General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat laws should we change/create, which will stop a future George Zimmerman?
Change Stand Your Ground to Duty to Retreat? Wouldn’t that have applied to Trayvon Martin too? If the jury was told the 2006 law wouldn’t the question have been why didn’t they both retreat?
The only eyewitness saw Trayvon Martin on top in the fight, so wouldn’t the out come be the same?
How do you write a law which would protect Trayvon Martin from George Zimmerman?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Guns only for people in well-regulated militias.
Or other strong gun laws.
If Zimmerman did not have a gun, nothing would have happened - or, at worst, a broken nose or two.
Guns are shit multipliers - anything bad becames many, many times worse if a gun is handy.
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)TM did seriously hurt or kill GZ. Wouldn't TM be in jail right now?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Plus, Zimmerman is a coward - he'd have never gone near Martin without a gun.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)There was a dude here in Redding who punched another dude at a club. The guy hit his head and died.
Assuming that the fight would not have been fatal without a gun is naive.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Very, very unlikely, I think.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)who wouldn't have gotten out of the truck and followed Trayvon without a gun.
In that respect, the gun is to blame for what happened.
Once the fight started, however, a serious head injury could have resulted.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)
spin
(17,493 posts)Zimmerman might have discovered it and shot him with it.
Now I am in no way saying that Zimmerman was a cop but:
FBI Releases Preliminary Statistics for Law Enforcement Officers Killed in 2010
Washington, D.C. May 16, 2011
According to preliminary statistics released today by the FBI, 56 of our nation’s law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty during 2010. By region, 22 victims were killed in the South, 18 in the West, 10 in the Midwest, three in the Northeast, and three in Puerto Rico. The total number of officers feloniously killed in 2010 was eight more than the 48 officers slain in 2009.
***snip***
Of the 56 victim officers, 38 were wearing body armor at the times of their deaths. Sixteen of the victim officers fired their own weapons, and seven officers attempted to use their own weapons. Seven victim officers had their weapons stolen; seven officers were killed with their own weapons. ...emphasis added
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-preliminary-statistics-for-law-enforcement-officers-killed-in-2010
Cops usually carry their handguns in holsters that have retention qualities that make it difficult to grab the weapon. Civilians do not normally use retention holsters.
I should point out that I am not defending Zimmerman. Had he stayed in his vehicle this incident would have never happened and I have no idea exactly what went down that evening in the rain. Only two people did and one is dead.
I also feel that it is quite possible that Zimmerman confronted Martin and flashed his handgun to gain leverage. If so, it could be argued that Martin had reason to fear for his life or health and was legally standing his ground. Flashing your weapon to intimidate another person is illegal in Florida.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
hack89
(39,171 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I do.
That's the OP's question.
hack89
(39,171 posts)with his history of violence, I could see him carrying a gun regardless - I think he feels he is above the law.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)and certainly not getting out of his car to actively stalk someone with it.
I guess we'll just disagree.
hack89
(39,171 posts)
Bragi
(7,650 posts)This tragedy was mostly driven by sick gun culture.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)Do you mean he acted like an officer or he actually impersonated one?
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)and usurping the authority of an officer, even after being notified that it wasn't necessary, I say he was a delusional misanthrope Playing Cop. But no I was wrong in my assertion of " Impersonating an officer " or a least the only witness can't swear that he was .
DrDan
(20,411 posts)this could be one potential law-change, however. I could support that. If a dispatcher says to not follow, then don't follow.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)If you make it a law to obey the dispatcher, someone who is not present and not aware of everything that is going on, you also make the the town/county/state that the dispatcher works for liable if someone is injured as a result of their orders.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)following the directive from the dispatcher.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)justice system - like proof beyond a reasonable doubt
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)the 911 dispatchers told the people in the WTC not to evacuate the building on 9-11-01.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)Several were told to stay put and wait for the FD. Most who chose to leave anyway are alive, those who waited are not. It was heard in several 911 calls.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)a dispatchers call ?
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)I was agreeing with the post on the police wouldn't like a law which says we should have to follow 911 advice.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)" Sir you should stop Following that person " the fear of liability was at work .
ZX86
(1,428 posts)Remove participating lawyers from the jury selection process and outlaw jury consultants. Juries should be selected by unbiased, disinterested third parties with no connection to the prosecution or defense. Every f'ed up criminal trial can be traced back to very a poor selection process where the prosecution and defense have a race to the bottom to seat the most easily manipulated or ignorant jury candidates available. Not the most qualified.
KinMd
(966 posts)DrDan
(20,411 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Even then, with the ratification of prohibition in 1919, it took more than 10 years before rationality could be restored.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)I leave it to the observer to judge how well that's worked...
They're aggressive sociopaths gripped by fear.
zencycler
(9 posts)I don't think this is a matter of changing laws, but of changing hearts and changing behavior.
President Obama made a good start at getting this conversation going, but I think in order to avoid future incidents like this we honestly must address some contributing factors which may have been present, not only for George Zimmerman, but, dare I say it, possibly also for Trayvon Martin.
Clearly, in this encounter, we know that it's highly likely that GZ racially profiled TM, and we also know that, once they met, someone inappropriately initiated either physical force or the threat of physical force.
Hence, we have two contributing issues which need to be considered - racial profiling and rage, both of which were factors that night and both of which need to be part of any serious discussion on race relations.
While no-one can prove that GZ did in fact racially profile TM, we all know such profiling is prevalent and is something that Blacks widely associate with Whites, particularly those involved in any type of law enforcement, and if so, it was naturally a factor in what eventually happened and thus should be part of the discussion.
Likewise, while no-one can prove that TM, in a rage, over-reacted to being watched, followed and questioned, we all know such rage is prevalent, something which Whites widely associate with Black, especially young Black people, and if so, it was naturally a factor in what eventually happened, and thus should be part of the discussion.
Naturally, this is not only a problem among minorities, as we've all seen someone in high school who starts a fight simply because he thinks someone looked at him the wrong way. But I think it's fair to say that it is a problem which, like many other social problems, is disproportionately adversely affecting young Black men and boys, and is likely a contributing factor to some of the other areas in which this population is disproportionately affected.
This rage is also part of a vicious cycle that both endangers Black youth and perpetuates racist stereotyping - and is therefore something that should be part of any serious discussion on race relations. Are there legitimate reasons why this rage is more prevalent among and more of a danger to Black youth - sure there are: economics, real or perceived disparities, broken families (both a symptom and a cause), and the lingering effects of segregation and enslavement. But until this issue is openly discussed and addressed, I honestly don't see how we break the vicious cycle to which it contributes.
Regardless of what actually happened that night, we know it's highly likely that racial profiling was a factor, and we know with certainty that someone irrationally escalated this into a physical confrontation through the inappropriate use or threat of physical force. And while we'll never know with certainty who that was, we do know that this form of rage I'm discussing was also a likely factor. Hence, we should use this opportunity to have open discussions on how BOTH these factors have an adverse effect, not only on minorities, but ultimately on everyone.
Jim__
(14,073 posts)From Reuters: Three residents have told the court that they saw someone who appeared to be Zimmerman on top during the incident.
The only eyewitness?
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)I hadn't heard that before.
Thanks for the info.
yardwork
(61,588 posts)The prosecution didn't do a very good job of highlighting witness testimony of Zimmerman attacking Martin.
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)I did mean prosecution.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)even though he saw the person on the top using MMA type hand movements. Helloooo. Zimmerman was the one with MMA training not Trayvon. Stupidest jury ever! I think I listened to that trial more than them.
JI7
(89,244 posts)Zimmerman is a fucking loser wannabe cop piece of shit .
bemildred
(90,061 posts)The problem is a willful failure to enforce those we have equitably and effectively and uniformly.
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)do you even know what justifiable means???
sP
flvegan
(64,407 posts)Beating a child? Stomping a homeless vet? Setting a puppy on fire?
Either you don't know what "justifiable homicide" means, or you forgot a sarcasm tag, or...never mind.
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)You can put 'em in the hospital ok. But cross that line into the ultimate crime and it's off to the pen with ya.
flvegan
(64,407 posts)Do we build a special prison for police acting in the line of duty? I mean, they are supposed to be the good guys. Or is that part of the cultural mindset that needs to be changed?
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)hope the poster never needs someone to save their life...
sP
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Pelican
(1,156 posts)tumtum
(438 posts)Someone who has already been victimized? Huh?
How about a woman who kills her attacker? You want to further her victimization? How about a home owner who shoots and kills a home invader?
How about cops who kill in the line of duty? You want them to be put in prison? 
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)That's the way the gun culture will tally Trayvon's murder.
tumtum
(438 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)tumtum
(438 posts)That makes me a bigot and gun lover? 
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)tumtum
(438 posts)I hardly followed the trial, so I don't know that much about it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Though zimmerman did not use that law, its existence still emboldened him.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)If this had taken place in London, it would be a story of two guys getting into a fight, being patched up in the emergency room, and going home later that evening or the next day.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Disallow police statements by Defendant as hearsay.
TheLion
(44 posts)Or, if ANYONE'S statements to the police are offered as 'evidence' in the trial, that should constitute direct testimony BY that person and open the door to cross-examination.
As it was, Zimmerman got his version of events entered as testimony and could not be cross-examined for them. That's just flat wrong.
hack89
(39,171 posts)
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)Change an affirmative claim of self defense to be the defendant's burden, as opposed to requiring the state to prove a negative beyond the shadow of doubt.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)who actually WERE protecting themselves, including a lot of poor minorities who can't afford a competent defense team.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Lots of times when people come up with a "quick fix" they don't think through the unintended consequences.
Little Star
(17,055 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Eliminate the need for gated communities.
Start by taking away the tax breaks given to companies that ship to and maintain manufacturing jobs in foreign countries.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)If you are in pursuit, there is no justification for feeling threatened.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)A cardinal rule of SD is to first remove yourself from confrontation & confrontational acts. Firearms instructors (who specialize in SD) deal with this. Zimmerman evidently did not follow this advice.
How to codify such would be difficult and be open to abuse: Was Zimmerman confronting or following to see if Martin was up to "no good?" I see no problem with a citizen taking an active role (tailing a car involved in hit & run, keeping in sight someone who has committed a violent crime). A problem arises when the citizen is armed, even legally.
Perhaps the crux would be with the verifiable actions of the purported "criminal:" Did he/she actually do something reasonably construed as criminal? In Martin's case, there was no evidence he had.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)At that point there was no threat unless he pursued. Following a someone who'd just committed a crime is completely different although initiating a confrontation would be a mistake.
geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)In most other states Zimmerman would be rotting in jail.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)various security apparatuses? IOW, HOAs can be allowed to have Neighborhood Watch programs but their staff and volunteers should be prohibited from carrying firearms.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)From Thom Hartmann:
Pre-ALEC and Jeb Bush, Florida law would have required this instruction in a self-defense murder trial: The defendant cannot justify the use of force likely to cause death of great bodily harm unless he used every reasonable means within his power and consistent with his own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force. The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify his use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating he could have avoided the need to use that force.
Stand your ground laws, written by repukes, nullified those instructions. In 2006, ALEC promoted SYG law. That is why jury instructions included SYG language.
New instructions: The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real. He had no duty to retreat and the right to meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself.
In other words, it's okay to murder someone if you FEEL THREATENED. Just imagine there's a threat.
MARTIN was judged by the pre-2006 law, while the fucking murderer was judged by the law written by those fucking assholes ALEC.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I've never seen that work out in any other case.
gulliver
(13,180 posts)Invest in education.
Otherwise, you're just trying to fight symptoms. And there is no way.
Put the resources we're using to fight the so-called "War on Drugs" into education.
Treat education like a crisis, and give the kids the tools they need to get out of the ghettos/trailer parks and leave the ghetto/trailer park mentality behind.
Initech
(100,055 posts)Like Stand Your Ground - a product of ALEC / Koch / Heritage Foundation criminals. If we don't get SYG repealed, Trayvon will be a statistic. 
markiv
(1,489 posts)just because something is technically legal, doesnt mean it's wise
I think this case proved that
Corporations are notoriously tight fisted, yet each and every one of them springs for uniforms, training and bonding for security guards - guns and ammo probably count for 0.00000019 percent of security costs. they do this so they dont create more problems than they solve
going skydiving with the absolute minimum concern for safety is legal too, but if you land on a kid, you'r going to break your neck and get sued by the kid's parents, and anyone who reads about it will say 'note to self, somthing to avoid'
throughout human history, ending up with a corpse with your bullets in him/her under ambiguous circumstances (not saying mart/zimm was ambiguous, just for sake of arguement), has never been a good thing for people who value their future freedom
the coverage of this event has been done in a way to DIVIDE people at a time when massive guest worker bills and trade agreements are quietly passing through
whereas the truth of this matter is something MOST people could probably agree on, that going armed with a gun and confronting people without ID and training (whether legal or not) is stupid, risky, and any trouble you get into, is your own
SeaLyons
(3,559 posts)chowder66
(9,065 posts)Show proof or failure of Self-Restraint in regard to self-defense claim.
If the shooter says they shot in self defense then they should prove that they did everything else they could to avoid killing someone.
So in the Zimmerman case, he pursued someone who wasn't doing anything wrong
He called the police
He continued to pursue Martin
He spoke to a police dispatcher on the phone that told him he didn't need to follow Martin
The police were on the way
He continued to pursue Martin
Zimmerman more than likely had an idea of how long it would take the police to get there (past experience)
I see failure to show restraint and there for any self-defense claim should not be allowed. Or this should be shown that he had
several opportunities to allow law-enforcement to take over and handle the situation.
Due to the lack of self-restraint and prejudice, he killed an innocent person. He should have to pay for this.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)XemaSab
(60,212 posts)It's alleged that Zimmerman called Trayvon a "coon" and it's known that he called him a "fucking punk."
Rachel Jeantel testified that Trayvon called Zimmerman a "creepy-ass cracker" and a "nigga."
If every person who ever said or thought anything racist was rounded up and killed, we'd have like 50 people left in this country.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)OK! OK! just kidding. but he did say "fucking coons"
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)If Martin attacked Zimmerman - and we'll never know if he did, but I think it's more likely than not - then shooting him was a reasonable response, and the law there should not be changed.
But if Zimmerman had not been carrying a gun, the confrontation would have been less likely to have happened. Admittedly, if it *had* happened Martin might well have murdered Zimmerman, but the overall number of deaths would be lower.
hunter
(38,309 posts)Cigarettes stink. So do hand guns.
