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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Clames

(2,038 posts)
68. Quote the entire thing...
Tue Mar 27, 2012, 06:06 PM
Mar 2012

...or don't bother at all.


2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[17]
776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
776.013?Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1)?A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b)?The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2)?The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b)?The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c)?The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d)?The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3)?A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4)?A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5)?As used in this section, the term:
(a)?“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b)?“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c)?“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

776.032?Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1)?A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2)?A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3)?The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

776.041?Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.




Now read that, carefully. That bold part outlines specifically where/when the law can be rebutted and may be rebutted in Zimmerman's case as it should be.



10 year old sleeping burglars....
The NRA sucks and Bloomberg is right on this issue jpak Mar 2012 #1
What about the *other* issues raised? You down with him on those? friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #2
This is about NRA - not "other issues" jpak Mar 2012 #15
This message was self-deleted by its author friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #17
That's not what you've said in the past- last Thursday for example: friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #18
So you're a one-issue voter ... Straw Man Mar 2012 #24
Hilarious, given how the NRA is in fact nothing but the National Republicans' Auxiliary. villager Mar 2012 #3
That's brilliant AH1Apache Mar 2012 #4
It makes you an enabler villager Mar 2012 #8
You give money to an organization that allies itself with the extreme right wing Ikonoklast Mar 2012 #63
how binary of you. Tuesday Afternoon Mar 2012 #5
You can tell someone's politics by who they ally with? Cool! friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #6
certainly by who they desperately, repeatedly apologize for villager Mar 2012 #7
So who here has apologized for the NRA? AH1Apache Mar 2012 #9
Nra endorsed Democrats... beevul Mar 2012 #13
Don't you love the double standard? The genetic and associational fallacies get applied regularly... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #20
Yup. beevul Mar 2012 #21
Compared to how many right wingers, and what's amount contributed. Hoyt Mar 2012 #23
" Do you know if Zimmerman will still make it? " rl6214 Mar 2012 #25
Hey, why should I use my brain - limited as it may be -- on those who believe guns Hoyt Mar 2012 #26
By far the best post you've ever made, hoyt. eqfan592 Mar 2012 #27
Guess next you'll be desperately defending ALEC,too? The NRA/ALEC connection: villager Mar 2012 #32
I read the Media Matters post claiming that gejohnston Mar 2012 #33
We understand you find the NRA much more credible than Media Matters villager Mar 2012 #36
I don't see the NRA claiming anything gejohnston Mar 2012 #38
Well, you wouldn't see that, would you? villager Mar 2012 #44
Why wouldn't we see that if it was there AH1Apache Mar 2012 #46
leopards don't change their spots gejohnston Mar 2012 #48
Thank you -- precisely the point about the NRA and the GOP! villager Mar 2012 #49
Dodge. n/t PavePusher Mar 2012 #42
will you give us the counterpart list of NRA-ILA-endorsed Republicans? iverglas Mar 2012 #34
Nobody is acting like the nra doesn't support republicans... beevul Mar 2012 #52
the spin never ends iverglas Mar 2012 #54
LOL. beevul Mar 2012 #57
too bad you didn't succeed iverglas Mar 2012 #58
that only means gejohnston Mar 2012 #59
NO IT DOES NOT NO IT DOES NOT NO IT DOES NOT iverglas Mar 2012 #62
Your interpretation... Clames Mar 2012 #64
............................... iverglas Mar 2012 #65
Quote the entire thing... Clames Mar 2012 #68
I've quoted the entire thing 87000 times at this site iverglas Mar 2012 #70
Some people... Clames Mar 2012 #73
I forget iverglas Mar 2012 #75
Sure I did. beevul Mar 2012 #60
oh, and btw, this is as nauseatingly, um, not candid iverglas Mar 2012 #35
I stand corrected, and so do you. beevul Mar 2012 #56
Bloomberg pushed hard to get marriage equality passed in NY, so, even though I really dislike... GodlessBiker Mar 2012 #10
...and then they accuse us of aligning with RWers... Union Scribe Mar 2012 #11
Why do I have to choose? tularetom Mar 2012 #12
I hate the NRA not the 2A... ileus Mar 2012 #14
Perfect is the enemy of the good. Loudly Mar 2012 #16
Agreed- which is why I accept legislation from RW assholes like Dennis Baxley friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #19
And yet Bloomie and Daley AH1Apache Mar 2012 #22
It took 58 years from Plessy to Brown v. Board of Ed. Loudly Mar 2012 #29
Heller is nothing like Plessy gejohnston Mar 2012 #30
I was just speaking of the duration until enlightenment. Loudly Mar 2012 #37
I suspect that your going to be waiting a long time AH1Apache Mar 2012 #39
McDonald over turned Cruikshank gejohnston Mar 2012 #40
McDonald may have disposed of the remnants of Cruikshank. Loudly Mar 2012 #43
And yet violent crime is at its lowest point in 20 years and gun sales are at historic highs AH1Apache Mar 2012 #45
please explain gejohnston Mar 2012 #47
What a red herring! Loudly Mar 2012 #50
hardly a red herring gejohnston Mar 2012 #51
Here's where your wrong AH1Apache Mar 2012 #53
shares, you are no different than any of the other "social cleansers" that have gone before you. friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #55
two questions iverglas Mar 2012 #66
Don't you recognize the previously PPR'd person? X_Digger Mar 2012 #67
This message was self-deleted by its author ellisonz Mar 2012 #69
and the jury spoke on the previous allegation iverglas Mar 2012 #71
lol ellisonz Mar 2012 #72
Apply it evenly. PPR'd means PPR'd. X_Digger Mar 2012 #74
I have made that case. ellisonz Mar 2012 #76
I don't have to, Beevul did the hard work for me. X_Digger Mar 2012 #77
This message was self-deleted by its author ellisonz Mar 2012 #78
Then I'd suggest alerting and presenting your evidence. X_Digger Mar 2012 #79
It's been done... ellisonz Mar 2012 #80
I'm sure some of his more *cough* out there theories will take care of him. X_Digger Mar 2012 #81
Loudly is without a doubt the former sharesunited. beevul made the catch, here: friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #91
You're positively wrong. I'm happy to defend my own words, but don't attribute those of others Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #82
This message was self-deleted by its author ellisonz Mar 2012 #83
Believe what you like... Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #84
This message was self-deleted by its author ellisonz Mar 2012 #85
Oh my, care to tell us what was there? n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #89
After I pointed out that I wasn't the posters he was accusing me of being, Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #90
Well, he's consistent. eqfan592 Mar 2012 #28
hey, isn't it a free country? iverglas Mar 2012 #31
They're both dogs. Remmah2 Mar 2012 #41
You ever notice Gungeon posts never show on the front page anymore? Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #61
There are three kinds of people in the world... discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2012 #86
I'll narrow it down to two. Johnny Rico Mar 2012 #87
Robert A. Heinlein discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2012 #88
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Question for DUers: Do yo...»Reply #68