Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Murder in the first, murder in the second, and manslaughter. [View all]TheWraith
(24,331 posts)35. We'll take this one chunk at a time.
because it eliminates the requirement that a person try every reasonable means to escape the danger other than the use of force.
Firstly, Florida's law isn't really that unusual--22 states have officially named "stand your ground" type laws, and most of the other states have similar laws that aren't named as such. Only a handful of states have the alternative, "duty to retreat" laws which say you have to run away even if you're otherwise behaving legally. It's not really that controversial of a measure, except a lot of people go out of their way to misrepresent the idea as being some kind of "Dirty Harry" situation where you can shoot anybody for any reason.
It's designed this way because laws requiring retreat are sometimes unfair to the victim: they may be physically unable to run away, or cornered, or be in a situation where they're obligated to run away from their own car or business rather than protect themselves. And even if they can, statistically speaking it's much harder and rarer to successfully defend yourself after you've tried and failed to escape. So the premise is that if you're legally able to be somewhere, and otherwise engaging in no aggressive behavior, you're not legally obligated to run instead of protecting yourself.
So long as you are in a place you have a right to be (thereby expanding the FL law beyond the usual SYG laws which apply in your home)
Actually, "stand your ground" laws never affect the home; self defense in the home is usually referred to as "castle doctrine" laws.
and you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, you are justified in the use of force.
Yes--provided that you are NOT the aggressor. For example, if someone is walking through a parking garage and they're assaulted by someone with a knife threatening to rob and rape them, then they're justified in using the force necessary to stop the assault.
If, on the other hand, a person picks fight with somebody they hate, THEN the other person comes at them with a knife, they're required by law to attempt to escape without using force, because they initiated the incident. Only if they try to run away and fail, or the other person keeps attacking after they've surrendered, do they have legal justification for using force.
In this case, even going by Zimmerman's story to the police, he initiated a confrontation by following Martin, and then did not either attempt to flee or surrender after that. So by the standards used, he would be culpable for the encounter even if Martin had a 12 inch bowie knife and was getting ready to gut him like a fresh trout.
Firstly, Florida's law isn't really that unusual--22 states have officially named "stand your ground" type laws, and most of the other states have similar laws that aren't named as such. Only a handful of states have the alternative, "duty to retreat" laws which say you have to run away even if you're otherwise behaving legally. It's not really that controversial of a measure, except a lot of people go out of their way to misrepresent the idea as being some kind of "Dirty Harry" situation where you can shoot anybody for any reason.
It's designed this way because laws requiring retreat are sometimes unfair to the victim: they may be physically unable to run away, or cornered, or be in a situation where they're obligated to run away from their own car or business rather than protect themselves. And even if they can, statistically speaking it's much harder and rarer to successfully defend yourself after you've tried and failed to escape. So the premise is that if you're legally able to be somewhere, and otherwise engaging in no aggressive behavior, you're not legally obligated to run instead of protecting yourself.
So long as you are in a place you have a right to be (thereby expanding the FL law beyond the usual SYG laws which apply in your home)
Actually, "stand your ground" laws never affect the home; self defense in the home is usually referred to as "castle doctrine" laws.
and you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, you are justified in the use of force.
Yes--provided that you are NOT the aggressor. For example, if someone is walking through a parking garage and they're assaulted by someone with a knife threatening to rob and rape them, then they're justified in using the force necessary to stop the assault.
If, on the other hand, a person picks fight with somebody they hate, THEN the other person comes at them with a knife, they're required by law to attempt to escape without using force, because they initiated the incident. Only if they try to run away and fail, or the other person keeps attacking after they've surrendered, do they have legal justification for using force.
In this case, even going by Zimmerman's story to the police, he initiated a confrontation by following Martin, and then did not either attempt to flee or surrender after that. So by the standards used, he would be culpable for the encounter even if Martin had a 12 inch bowie knife and was getting ready to gut him like a fresh trout.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I read that he can't be charged with murder in Florida, because only a grand jury can do that.
pnwmom
Apr 2012
#2
Yes, if he was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to real prison time, I would be relieved.
pnwmom
Apr 2012
#16
Good! I've heard some pretty jaw-dropping stories of people getting off because of that law --
gateley
Apr 2012
#10
I didn't realize killing had such a limited punishment, a likely 10 to 15 years is all for
Dragonfli
Apr 2012
#19
Thank-you. My first reaction was to ask that question and here you answered it.
robinlynne
Apr 2012
#39
manslaughter still ruins your life. Ask any of the EMT or emergency vehicle drivers
pasto76
Apr 2012
#41