida's legislature was suspect thanks to the fiscal lubrication of the NRA), but my understanding of it is that one is entitled to self-defense with deadly force if someone comes at you with deadly force--like for like, where you stand.

You are correct. So long as you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger you can shoot. The main failing with this particular law is that it doesn't have a clause that says something to the effect of "unless you are the aggressor."

 

Basically, you can initiate a confrontation and if you feel that the person poses a threat to you then you can shoot them. It's very poorly thought out.

 

Here's a good quick breakdown of the law by the NYT. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/03/21/do-stand-your-ground-laws-encourage-vigilantes/what-the-florida-stand-your-ground-law-says

[carlfense]

Excellent quick summary from The Dish:

Emily Bazelon takes a close look at Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, which protected the man who killed Trayvon Martin:

 

"It’s that decision not to press charges that makes Stand Your Ground laws, which a bunch of other states have adopted, a crazy departure from the past. It’s one thing to raise self-defense at trial. It’s another to have what the Florida Supreme Court calls “true immunity.” True immunity, the court said, means a trial judge can dismiss a prosecution, based on a Stand Your Ground assertion, before trial begins."

 

Gregory O'Meara, a former prosecutor, thinks basic self-defense laws are enough:

 

"To claim self defense or defense of others under current statutes, a person under attack (the defender) needs to raise credible proof: first, that he reasonably thought he (or another) was unlawfully under imminent deadly attack by another; second, that each forceful action, including deadly force, he took in response to this attack was necessary to stop the attack; and third, that he acted solely with the intent to thwart the unlawful attack. In many jurisdictions, the defender must withdraw from the fight before using deadly force if he can do so in complete safety. If the defender meets these requirements, he will be found not guilty."

http://andrewsulliva...go-too-far.html

['SkersRule]

The youth was black, the shooter was white, and there's "no" crime here? That's American history 101.

 

Here's what I think occurred and admittedly I'm only guessing: Black youth walking along minding his own business going back to the house he was staying at. Racist rent-a-cop sees black youth and thinks there is no possible way he could be there in this gated community legitimately. Rent-a-cop confronts youth who then does what any typical teenager would do and starts arguing back essentially telling rent-a-cop to shut it along with offering other "advice." Rent-a-cop wants to get physical, lays his hands upon the youth who retaliates. Rent-a-cop pulls out a gun and shoots the youth. And all this occurred because the rent-a-cop was a racist and the black youth had a big mouth. Of course this is only my theory and I could be off-base entirely.

[VectorVictor]

Not to defend the law (as its implementation through Florida's legislature was suspect thanks to the fiscal lubrication of the NRA), but my understanding of it is that one is entitled to self-defense with deadly force if someone comes at you with deadly force--like for like, where you stand.

You are correct. So long as you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger you can shoot. The main failing with this particular law is that it doesn't have a clause that says something to the effect of "unless you are the aggressor."

 

Basically, you can initiate a confrontation and if you feel that the person poses a threat to you then you can shoot them. It's very poorly thought out.

 

Here's a good quick breakdown of the law by the NYT. http://www.nytimes.c...ground-law-says

 

Thanks for the info Carlfense. Very informational link and a required read, IMO, to discuss this issue.

 

And 'SkersRule, your use of 'rent-a-cop' implies that Zimmerman was trained and sanctioned. He was a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain (again--per the local police, there wasn't an official neighborhood watch program in that neighborhood) with a concealed handgun license. Also, don't forget that Zimmerman called 911 on the youth, and the operator advised him not to engage the boy, but he did it anyway.

 

Now, I actually support concealed handgun licenses, provided that the requisite training and tests stay in place (and that it isn't just given out freely like a driver's license in most states). One of the first classes you have to take in Texas is about you and the law, and how shooting someone above the waist is considered attempted murder, and anything below it is aggravated assault. If you think there's going to even be a sliver of a question about how you acted, you shoot your aggressor below the waist.

 

Unless Zimmerman was either high, drunk, or just bat s**t insane, he had to know that his actions would be considered questionable after calling 999 and disobeying/disregarding their instructions. The fact that the local police failed to drug or alcohol test Zimmerman immediately after the incident is pure incompetence IMO.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Fox coming in strong with reporting this issue, saying the hoodie was just as much to blame as Zimmerman for Trayvon's death.

 

http://thinkprogress...trayvon-martin/

[johnnyrodgers20]

The political tie-in is that FL had passed a law that basically allows people to shoot first and ask questions later...The police declined to even arrest the shooter because of the "stand your ground" law. This, despite the fact that most seem to agree that the shooter was the original aggressor.

 

Not to defend the law (as its implementation through Florida's legislature was suspect thanks to the fiscal lubrication of the NRA), but my understanding of it is that one is entitled to self-defense with deadly force if someone comes at you with deadly force--like for like, where you stand.

 

Unless the iced tea was laced with cyanide and the Skittles were evil nanobots, there's no reasonable way the boy's attack could be construed as deadly force.

 

---

 

And to make sure folks are aware, the Police really fouled this up from the beginning--Zimmerman was not drug or alcohol tested after the incident...but the dead body of Trayvon Martin was drug and alcohol tested as it sat in the Coroner's Office for three days before his parents were made aware of their son's death. No one from the Police bothered to inform Trayvon's parents, and they had already reported him missing.

 

The body had Trayvon's cell phone on it, including the most recent number dialed of his girlfriend who heard the whole thing go down from her end on the phone live. One would think the police could have looked up the last numbers on the phone and dialed his parents or girlfriend to let them know...

 

---

 

The bolded statement is a little misleading counselor as the defendent was on a neighborhood watch and the teen was a stranger in the community.

 

Johnny, it's already been out in the news that Zimmerman was a 'self-appointed' neighborhood watch captain, and that no organized Neighborhood Watch program (read: registered w/local police) existed in this community. I haven't seen any retractions on this point yet.

 

 

I did not know that. As I have said many times I have two little ones and as much as I love to watch the news I have other priorities. I just saw a news clip yesterday on this incident and while they gave more information about Zimmerman they did not go into detail about the neighborhood watch. So many mystries but Zimmerman appears to in trouble the more information comes out about the incident. The sad thing in all of this, as any other tragedy, is that no matter what happens to Zimmerman a family lost a son, brother, nephew, cousin that will never be with them again!!

[huKSer]

Fox coming in strong with reporting this issue, saying the hoodie was just as much to blame as Zimmerman for Trayvon's death.

 

http://thinkprogress...trayvon-martin/

Not Fox, Geraldo

[huKSer]

I think Zimmerman was itching to use his gun, and who the victim was didn't matter. If I was mouthing off and took a swing at someone (while I am on the phone with my girl friend and holding onto a bag of scittles and a bottle of tea) some one pulls out a gun on me I would become VERY compliant.

 

As egregious an act that Zimmerman did, the local police were the biggest criminals.

[Whistlebritches]

As egregious an act that Zimmerman did, the local police were the biggest criminals.

 

Exactly. Arrest him and at least charge him with manslaughter. Collect the evidence and let a DA or grand jury decide what/if any case is justified.