General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSay it's all true...
Say Trayvon confronted Zimmerman. Say he beat his coward ass to a pulp. Pardon me for asking but doesn't confronting a man who is stalking you fall under the FUCKING STAND YOUR GROUND law?
Zimmerman admits stalking the kid. The kid "feels threatened" and goes after Zimmerman. According to the law Zimmerman is being protected by, the kid is perfectly within his rights to beat the shit out of Zimmerman.
The circular logic the right wing is displaying astounds me.
It's all moot anyway, the kid is gone, Zimmerman needs to be on trial. Let a jury sort this shit out.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)Don't buy it for a single second.
blm
(112,920 posts)Are kids taught throughout their childhood and teens to scream and fight when adults approach them close enough to grab them? Yes. They are taught that by responsible parents and law enforcement mentors who train the kids, usually in school settings.
Was the adult told THAT NIGHT to NOT do exactly what he chose to do? Yes.
That should be the end of the "But he hit me" defense from the adult.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)Among other reasons, Florida self defense laws (like every other self defense law in the country that I'm aware of) very specifically does not extend to the aggressor in an incident. You can't instigate a fight with someone and then kill them in self defense. Zimmerman became the aggressor once he started pursuing Martin, at which point his ability to claim self defense went away. For that matter, even if you're attacked first by someone, you can't pursue them afterward and still invoke self defense, even if they committed a crime against you or someone else.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)It's unlikely to go federal unless the DOJ decides to try and pull it there on hate-crimes grounds, asserting that it wouldn't be properly tried by the state. And it's even more unlikely that anyone is going to let the local officials so much as touch it anymore after the questions that have been raised on that side. So this will likely be charged by the grand jury and tried by a state prosecutor in Orlando.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
slackmaster
(60,567 posts)The grand jury will convene on April 10.
Johnson20
(315 posts)speculation has got to stop. Some of the best investigators in the world are working on this! For God's sake lets wait and see what they come up with, please.
We're not allowed to discuss it anymore?
Johnson20
(315 posts)It's just that some of the posts have been absolutly preposterous. I have always come to DU thinking that most folks here were above some of the comments being made and generally base comments on reason, not emotion.
FLAprogressive
(6,771 posts)WillowTree
(5,325 posts)Last edited Mon Mar 26, 2012, 08:42 PM - Edit history (1)
Certainly within his rights to confront him and demand to know what his problem is, though I would argue that if one doesn't know who the guy is or what his problem is (or if he's got a weapon), it should only be done with acceptance of the fact that it could mean opening a Pandora's box. But no, merely being followed by some jerk or "feeling threatened" does not, by any stretch, give anyone the right to "beat the shit" out of him.
By your line of logic, if I'm walking down the street and there's a man.......say, a scary BLACK man.......walking a short distance behind me, and he keeps walking a short distance behind me, or even draws a little closer.......and I get to "feeling threatened", I would be within my rights to turn suddenly while yanking a switchblade out of my pocket and deposit it between his third and fourth ribs.
There's a long, long distance between "feeling threatened" and responding with violence.