Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

[Bubba_Switzler]

Maybe he would and maybe he wouldn’t. Dead men tell no tales. But Zimmerman was armed. That we know. Thus, the force used by Martin was still in self-defense.

Your conclusion does not follow from the premise and does not fit the evidence available.

In a fight, it is hard to know exactly when to let up. It is possible also that Martin let off and received a bullet for his mercy.

It is possible that Martin was shot by a lone gunman in a grassy knoll.

Absolutely. I do not doubt this crime is getting more than its due attention. I also do not doubt that there is at least probable cause for an arrest, which would allow a jury to decide the case and allow time to cool emotions.

The police and DA decided otherwise and they had direct access to the evidence.

The irony is that under less politicized circumstances, the same people would be demanding better to let 10 guilty men free than allow one man to be unjustly convicted. So much for that.

 

[pnewton]

It is possible that Martin was shot by a lone gunman in a grassy knoll.

There is no grassy knoll. There is a bullet in Trayvon. While we do not have all the evidence, we do have a great deal. As the Chief of Police withdrew from the case, excuse me if I have no confidence in such a man. As I said earlier, in my opinion, it was a cowardly decision.

 

[Nicko]

Here the section you quoted. Hows it apply?

Sec. 53a-18. Use of reasonable physical force or deadly physical force generally.
The use of physical force upon another person which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal

“under any of the following circumstances”

What you are missing, Gary, is that a claim of self-defence is an affirmative defence. In other words, by claiming self-defence a person is admitting to actions that would normally constitute assault or homicide. The burden of proof is then on them to show that their actions were justified.

All legal systems in the world, let alone the US, have a provision for self-defence.

It seems that you are unfamiliar with what the term means. Please educate yourself.

In the United States, it is illegal to harm another person intentionally.

That is the law at its most basic level. The names given to crimes involving such harm range from battery to murder, but the general idea is simple: If you poke someone in the eye, you can safely assume that you’re breaking a law.

However, there are circumstances that may justify your action, or at least mitigate the punishment. These vary, but the relevant consideration to this discussion is common sense: self-defense.

If you poke someone’s eye to prevent him from poking you, are you still committing a crime?

Well, not really, but it’s more complicated than that. A killing is a killing; an eye-poking is an eye-poking; a stabbing is a stabbing, and so forth. If the evidence supports that you did such a thing, and you’re prosecuted for it, and you don’t deny it, then it’s a crime. You can, however, make the case that you were legally justified in your actions, and if you can prove that, then you’re clear. But while establishing that you did the eye-poking is the prosecution’s problem, establishing justification is yours—your burden of proof.

useofforce.us/

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

There is no grassy knoll. There is a bullet in Trayvon. While we do not have all the evidence, we do have a great deal. As the Chief of Police withdrew from the case, excuse me if I have no confidence in such a man. As I said earlier, in my opinion, it was a cowardly decision.

I think cowardly is too strong a term. If he were a coward he would have arrested Zimmerman and dumped the problem in the DA’s lap. By withdrawing from the case has said, in effect, “be my guest,” a very charitable gesture toward the mob without harming Zimmerman, who he obviously believes to be innocent of any crime.

To expect more in the face of this lynch mob is unreasonable.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Not really, the guy no-doubt should be in prison. No doubt.

And I wear hoodies up here all winter casual.

I think its an attrocity. But I don’t think the law is wrong, the police should definately have arrested the fool immediately.

Yet we must understand, wearing hoodies and running around with your hands in your pocket presents a image which is widely known in the inner-city today. My son and his friends on the high school basketball team all run around together like this. They went to Harlem Tues night to see a rap show.

But theres a point with rational thinking where projecting this image will present an issue. But hey these kids all know exactly how I feel about it. Projecting a gangter image is a problem. I walk around with a hoodie and do not do that? I pray they all don’t get stupid when they do go out. But hey they listen to me on the basketball court, and about Christ, so I suspect they have enough respect to think about all I tell them.

Well, thank God we have a legal system and not trial by public opinion in this country.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I am willing to put $500 on anyone here who is willing to wager that this incident is turned into a gun control issue. Considering the fed is already involved when this doesn’t involve a federal employee, didn’t cross state lines, or any other reason why the feds would need to be involved.

I hate it when I’m right all the time.

Sen. Chuck Schumer is calling on the Justice Department to investigate so-called “Stand Your Ground” laws following the fatal shooting of an unarmed Florida teen. The law, a version of which was enacted in Florida in 2005, allows for individuals to use deadly force – even outside their home – if they feel threatened.

Read more: foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/25/schumer-calls-for-federal-probe-stand-your-ground-laws-after-florida-shooting/?test=latestnews#ixzz1qB2sv8AX

 

[pnewton]

To expect more in the face of this lynch mob is unreasonable.

I guess I have a different view of what is reasonable.

 

[havana1]

I hate it when I’m right all the time.

Sen. Chuck Schumer is calling on the Justice Department to investigate so-called “Stand Your Ground” laws following the fatal shooting of an unarmed Florida teen. The law, a version of which was enacted in Florida in 2005, allows for individuals to use deadly force – even outside their home – if they feel threatened.

If they FEEL threatened?? Oh, so it’s a touchy-feely thing? No evidence (admissible evidence or any other kind), but based upon how you FEEL? Wow. We are talking about the same state who can’t even empanel a jury correctly…? I agree with Sen Schumer. If Sanford’s local law enforcement has proven itself as credible as the Keystone Kops - only thing missing in all these Fox News stories is a pie in the face and a laugh track - I’m all for federal intervention. **My prayers continue to go out to Trayvon Martin’s parents - who seem to have been forgotten in all of this. **

 

[catharina]

There is no grassy knoll. There is a bullet in Trayvon. While we do not have all the evidence, we do have a great deal. As the Chief of Police withdrew from the case, excuse me if I have no confidence in such a man. As I said earlier, in my opinion, it was a cowardly decision.

The “step aside” by the chief and prosecutor raise more questions.
This police department was buried to its throat just over a year ago
when the son of a lieutenant was let go after he (white) brutally beat
a homeless (black) man. So things would have been - except that a
video existed and proved the son’s guilt. The Sanford PD created its
own very recent history of racist behavior.

 

[Lujack]

Now all you need to do is find some evidence to support this theory.

Its a shame that Martin never called anyone to tell them that he was afraid because a strange man was following. If only he had a girlfriend he could have called…

If by “public outcry” you mean a lynch mob, yeah, I would prefer to rule of law to that.

Now, as I said before, if there is some new evidence then that might well justify a reexamination of the case and perhaps an arrest and prosecution. Making up theories does not constitute new evidence nor does the agitation of the mob or the grandstanding of mob agitators with political agendas.

The evidence on the scene justified Zimmerman’s arrest and the police were wrong for not arresting him on the spot.

 

[Lujack]

I hate it when I’m right all the time.

Sen. Chuck Schumer is calling on the Justice Department to investigate so-called “Stand Your Ground” laws following the fatal shooting of an unarmed Florida teen. The law, a version of which was enacted in Florida in 2005, allows for individuals to use deadly force – even outside their home – if they feel threatened.

Read more: foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/25/schumer-calls-for-federal-probe-stand-your-ground-laws-after-florida-shooting/?test=latestnews#ixzz1qB2sv8AX

“Stand Your Ground” isn’t a gun control law.

 

[maryjk]

Its a shame that Martin never called anyone to tell them that he was afraid because a strange man was following. If only he had a girlfriend he could have called…

The real shame is that he didn’t call 911. That way it would be on tape, rather than hearsay.

The evidence on the scene justified Zimmerman’s arrest and the police were wrong for not arresting him on the spot.

His bloody nose and lacerated head?

 

[Bill1940]

“Stand Your Ground” isn’t a gun control law.

The purpose of the Florida law is to prevent unjust prosecution of an innocent person who must defend his or her own life when away from home. It does not afford cover for vigilantism. It seems, we don’t know who was fleeing whom in this situation. The facts of this case should determine its outcome and let us hope politics stays out of it. Accordingly, President Obama should not have said anything about it. He knows no more of the facts than we. There is a witness, and a hope that justice will be done. To call the Florida law a “Shoot First”" law is unjust, because untrue. Senator Schumer is a notorious enemy of the Second Amendment, by the way.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Its a shame that Martin never called anyone to tell them that he was afraid because a strange man was following. If only he had a girlfriend he could have called…The evidence on the scene justified Zimmerman’s arrest and the police were wrong for not arresting him on the spot.

The police and DA drew a different conclusion from the available evidence. Whether the mob would have arrested Zimmerman (or just lynched him on the spot) is another matter.

We will await the decision of the grand jury upon reviewing the evidence. I don’t think they will have any difficultly finding and arresting Zimmerman if they come to a different conclusion.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The purpose of the Florida law is to prevent unjust prosecution of an innocent person who must defend his or her own life when away from home.

Wrong the purpose of the law was to prvent Unjust Crime Victims not produce them. Prosecution has ZIP to do with the Police, that applies in COURT

And it exists in 26 states the US of A and has ZIP to do with this case F Lee Bailey. This is a nut who stalked and killed a kid with a bag of Skittles in his pocket going home to watch the game. He did not commit a crime, should not have been followed, and the man certainly has NO business walking in ANOTHERS home in pursuit. Your LOST.

WHAT CRIME did the kid commit? Why was he stalked? Why wasn’t 911 called while he was stalking the kid? The case stinks and Zimmerman should have been arrested immediately. The Mans actions are not covered by the Shoot First Law.

To and boot he was a fake Block Watch participant, who do not even carry firearms. You ever even see the Guardian Angels carry semi autos? A NUTm who what should have been let out and given his Gun back with PTA for court? While the Barney Fife crew figures out what to do, and family buries a DEAD Teenage son?

Your lost.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The police and DA drew a different conclusion from the available evidence. Whether the mob would have arrested Zimmerman (or just lynched him on the spot) is another matter.

We will await the decision of the grand jury upon reviewing the evidence. I don’t think they will have any difficultly finding and arresting Zimmerman if they come to a different conclusion.

The DA shouldn’t have been involved until after the arrest. And no hes going to court, bond or jail, just as he should have from the get go.

The mobs not lynching anyone but in your illusional mind. And there wouldn’t be a mob if he was arrested as he should have been IMMEDIATELY.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The real shame is that he didn’t call 911. That way it would be on tape, rather than hearsay.

Sure is.

Well when you run around playing Superman I guess 911 isn’t on the list. But ya think?

His bloody nose and lacerated head?

Mean what, the kid scared fought for his life the last few moments of his life before he was murdered in Cold Blood? What fingerprints are on the weapon and what other weapon exits? OH well if there was an “arrest” maybe we could have sorted all this chaos out “first”. Correctly.

What weapon did the kid have? Oh right NONE. An Ice Tea and Bag of Skittles.

 

[GaryTaylor]

This is the relevant portion. The rest simpy defines those cases where self defense applies and a death (homicide) is not a crime.

As a general rule, the police don’t arrest where there no crime.

I’m done with this. If you don’t get it by now you never will.

.

Right, and you didn’t show me how anything there applies because it doesn’t “WHICH YOU SIGHTED” the statue and I put it in the cut and paste!! Justified hoimicide can be proven in COURT. Period. There is no going home for Self Defense is such a situation which is to get to MY POINT. Different state laws. 26 which have the similiar as Fla. The rest VARY. Its innocent till proven guily in Court, not the street.

A kid was shot for no reason there was a Crime and its called MURDER. Stick to what you do know, Instead of what you don’t know.

Your getting arrested here and thats IT. NO GRAND JURY none I’ve seen, ever, BOND or JAIL. Now they say they have one, heard of one, never heard of it used.

The only thing relevant is IF you fall into one of those provisions I sighted. I think you should move on to talking about something you DO KNOW. Instead of what I witnessed for well over a half of century. Your not going home in this case here Period. Shooting someone in your business, your home etc different situation.

Your on ground which you do not know, move on what you do know.

IF a Crime was committed…its a forgone conclusion with a BODY dead by GSWs and in the mans own home by a killer who does NOT live there. IF theres no justified homicide which can be proven, then you would have to prove that at the Grand Jury or in Court IF you have the evidence. WHAT CRIME DID THE KID COMMIT? Well thats why Grand Jurys and Courts exist. And mob situations won’t

Shoot First doesn’t include STALKING with a Firearm. Its a crime prevention law. not one to create homicides. On civilians watching the Final Four NCAA.
And let me clue you in on something, I really don’t appreciate your “Babbling” comments and attitude. If you can’t speak respectful as a Catholic here YOU should move on. An while your entitled to you OPINION exuse me if I have mine. There like pennies everyone has one. Mighty grand of you to believe only YOURS counts F Lee Baily.

You need to get over yourself. People are upset and they should be upset. If it was my son I’d be in rage. Probly would be arrested down their for disorderly conduct. Thats if its a crime their.

 

[GaryTaylor]

The purpose of the Florida law is to prevent unjust prosecution of an innocent person who must defend his or her own life when away from home. It does not afford cover for vigilantism. It seems, we don’t know who was fleeing whom in this situation. The facts of this case should determine its outcome and let us hope politics stays out of it. Accordingly, President Obama should not have said anything about it. He knows no more of the facts than we. There is a witness, and a hope that justice will be done. To call the Florida law a “Shoot First”" law is unjust, because untrue. Senator Schumer is a notorious enemy of the Second Amendment, by the way.

No its to prevent crimes not prosecution, and it doesn’t matter if you are not the innocent person, I could be just happening by and help prevent a felony, but I agree the "Shoot First: is valid. It just does not apply here, and because of Nuts like this a valid law becomes in jeopardy.

Hunting of Stalking on the streets of America isn’t shoot first.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by Lujack
I think it is in some ways ironic that Zimmerman’s defenders urge us to be patient, leave things to the professionals, let them handle it…had Mr. Zimmerman taken their advice on the night that he shot Trayvon Martin dead, had he listened to the advice of the 911 dispatchers and left things to the police instead of trying to be a vigilante…

I just can’t help but feel if this had been a police officer, he would be walking away because the community realizes that officers put their life on the line and sometimes make bad judgment calls.

Zimmerman did not have that kind of protection in a" neighborhood watch" situation. He may have feared for his life after 46 calls to the police and felt it necessary and urged others to carry guns to protect themselves but he had no such protection. The gated community would not protect nor the police he kept calling and to stick his own neck out, many would consider him a “fool”.