HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » NAACP: Stand Your Ground ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:46 PM

NAACP: Stand Your Ground Law Not to Blame in Taryvon Martin Shooting

at least that is what the CEO told Amy Goodman.

http://content.bitsontherun.com/previews/zzrWTwGH-dh3Zgtip

What can I say, other than that I agree. Something tells me that was not the answer Amy was expecting.

46 replies, 3477 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply NAACP: Stand Your Ground Law Not to Blame in Taryvon Martin Shooting (Original post)
gejohnston Mar 2012 OP
Edweird Mar 2012 #1
madinmaryland Mar 2012 #2
Edweird Mar 2012 #25
SpencerShay Mar 2012 #18
Edweird Mar 2012 #24
rustydog Mar 2012 #37
derby378 Mar 2012 #46
ProSense Mar 2012 #3
gejohnston Mar 2012 #4
jpak Mar 2012 #5
ProSense Mar 2012 #6
ellisonz Mar 2012 #12
TheKentuckian Mar 2012 #28
Hoyt Mar 2012 #16
Edweird Mar 2012 #26
ProSense Mar 2012 #35
Edweird Mar 2012 #45
X_Digger Mar 2012 #7
enough Mar 2012 #8
Mojorabbit Mar 2012 #9
ProSense Mar 2012 #11
Edweird Mar 2012 #27
pipoman Mar 2012 #31
ProSense Mar 2012 #36
pipoman Mar 2012 #39
ProSense Mar 2012 #41
pipoman Mar 2012 #44
hwmnbn Mar 2012 #10
gejohnston Mar 2012 #13
loyalsister Mar 2012 #14
gejohnston Mar 2012 #19
loyalsister Mar 2012 #21
gejohnston Mar 2012 #32
loyalsister Mar 2012 #33
gejohnston Mar 2012 #34
movonne Mar 2012 #15
Hoyt Mar 2012 #17
L0oniX Mar 2012 #38
Hoyt Mar 2012 #42
loyalsister Mar 2012 #20
enough Mar 2012 #22
loyalsister Mar 2012 #29
tularetom Mar 2012 #23
npk Mar 2012 #30
Hoyt Mar 2012 #43
MrScorpio Mar 2012 #40

Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:53 PM

1. Yeah, but it won't stop the gun grabbers or South/Florida bashers.

 

They are conflating a Hispanic with a Jewish sounding name with the KKK and the Stand Your Ground law with the ability to shoot whoever you want. Facts and honesty aren't really their 'thing'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Edweird (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:57 PM

2. After you said "gun grabbers" you lost any respectability that you had.

Does that make you a "gun-thumper"??



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #2)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:19 PM

25. I'm pro Bill Of Rights.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Edweird (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:00 PM

18. GUN NUT FAIL.

 



"They are conflating a Hispanic with a Jewish sounding name with the KKK"

There were Jewish Nazi collaborators, FYI, and blacks owned slaves. Willful ignorance is obviously your “thing.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SpencerShay (Reply #18)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:12 PM

24. I'm not talking about Nazis or slave owners - I'm talking about the Klan.

 

The Klan is what the Hispanic named Zimmerman is being conflated with - not Nazis or slave owners. The shooter had the same odds of being a member of the Klan as the kid he shot. Your post is EXACTLY the kind dishonest zealotry to which I am referring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Edweird (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:07 PM

37. The gun grabbers? Thos famously effective people

who have taken my guns away from me? Oh wait,
I still own and possess my weapons!

There is still a 2nd amendment! Gun-grabbers huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustydog (Reply #37)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 07:45 PM

46. Thanks in part to those of us who wouldn't let up

You have to admit that the 5-4 ruling on DC v. Heller was waaaay too close. It should have been more lopsided in Heller's favor, but c'est la vie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 04:59 PM

3. What

"Something tells me that was not the answer Amy was expecting."

...does that mean? I heard Ben Jealous say what most people have been saying: that the law is being misinterpreted and misused.

The fact is that this is a horrible law.

Opponents Of Florida’s 2005 ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law Predicted ‘Racially Motivated Killings’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002459977

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:03 PM

4. if you think SYG is horrible,

the duty to retreat law that preceded it was worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:04 PM

5. SYG = legalized murder

get over it

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:05 PM

6. Is

"if you think SYG is horrible, the duty to retreat law that preceded it was worse. "

...that suppose to justify a horrible law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:32 PM

12. He thinks it elevates violent criminals above himself. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:30 PM

28. Don't compare the law to the almighty...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:43 PM

16. That's true, only if you carry a gun and are looking for a good opportunity to use all your training

and preparation to shoot a man who might even be unarmed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:22 PM

26. I'm a Florida resident and I'm pro SYG. You can be as much of a coward as you choose.

 

I, for one, am glad I am not REQUIRED to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Edweird (Reply #26)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:50 PM

35. So

"I'm a Florida resident and I'm pro SYG. You can be as much of a coward as you choose."

...who was the "coward" in the current situation: Zimmerman or Martin?

It's a stupid law. You can defend it all you want to. It's stupid!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #35)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 07:40 PM

45. Zimmerman has nothing to do with SYG. He was clearly the aggressor and therefore outside SYG.

 

The fact that you are either unable or unwilling to grasp that is telling. The law is fine - the corruption in Sanford is not. The two have nothing to do with each other. Even the NAACP gets it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:06 PM

7. My, that sounds familiar.

Glad to hear someone repeat what I've been saying all along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:09 PM

8. I think this is correct. The problem is the arbitrary abdication of law enforcement by the police.


I actually think the immediate furor over Stand Your Ground was generated as a smokescreen to confuse the issue and take the focus off the outrageous behavior of the police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:18 PM

9. I agree. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:23 PM

11. That's

"The problem is the arbitrary abdication of law enforcement by the police."

...the problem with bad laws. The fact that law enforcement and the laws supporters have been using this law to justify this kind of situation set a horrible precedent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:23 PM

27. SYG or not the shooter is the child of politically connected people in a clearly corrupt small town.

 

The outcome would still be the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:58 PM

31. What is your solution?

Leave people who defend themselves from an aggressor in a position of having to sell their belongings and spend their kids college fund to legally defend themselves against prosecution, then legally defend themselves against the family of the attacker?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #31)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:02 PM

36. First

What is your solution?

Leave people who defend themselves from an aggressor in a position of having to sell their belongings and spend their kids college fund to legally defend themselves against prosecution, then legally defend themselves against the family of the attacker?

...repeal the stupid law. Second, employ some fucking common sense. Three, if someone shoots an unarmed person, the very least that should happen is an arrest, investigation and trial.

Instead, and because of this law, people are debating whether or not:

the killer's nose is broken

he said the "endearing" word "coon," "goon" or "punk"

he's "white" or "white hispanic"


When a law results in a cover up and a bunch of absurd discussions, it's time to rectify the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #36)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:26 PM

39. Yeah,

and it was time to rectify the situation when some police/prosecutors couldn't be trusted with the common sense standard and charged and destroyed people who were the intended victims, then let civil suits go forward which the dead thug's family are claiming damages. Second guessing if the intended victim could have done something other than kill their attacker, or used 'excessive force'. All these things sound easy enough, they just result in people who are accosted while going about their business being financially ruined because of the acts of some thug. This law was put in place to protect the innocent. It could be a 'catch 22'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #39)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:36 PM

41. Wait

Yeah, and it was time to rectify the situation when some police/prosecutors couldn't be trusted with the common sense standard and charged and destroyed people who were the intended victims, then let civil suits go forward which the dead thug's family are claiming damages.

...if the law was intended to rectify that situation, it failed miserably.

Second guessing if the intended victim could have done something other than kill their attacker, or used 'excessive force'.

Are you arguing from the perspective that Zimmerman's nose is broken to claim that the dead young man may have used "excessive force"?

All these things sound easy enough, they just result in people who are accosted while going about their business being financially ruined because of the acts of some thug. This law was put in place to protect the innocent. It could be a 'catch 22'.

"Easy" never crossed my mind, justice did. Martin was "accosted while going about" his "business" and, again, the law "put in place to protect the innocent" failed him miserably.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #41)

Mon Mar 26, 2012, 12:02 AM

44. I'm not saying this incident

is justified or that it isn't. Not enough is known yet. Certainly the initial reports made it sound that Zimmerman provoked this incident.

I really wasn't commenting on this case in particular, I was commenting on the reason for the law in the first place. This case aside, in general..It is true that more people are murdered using hands and feet than with rifles, so whether or not an attacker has a knife or gun is immaterial to whether the person is a threat or if a shooting is justified. The absense of a weapon doesn't automatically prove a person was innocent.

I'm not convinced that there aren't far more people who benefit than who suffer because of this law. In the same way that alcohol has killed many, many innocent people yet nobody is calling for alcohol prohibition. Many things which are legal have a side effect of hurting innocent people, while they are statistically beneficial. I want to see a study of the numbers. I don't believe in legislating based on anecdote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:22 PM

10. I wonder if the NRA and repubs would support giving all young black males...

handguns and assuring them they have the right to "stand their ground" whenever they feel thtreatened?.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hwmnbn (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:37 PM

13. Let me put it this way,

all of the gun blogs I read wants Zimmerman in jail.

handguns and assuring them they have the right to "stand their ground" whenever they feel thtreatened?.

Let me put it to you this way. If Martin were a middle aged guy wearing a fishing vest instead of a hoodie in my county, we would not be having this conversation. Rush and Beck would be complaining about SYG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hwmnbn (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:41 PM

14. Exactly

It is a reasonable to argue that the SYG law favored Trayvon in that incident. It brings us to the question of whether it would have been applied equally.
It is clear that these laws are here to stay. I don't like them, but I do agree that the potential for discrimination in enforcement is something that should be addressed.

In this case the question of who had the ground on which to stand and why can be debated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalsister (Reply #14)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:21 PM

19. depends

if it happened in Gainsville or Tampa: Yes
Sanford: probably not.
Cedar Key (a small island town near Rosewood), Yankeetown, the panhandle: No fucking way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #19)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:31 PM

21. Can you clarify?

I am curious what you are answering in reference to the regions you mentioned. Whether the discussion could happen or whether it has already been defined clearly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalsister (Reply #21)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 09:58 PM

32. my bad


It is a reasonable to argue that the SYG law favored Trayvon in that incident. It brings us to the question of whether it would have been applied equally.

If Zimmerman was the one that died, the law would protect Trayvon. That is if it is properly applied. The regions are "what are the odds" of the law being properly applied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #32)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:10 PM

33. Thanks

That definitely helps.
Is there a maybe anywhere?
Where is the federal court where a (thus far, hypothetical) federally enforced hate crime would be prosecuted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalsister (Reply #33)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:45 PM

34. Citrus, Hernando and Pasco counties would be a maybe

IIRC, the federal district court is in Tampa.
My boss was telling me a story that some racist made the mistake of attacking the wrong African American guy a few years agot. Not only was the African American armed, he was the sheriff of another county.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hwmnbn (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:41 PM

15. Probably not....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hwmnbn (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 05:46 PM

17. Nope, right wing NRA supports right wingers arming up.

Good question and observation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #17)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:12 PM

38. I wonder if they also support the Black Panthers arming up?

I remember back in the 60's when I lived in San Fransisco the BP's did arm up and were out on the street with guns. The good ol days ...I loved that city back then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:38 PM

42. As M Ali might say: BPs never did anything to me.

I'd like to have some serious time in San Francisco.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 06:25 PM

20. This trial may give a clear picture of the bed we have made

There are cases all over the country where left leaning courts are ruling in the name of equality on gun issues. It is probably not what many members of the NRA and definitely the RW had in mind.

"We refuse to allow law-abiding Americans to be treated as second-class citizens when it comes to this constitutional right, which applies to poor people, too," said NRA lobbyist Chris Cox

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/26/BAUA11FN68.DTL#ixzz1qAa7ogRV

Public housing is home to former felons, women who are fleeing domestic abuse situations, and people who have disabilities or experienced mild - severe mental illness.
Equality in the application of the SC interpretation is something we need to take seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalsister (Reply #20)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 07:33 PM

22. Trial? So far there is no trial coming, and I don't think we can assume there will be.

That's the whole problem here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to enough (Reply #22)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:33 PM

29. I agree

I was speaking optimistically\idealistically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:11 PM

23. Perhaps someone would be interested in training young black males to stand their ground

Maybe people like Zimmerman wouldn't be so brave if they suspected the blacks they were stalking might be armed.

I'm all for it. The 2nd amendment to the US Constitution applies to all Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tularetom (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 08:47 PM

30. No offense tularetom

But I suspect that is what Zimmerman thought. That is why I don't agree with this line of thinking. The whole damn issue we are facing in this country is that "people like Zimmerman" already believe that every young black man is armed and carrying a gun. That is why so many young black people are shot and killed by not only average citizens but by law enforcement. It is that prevailing thought process that IMO led to this entire tragedy. If Zimmerman had seen a white young kid walking though his neighborhood he never would have thought that the boy would be armed, but because of the way the media has portrayed crime in the country so many people think that when they see a young black man walking through their neighborhood they automatically assume that the person is armed, and it heightens the tension from the very beginning. As a teacher of mine once told me, a young black man in this country has to be so very careful in how they react to a person they meet on the street even their on neighborhood, because so many people will see them as a threat, even though 99% of young black men are no threat at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to npk (Reply #30)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:42 PM

43. + A Bunch!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Original post)

Sun Mar 25, 2012, 11:33 PM

40. It wasn't responsible for him getting shot

It was responsible for his shooter to be given such hands off treatment by the police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread