I own 3 guns, Support the 2nd Amendment, and think Florida's SYG Law is F##king Nuts

[Redneck Democrat]

I have two rifles. For hunting. And a handgun for personal protection. Of myself and my house And of course, when my 8-year-old son & 5-year-old daughter visit me on weekends, my family.

I would not go outside to shoot someone trespassing on my land, unless one of my kids was out there as well being threantened by him, or he was shooting into my house. And I sure as Hell would not PURSUE the guy outside my property. That's what 911 is for.

George Zimmerman strikes me as a slimy little cop wannabe who was actively LOOKING for "trouble", and if he's not charged at least with manslaughter, I will be willing to sign any and all petition(s) calling for a nationwide boycott on travel to Florida, whose politicians seem to be competing with those in Arizona for the title of Most Insane, as Jon Stewart has suggested.

Well, the dextromethorphan is kicking in and I'm fading fast. If I don't die I'll be posting again. Othwerwise, I'be enjoyed my time here thus far.

[geckosfeet]

1. Welcome aboard. Yep. Zimmerman was looking for trouble.

Why someone would actively look and pursue trouble in the manner that he did is unnerving. The fact that he is still walking around free and not being charged with anything is simply jaw dropping.

[metalbot]

28. Why should he be arrested?

Everyone needs to take a couple of deep breaths here.

Nobody here was involved in the investigation, either as a detective on the scene, or as a prosecutor reviewing the case. Due to public outcry, there's going to be yet another investigation of the facts relating to the shooting. You know what? After that investigation, there's no guarantee that he's going to be charged, and that in itself isn't necessarily a bad thing.

There is only one living eye witness to the shooting. There are people who heard the shooting, as well as some of the events leading up to it. According to the police report, the shooter had a broken nose and grass stains on his back. He's claiming self defense. If it wasn't self defense, it's up to the state to prove that, which is exactly the way it should be.

Nobody likes the end result - dead teenager.

The question is then "was a crime committed here, and if so, what crime, and how do we prove it?"

There's almost no chance of getting a murder conviction here in the absence of additional evidence. What Zimmerman did was stupid - to confront someone who was in his neighborhood for the primary reason of their being black. However, doing something stupid doesn't elevate the actions that took place after being stupid to a crime. It's going to come down to "Did Martin attack Zimmerman first?" Following someone around in your neighborhood and asking them where they are going is rude, but wouldn't necessarily qualify as provoking someone to attack you. If Zimmerman were attacked as a result of following the teen, he hasn't forfeited his right to self defense. Now, if it could be demonstrated that Zimmerman tried to physically restrain Martin, and that he was attacked only as a result of attacking Martin first, then the argument for self-defense is weakened substantially, and a manslaughter conviction might be possible.

When people outside of this case insist that Zimmerman should be arrested, what they are essentially arguing is that they know something about the moments before the shooting that nobody else does. Until there is some evidence relating to those moments that indicates that this was not self defense, and that would hold up in a court of law, why SHOULD he be arrested? The fact that there's a result that nobody likes doesn't mean we should apply special rules of justice to this case.

[Johnny Rico]

29. +1

[geckosfeet]

30. Manslaughter is a crime.

[Bladian]

31. Are you serious? nt

[allan01]

2. re:I own 3 guns, Support the 2nd Amendment, and think Florida's SYG Law is F##king Nuts

[LynneSin]

3. SYG laws are nothing more than an excuse to go human hunting

And nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.

You're like many of the gun owners I know - you enjoy the sport, respect the power and smart enough know when to keep them locked away.

[allan01]

4. re: I own 3 guns, Support the 2nd Amendment, and think Florida's SYG Law is F##king Nuts

the above video is my feeling about florida

[DrDan]

5. you do realize more than 20 other states have similar laws

the NRA craziness is not limited to Florida

[michreject]

6. I own over 50 guns

Over 30 handguns.

I don't condone or defend what Zimmerman did. In fact, I hope he spends the rest of his life in prison.

That being said, I support any law that allows me to be in a certain place and not be required to turn tail and run. My comings and goings shouldn't be dictated by criminals.

If, God forbid, I use a gun in defense of myself or family, and the shooting is deemed justifiable, then SYG laws shield me from being sued by the family of junior the thug.

Flame suit on.

[AnnieK401]

7. Civil vs. Criminal law

I am not an attorney, however, from my admittedly limited understanding of the law I believe you are dead wrong about protection from being sued under civil law. SYG laws might, in certain circumstances, protect you from criminal prosecution. However, a lawsuit by the family would fall under civil law. I would not be so sure it would protect you from a wrongful death lawsuit by the family. Personally, I hope Trayvon's parents go after Zimmerman in civil court, if they can. Although he is probably not worth enough to make it worth an attorney's time, unless some high profile attorney wants to take it for the publicity. Again, I am not an attorney and don't know how this specific specific would apply to this specific case. However, I do know there is a difference. Just because you might not be found criminally liable for a certain action does not mean you can not be sued.

[hack89]

8. Many SYG laws specifically provide immunity from civil lawsuits

if you shot someone in self defense and it is deemed a lawful shooting.

[AnnieK401]

9. Just checked, you are correct

I did some further research and you are correct. There are some protections against civil lawsuits under SYG laws. Although, I believe the burden of proof is different. I am not sure how it would apply in this case.

[michreject]

10. Not in MI

If the shoot is deemed to be justifiable, then I cannot be sued by the thugs family.

Edit to add:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

Immunity from civil lawsuit

In addition to providing a valid defense in criminal law, many laws implementing the Castle Doctrine, particularly those with a "Stand-Your-Ground clause", also have a clause which provides immunity from any lawsuit filed on behalf of the assailant for damages or injury resulting from the lawful use of not excessive force. Without this clause an assailant can sue for medical bills, property damage, disability, and pain and suffering as a result of the injuries inflicted by the defender, or their next-of-kin may sue for wrongful death in the case of a fatality. Even if successfully rebutted, the defendant (the homeowner defender) may have to pay high legal costs as a result of such lawsuits; without immunity, such civil action could be used for revenge against a defender acting lawfully.

Use of force in self-defense which causes damage or injuries to other parties who were not acting criminally may give rise to prosecution and damages.



MI law covers both your home and any place that you have a legal right to be.

[AnnieK401]

12. Trayvon as the "assailant?"

At first I was confused by the term "assailant." Wasn't Zimmerman the "assailant" in this case? That is why a jury and legal experts need to sort this one out. I know in the last couple of days some Zimmerman and NRA supporters have tried to portray Trayvon as some kind of "punk" who deserved to be shot. OK, maybe I am not a legal expert, but I do know that the 14th amendment states: "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
I am not sure how the SYG laws fit in here. This should be an interesting legal case. Even serial killers get a trial before they are executed. It seems to me that Zimmerman appointed himself judge, jury and executioner and executed a 17 yr old for going to the store for Skittles and iced tea.

[iverglas]

16. no no no -- Trayvon as "the thug"

If you're gonna play with the Guns forum folks, you gotta learn the lingo!

They aren't human beings, so things like constitutions don't apply to them.

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The law says thou shalt not kill, but that only applies to human beings, not thugs, so nobody has to worry about that equal protection thing.

[DanTex]

34. Actually, the correct gungeon terminology is "da thug".

As in Da thug gotta "rational need:" It's his bidness, and he won't be interfered with.

Strange place, that gungeon.

[iverglas]

36. oh my goodness

I wasn't around for that particular one. Just for all the times I was told that "da thug" as used by that poster was NOT racist ...

[Redneck Democrat]

26. "If the shoot is deemed to be justifiable, then I cannot be sued by the thugs family."

Over 30 handguns? "Junior thug"? Does your name michreject mean that Terry Nichols' militia wouldn't let you join?

Bud, I have no problem saying: You scare me.

[bowens43]

13. If you codone SYG laws you condone murder. Period.

Own 50 guns? 30 handguns?

That's ridiculous and in a civilized country that would not be allowed.

[michreject]

19. Show me where this is illegal

BTW.I consider myself civilized.

I have a CPL and have never shot anyone.

[Johnny Rico]

25. Just how many guns *should* I be allowed to own, then? Specifics, please.

[iverglas]

14. the family of "junior the thug"

Does anybody really not know what that means?

I think the family of Trayvon Martin does.

Oh, I dunno. Maybe people down there really do refer to white teenaged boys that way.

[michreject]

17. I wasn't referring to the Zimmernam incident in my SYG statement

And you knew that, but then you couldn't feign outrage.

[iverglas]

18. of course you weren't

It's just obvious that you and Zimmerman share a dictionary.

[michreject]

20. obvious eh?

And just where do you get this from, all knowing, all seeing, great one?

[iverglas]

21. the Guns forum

I believe you're familiar with it.

[michreject]

23. Yeah

I don't post too much in there.

I don't like the continuous arguing back and forth.

I would guess that 95% of my comparatively few posts are in GD.

[Lizzie Poppet]

15. I concur.

It is not the ethical prerogative of the State to make my "fight or flight" decision for me. Such situations are highly variable, and thus are poorly suited to one-size-fits-all solutions. I would never even dream of obeying a "duty to retreat" law (if my state actually had one) if in my best judgement retreat was not the best course of action.

That said, I still think SYB laws need considerable refinement. The Trayvon Martin murder clearly demonstrates that explicit and stringent requirements pertaining to the subsequent investigation are needed. The Sanford PD made a complete botch of the investigation, and it's reasonable to suspect a deliberate attempt to sweep the details under the rug. In addition, such laws need to make it abundantly clear that they do not protect the aggressor, and that one can become the aggressor without actually being the first to engage in violence. Zimmerman created the conflict situation with Martin by essentially stalking him and placing him in fear for his safety...a fear that turned out to be tragically justified.

[iverglas]

22. here's the funny thing

I would never even dream of obeying a "duty to retreat" law (if my state actually had one) if in my best judgement retreat was not the best course of action.

Do you even know what "duty to retreat" laws say?

You might want to look one up before tilting at straw "one-size-fits-all solutions" windmills.

[COLGATE4]

24. K&R. Way too much pseudo-legalese being

thrown around on this forum.

[Lizzie Poppet]

27. Yep, I do.

I've read several...and to head off what might be your next post, I do understand that most have variously-stated exceptions to the mandate to retreat. Perhaps I should have been laboriously, meticulously clear in indicating that I was simply presenting a hypothetical. I guess I forgot that this was teh interwebz.

[TeamsterDem]

11. I think it's good in theory but bad in the real world

I understand the concept behind the law and don't disagree with its intentions, but instead with its real world applicability. If we knew that all SYG actors wouldn't hit innocent bystanders, overreact to situations, or use the law as a guise under which they incite problems only to later claim "self-defense" then it'd be fine. But you can't ensure people won't do those things, so without explicit criminal/civil punishments for those things the law effectively licenses them.

[Uncle Joe]

33. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Redneck Democrat.

[2ndAmForComputers]

35. I see you are already getting your scolding from the gunolatry for insufficient ideological purity.

Wear that as a badge of honor.