HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » "The Trayvon Martin ...

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:01 PM

 

"The Trayvon Martin case exposes the realities of a new generation of self-defense laws"

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57398005-504083/the-trayvon-martin-case-exposes-the-realities-of-a-new-generation-of-self-defense-laws/

The Trayvon Martin case exposes the realities of a new generation of self-defense laws

The article essentially points out that these "stand your ground" laws make it easy for people to claim self-defense during a shooting, with the benchmark for what defines "reasonably fearing for your life" being hard to quantify, though not limitless as the case where the guy returned to an injured criminal and finished him off shows.



38 replies, 4559 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 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply "The Trayvon Martin case exposes the realities of a new generation of self-defense laws" (Original post)
Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 OP
MADem Mar 2012 #1
ellisonz Mar 2012 #3
spin Mar 2012 #10
Politicalboi Mar 2012 #2
gejohnston Mar 2012 #4
MADem Mar 2012 #5
gejohnston Mar 2012 #6
MADem Mar 2012 #8
BiggJawn Mar 2012 #31
MADem Mar 2012 #32
spin Mar 2012 #12
gejohnston Mar 2012 #13
spin Mar 2012 #14
gejohnston Mar 2012 #15
TPaine7 Mar 2012 #7
E-Mag Mar 2012 #9
spin Mar 2012 #11
Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #19
spin Mar 2012 #22
Logical Mar 2012 #27
chrisa Mar 2012 #16
ellisonz Mar 2012 #17
GreenStormCloud Mar 2012 #18
Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #38
Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #20
gejohnston Mar 2012 #21
jpak Mar 2012 #23
gejohnston Mar 2012 #24
gejohnston Mar 2012 #25
AzWorker Mar 2012 #28
gejohnston Mar 2012 #29
AzWorker Mar 2012 #30
MADem Mar 2012 #33
AzWorker Mar 2012 #34
MADem Mar 2012 #35
eqfan592 Mar 2012 #37
ManiacJoe Mar 2012 #26
friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #36

Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:05 PM

1. You never know who might attack you with candy and ice cream. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:28 PM

3. And the dreaded can of ice tea...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:25 PM

10. Self delete. Replied to wrong post. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:12 PM

2. This is crazy shit

So anyone you feel is a threat, you can shoot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:41 PM

4. is this a replay of Bernhard Goetz?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz#Public_reaction
He was accused of being racist and firing because the targets were black, even though the facts showed otherwise.
We will see what where the investigation and grand jury goes.
So far there is nothing but speculation. I think the media is poisoning the possible jury pool with such speculation. So far, I'm leaning towards to frying the guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:04 PM

5. You're over 20--that was nearly 30 years ago!

The "Subway Vigilante"--didn't he get acquitted of everything save carrying an unregistered firearm, or something? That was when NYC was not "Disney-fied" and Times Square was not a place for children. It's a very different NYC, these days.

This teen wasn't mugging anyone, though--he was going to the store for treats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #5)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:11 PM

6. Way over 20

did you think I'm some kid in mom's basement? I was living out of the US at the time. True, that was his only conviction. Before that, Austin Weeks (who also had an illegal gun) shot some white racist and was not charged even for the gun.
I agree with you in this case, that is what it looks like. Like I said, I looks like this guy should fry.
My point was more about poisoning possible jury pools with speculation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 09:28 PM

8. No, not at all--I was trying to NOT suggest you were an old-ass fart, like me.

Who remembers that name, except for people of a certain age or the rare young adult at the time who wasn't out partying, but instead watched the news?

That was many years ago, when women were wearing too tight Jordache jeans and big hair, and men walked the streets without any shame at all in Members Only jackets!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 19, 2012, 10:39 PM

31. Damn, now you got me mourning my youth...

"... when women were wearing too tight Jordache jeans and big hair..."

I am just flabbergasted as to why this Zimmerman guy hasn't been locked up yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BiggJawn (Reply #31)

Mon Mar 19, 2012, 10:42 PM

32. Hee hee...I wasn't all that young and frisky back then, either, but certainly fresher than today!

I don't get the Zimmerman thing either--he must have sex tapes of the police chief, or something. It's insane that the only way to get justice down in Sanford FL is to call JUSTICE (as in the Department of) in DC!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:34 PM

12. One big difference is that Bernie Goetz was carrying an illegal firearm ...

and he was convicted for doing so.

Bernhard Goetz

Bernhard Hugo Goetz (born November 7, 1947) is an American man best known for shooting four young men who tried to mug him on a New York City Subway train, resulting in his conviction for illegal possession of a firearm. He came to symbolize New Yorkers’ frustrations with the high crime rates of the early 1980s. The incident occurred on a No. 2 train in Manhattan on December 22, 1984. It sparked a nationwide debate on race and crime in major cities, and the legal limits of self-defense.

Goetz fired an unlicensed revolver five times, seriously wounding all the muggers. Following this incident, he was dubbed the "Subway Vigilante" by the New York press, and was both praised and vilified in the media and in public opinion.

He surrendered to police nine days later and was eventually charged with attempted murder, assault, reckless endangerment, and several firearms offenses. A jury found him not guilty of all charges except an illegal firearms possession count, for which he served two-thirds of a one-year sentence. The incident has been cited as a contributing factor to the groundswell movement against urban crime and disorder, and successful National Rifle Association campaigns to loosen restrictions on the concealed carrying of firearms.emphasis added
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz#Public_reaction

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #12)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:38 PM

13. I know, that was not where I was going

I was more concerned about poisoned jury pool and political pressure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #13)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:56 PM

14. He called 911 and was told to wait for the police ...

Had he done so, from what I can infer from the newspaper reports, everything should have ended peacefully.

In my opinion at this time with the information that I have, I feel he should be prosecuted and a jury should decide his fate.

I do feel that biased media reports, political pressure and a tainted jury pool could hurt the chances of acquittal if the shooter did have a valid reason to use legitimate self defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #14)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 12:06 AM

15. the way it is looking

I agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 06:45 PM

7. The new generation of self-defense laws shouldn't apply to the INITIATOR of hostilities.

 

Nor do I believe that they do.

If I follow and challenge a person who is doing nothing wrong, I should expect them to defend themselves. If, in the course of defending themselves I get punched in the face, that's my fault.

Only after I declare my intent to withdraw and actually attempt to withdraw do I have any claim to self-defense.

Based on the facts as they appear to be now, the shooter should be made an example of, "stand your ground" law notwithstanding.

Hopefully the truth of what really happened will come out soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 10:17 PM

9. apparently the 911 audio has been released

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Fri Mar 16, 2012, 11:29 PM

11. A question ...

Suppose that I am innocently walking down the street doing nothing illegal and because my situational awareness has totally failed me, I find myself facing an attacker armed with a gun or a knife at close range. He demands my money and he appears to be very angry and somewhat unstable and I truly feel that no matter what I do, he will either severely injure or even kill me.

He rushes at me with his knife or points his weapon at my head with his finger on the trigger. I manage to draw my firearm and I shoot him, stopping the attack. I may get cut or shot but my actions save my life.

The prosecuting attorney decides that I didn't make an effort to retreat before I drew my weapon. I get prosecuted and the jury decides that the law required me to retreat or run before I could claim legitimate self defense. I go to jail and the street thug or his family sues me. I lose my house and my life savings.

Is this fair?

Let me add that if an armed individual walks up to me and demands my money but I believe that he has no intention of hurting me, I will simply give him my wallet. I can replace my money, my credit and debit cards and my ID far easier than I can my health and I have no desire to end up six feet under if I can avoid it. I have absolutely no wish to ever shoot another person and I hope and pray that I never will. I might be pissed that I got robbed but if I walked away from the situation without injury I wouldn't feel that I was a coward. I would simply be using the advice that my martial arts instructor told my class many years ago.

The newer "Stand Your Ground" law in Florida removes the duty to retreat if attacked in a place you have every right to be. In my opinion, there are times where breaking off an encounter and retreating is the wisest choice. However if faced by someone who is armed and very dangerous, this could lead to being stabbed or shot in the back. If I find myself in an argument or an altercation and I can simply leave, I plan to do so. There is no logical reason to continue a heated disagreement if the results will be violence.

You can and should face an investigation and possibly prosecution in Florida if there is any reason to believe that you didn't use legitimate self defense. Sometimes two people are totally alone and one ends up dead. Such situations would be hard to prosecute under either the old or new versions of the Florida self defense laws. It comes down to the word of supposed victim as the supposed attacker is dead. No real big change there. Often a jury makes the final decision in such cases and that's the way it should be.

In the case mentioned in the OP, I have read that member of the neighborhood watch program called 911 to report a suspicious person. He was informed to merely observe and wait for the police to arrive. Apparently he failed to follow these instructions. In my opinion he should be charged and prosecuted. A jury can determine if he acted appropriately. The jury will be able to review all the evidence and the hours they spend listening to the prosecution and defense will enable them to make a far better decision than we can from reading newspaper reports.

U.S. News: Florida State Attorney Gets Involved in Teen Shooting Case
March 15, 2012
(2:37)


***snip***

Before the confrontation, Zimmerman called 911 reporting a suspicious figure. He was reportedly instructed by dispatch to let the police handle it. But ABC News says it’s found evidence suggesting the police may have responded questionably, saying one officer...

“...corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help. The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.”

Still, police say there’s no evidence that directly contradicts Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. CNN explains Zimmerman is unlikely to be charged, thanks to Florida’s “stand your ground” law.
http://www.newsy.com/videos/florida-state-attorney-gets-involved-in-teen-shooting-case








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #11)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 12:17 PM

19. +1. I agree with everything you said.

If all gun carriers were as level headed as you, fewer folk would object to the practice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #19)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 01:01 PM

22. Thanks for your support. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #11)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 07:12 PM

27. Spin, great post as usual! Spot on! n-t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 01:13 AM

16. As I said before, if someone were following you from the store to your home

in a car, wouldn't you consider that an act of aggression? My first thought would be that this might be a rapist or killer, and I should try to get away ASAP. Trayvon Martin might have attacked the shooter instead of running, which wasn't smart, but the shooter was also a creep who is responsible for this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 03:43 AM

17. Murder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #17)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 06:40 AM

18. For once we agree.

I don't think that this would be covered by "stand your ground" laws as it appears he followed and confronted the kid. Stand-your-ground does not allow you to initiate hostilities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ellisonz (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 20, 2012, 09:25 PM

38. We cannot know it was murder yet.

 

The fact is, we don't know if Zimmerman was threatened or not.

There is currently a witness who says that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman on the ground beating him.

I don't think there are enough facts in this case to make a conclusion yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 12:21 PM

20. Isn't it great when we all agree on something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starboard Tack (Reply #20)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 12:36 PM

21. yes it is


and add underused smilies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 03:24 PM

23. "stand your ground" = legalized murder by racist gun vigilantes

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #23)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 03:43 PM

24. by definition

he could not be a vigilante because he acted alone. legal and murder is also an oxymoron. In Ancient Greece, killing a dolphin was murder. Since there is an investigation, looks like he did not "stand his ground" and was the aggressor. This is starting to look as though the "legalized murder" meme is going to be put the rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 05:53 PM

25. the more I read about this

tend to think that the problem isn't the "stand your ground" law, but Sanford's PD's investigation. FDLE and the feds should step in and the Sanford PD and possibly the voters needs to clean house.

edit to add the link. Check out video at he bottom of page.
http://sandrarose.com/2012/03/911-call-trayvon-martin-cried-for-help-before-gunshot/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #25)

Sun Mar 18, 2012, 08:56 PM

28. Unsure of who is making those pleas for help...

 

But there is one witness that is saying they not only heard the pleas, but witnessed the man do the pleading...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A man who witnessed part of the altercation contacted authorities.

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.

John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.

"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."



Read more: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dp...cation#ixzz1pQAY9Lgm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzWorker (Reply #28)

Sun Mar 18, 2012, 09:15 PM

29. have not seen this one

I have not read this one, thanks.

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.
John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.
"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."


If this account is accurate, that shoots conventional wisdom in the ass. If this account is accurate, it casts doubt on the "racist vigilante" meme and could explain Sanford PD's actions.

That does not mean Zimmerman was correct in confronting the kid, and that does not mean Zimmerman is or is not a racist. It only means that it would make winning a conviction very hard or impossible regardless of the races involved.

Some months ago, a Tampa area kid stabbed his bully to death. The bully and several of his buds surrounded the killer, who reasonably feared for his safety. That is what several neutral witnesses said. It was ruled self-defense, and the bully's parents whined and cried about the injustice of letting a killer go free.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #29)

Mon Mar 19, 2012, 09:36 PM

30. So far it seems to be the only witness that saw the person that was doing the pleading...

 

Oddly enough this angle has not been reported on much since it came out early in the investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzWorker (Reply #28)

Mon Mar 19, 2012, 10:50 PM

33. Voices have recognizable characteristics, and the person yelling "help" can be heard on at least one

of the 911 calls. We'll soon find out if the poor defenseless guy with the gun (??) was the one being beaten up by a kid 100 pounds lighter than him.

Also, there is a problem with your link--a click reveals this:

Sorry, the page you requested was not found.

Please check the URL for mistakes. You can also try using the site navigation or search tool to find your content.


Maybe Fox figured out it was crap? And scrubbed it? I couldn't find it elsewhere on the site, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to AzWorker (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 20, 2012, 12:45 AM

35. Thanks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AzWorker (Reply #34)

Tue Mar 20, 2012, 09:01 PM

37. I don't understand why this isn't being talked about a bit more.

This guy seems to be the only eye witness to the events immediately prior too the shooting, but it sounds like the media is almost totally ignoring him. Has it turned out that he was a phony? Or is this a case where the media has decided the shooter is guilty and is ignoring any contradictory evidence? This all stinks to me one way or another...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Sat Mar 17, 2012, 05:59 PM

26. "Reasonably believe" has a standard.

Look up the phrase "ability, opportunity, jeopardy". This is the standard that the courts and self-defense schools use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Original post)

Tue Mar 20, 2012, 01:00 AM

36. UPDATE: U.S. Department of Justice, FBI and FDLE to probe Trayvon Martin killing

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/19/2703029/us-department-of-justice-fbi-and.html

U.S. Department of Justice, FBI and FDLE to probe Trayvon Martin killing
By Frances Robles The Miami Herald
frobles@MiamiHerald.com

The U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and the FBI will investigate the killing of Miami Gardens teenager Trayvon Martin by a neighborhood watch volunteer, the department announced late Monday.

The announcement coincided with a statement from Florida Gov. Rick Scott asking the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to offer “appropriate resources” in the case.

The federal and state agencies are intervening in what attorneys call a botched investigation into the killing of the Michael Krop Senior High School student, who was killed Feb. 26 in Sanford, a town of 55,000 just north of Orlando. Trayvon, 17, on suspension from school, was staying at his father’s girlfriend’s house when he walked to a nearby a 7-Eleven store to buy candy and iced tea.

George Zimmerman, 28, a neighborhood watch volunteer with a long history of calling in everything from open garage doors to “suspicious characters,” called police to say he had spotted someone who looked drugged, was walking too slowly in the rain, and appeared to be looking at people’s houses. Zimmerman sounded alarmed because the stranger had his hand in his waistband and held something in his other hand...


You know something's rotten in the state of Florida when even Slick Rick Scott steps in...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread