• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to[W:222]

Smeagol

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
1,694
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression
 
Last edited:

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for and extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

To answer your question in short. No.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,663
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for and extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

First, stand your ground laws are a nickname. SYG is not a piece of legislation so named. No such thing. Here are Florida statutes that apply. (Says MaggieD who knows "not much.")

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.

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.

If someone slaps you or pushes you or bullies you, you do not have the right to pull out a gun and shoot him in the head.
 

TheNextEra

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
16,575
Reaction score
6,767
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

No, hence why Zimmerman did not use that as his defense in the trial.
 

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,663
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

No, hence why Zimmerman did not use that as his defense in the trial.

No, a stand-your-ground hearing would have taken place before the judge alone. No jury. Zimmerman's defense team knew a judge would not grant that immunity because of the political ramifications that surrounded this case. Smart move. They'll go after it now, and a judge will be able to rule solely on the merits of the circumstances since he's been found not guilty. The only defense to killing another human being is self-defense, so I'm thinking it'll be a slam dunk.
 

MarineTpartier

Haters gon' hate
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
2,420
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

Just because someone is mean mugging you or following you doesn't mean you can physically harm them. You can, however, pull out your cell phone and call the cops. If you don't have a cell phone, you can stop at someone's house or a public establishment and use their phone. In the case of T Martin, he had a cell phone on him. He decided to call his girlfriend instead of the cops. If he had called the cops, this whole thing probably wouldn't have happened. To say that we can physically harm someone just because we don't like what they are doing is irresponsible.
 

TheNextEra

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
16,575
Reaction score
6,767
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

No, a stand-your-ground hearing would have taken place before the judge alone. No jury. Zimmerman's defense team knew a judge would not grant that immunity because of the political ramifications that surrounded this case. Smart move. They'll go after it now, and a judge will be able to rule solely on the merits of the circumstances since he's been found not guilty. The only defense to killing another human being is self-defense, so I'm thinking it'll be a slam dunk.

If it was a "slam-dunk" as you think it was a judge COULDN'T have denied it. We'll see, but I don't see that happening this time either. Don't get me wrong, I'm not on the "Zimmerman is guilty" crowd I just was suprised that they didn't use the Stand your ground law in his defense during the trial.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,344
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression
None of those things are illegal and you have an obligation to walk away from those things. If you cant, grow up. Or make it a point to "stand and fight", but be prepared to die. Many people carry guns, knives or other weapons.
 

Simon W. Moon

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
27,129
Reaction score
11,162
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression
Not de jure, but de facto, yes. If you provoke them to the point where you are in fear of imminent great bodily harm or deathyou may use lethal force to defend yourself.
 

Surtr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
7,017
Reaction score
2,980
Location
The greatest planet in the world.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

Stand your ground means that if someone attacks you outside of your property, you have the legal right to defend yourself. Variations by state are likely to exist.
 

Phoenix

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
1,808
Reaction score
622
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

It's specifically addressed in the statutes.
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.

An aggressor can use deadly force if essentially he has tried to escape the situation and / or has called uncle and in good faith expresses they want to end the confrontation. Of course they can't be comming a crime either.
 
Last edited:

Dapper Andy

Banned
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
913
Reaction score
310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

No, hence why Zimmerman did not use that as his defense in the trial.

Nothing Zimmerman did actually involved Stand Your Ground laws.

The laws imply a choice between running or fighting but Zimmerman didn't have the opportunity to run away. He was pinned underneath a guy beating the snot out of him.
 

Dapper Andy

Banned
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
913
Reaction score
310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

I suppose the answer in theory is clearly yes and it has probably happened before.
 

chuck71

Active member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
399
Reaction score
56
Location
Pulaski Tn
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

:mrgreen: That's exactly what George Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin. After being told by a police dispatcher not to pursue Martin, Zimmerman did exactly that. He goaded, pursued, and berated Trayvon until it escalated to a fight, ending when Zimmerman shot him dead. And he was found Not Guilty. How does a man who outweighs a kid by eighty pounds get away with saying that Martin was savagely beating him, and he had no choice but to shoot him?
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I'm listening to a talk show now where the host is making an interesting assertion with respect to stand you ground laws.

When I was a kid, I was regularly the victim of bullying by an older kid. This kid essentially harassed, taunted and annoyed me in non-violent ways in order to trigger some sort of physical response, albeit mild, by me such as gently pushing them out of my way or inadvertently bumping into them in efforts to get out of their way. Then, once "I made it physical", he had the justification he needed to proceed to beat the living crap out of me. Up until that point however, the bully was behaving completely in a non-violent way. Verbal taunting, violating my personal space as I defined it, etc. were all within his right to free speech and especially his right to movement.

The points the host made reminded my of the experiences with bullying as a kid, albeit at a far more consequential level. My question is, as it relates to stand your ground laws, may those who use such laws as a legal defense legally engage in actions that essentially escalate, instigate and/or lure another into conditions where stand your ground may be legally used with an immediately proceeding and separate interchange that then led to him having the legal right to kill the person? Those actions may include but not be necessarily limited to:

- Following someone for an extended period especially in an isolated area that my also not be well lit
- Making angry stares
- Coming within a certain radius of the person especially in isolated and unlit areas; violating "personal space"
- Starting a conversation of a hostile tone but no threats were made
- Initiating an interrogation with no obvious justification especially in a condescending tone
- Other acts of not violent agression

Here ya go...

Wiki ~ Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

The Court, in a unanimous decision, upheld the arrest. Writing the decision for the Court, Justice Frank Murphy advanced a “two-tier theory” of the First Amendment. Certain “well-defined and narrowly limited” categories of speech fall outside the bounds of constitutional protection. Thus, “the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous,” and (in this case) insulting or “fighting” words neither contributed to the expression of ideas nor possessed any “social value” in the search for truth.[2]

Murphy wrote:
There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

:mrgreen: That's exactly what George Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin. After being told by a police dispatcher not to pursue Martin, Zimmerman did exactly that. He goaded, pursued, and berated Trayvon until it escalated to a fight, ending when Zimmerman shot him dead. And he was found Not Guilty. How does a man who outweighs a kid by eighty pounds get away with saying that Martin was savagely beating him, and he had no choice but to shoot him?

You obviously know very little if any of the facts in the case.
 

chuck71

Active member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
399
Reaction score
56
Location
Pulaski Tn
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

Nothing Zimmerman did actually involved Stand Your Ground laws.

The laws imply a choice between running or fighting but Zimmerman didn't have the opportunity to run away. He was pinned underneath a guy beating the snot out of him.

:mrgreen: Zimmerman outweighed Martin by eighty pounds. Was Martin another Manny Paquio? Zimmerman was told by a police dispatcher not to pursue Martin, but he did anyway. He had plenty of opportunity to run away. A voice expert analyzed the recording that lady witness made and determined the person yelling for help was not Zimmerman. Who then, was it? Duhhhh! Zimmerman pursued Martin, and Martin tried to get away. C'mon Dapper, a kid outweighed by eighty pounds has the guy pinned underneath and is beating the snot out of him? tks, chuck
 

Dapper Andy

Banned
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
913
Reaction score
310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

:mrgreen: Zimmerman outweighed Martin by eighty pounds. Was Martin another Manny Paquio? Zimmerman was told by a police dispatcher not to pursue Martin, but he did anyway. He had plenty of opportunity to run away. A voice expert analyzed the recording that lady witness made and determined the person yelling for help was not Zimmerman. Who then, was it? Duhhhh! Zimmerman pursued Martin, and Martin tried to get away. C'mon Dapper, a kid outweighed by eighty pounds has the guy pinned underneath and is beating the snot out of him? tks, chuck

I guess this is your way of telling us you didn't follow the case very closely.
 

chuck71

Active member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
399
Reaction score
56
Location
Pulaski Tn
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

You obviously know very little if any of the facts in the case.

:mrgreen: I heard the actual recording between Zimmerman and the police dispatcher, so that's one BIG fact I know. It went something like this: Zimmerman "There's a suspicious looking black man out here. He's acting like he's on drugs". Dispatcher: "Are you following him?" Zimmerman: "Yes!" Dispatcher: "Ok, well, we don't need you to do that". Another fact I know is that Zimmerman outweighed Martin by eighty pounds. I heard the recording of Martin talking to his girlfriend. He told her some one was following him. She told him to run. He said "I'm not going to run, but I'm going to walk fast". So there's another FACT I know! Obviously, it was Zimmerman who was pursuing Martin!! Here's the biggest FACT, Kal',: If Zimmerman had complied with the Police dispatchers instructions to NOT pursue Martin, Martin would be walking around today, skittles, hoody, and all. So think that over, Mr. 'I have an answer for everything'. chuck
 

chuck71

Active member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
399
Reaction score
56
Location
Pulaski Tn
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I guess this is your way of telling us you didn't follow the case very closely.

:mrgreen: I followed the case VERY closely. If I wanted to tell you I didn't I would say it in just those words 'I didn't follow the case very closely', but the fact is, I did. Tell me Zimmerman didn't outweigh Martin by eighty pounds! Tell me a Police dispatcher DIDN'T tell Zimmerman not to follow him! Tell me Martin didn't try to get away from Zimmerman! Tell me Zimmerman was not the aggressive pursuer of Martin! I followed the case very, very, closely. You say you're an 'Advisor' What kind of valuable advice do you give? Do you advise dogs on the best way to pee on a fire hydrant? chuck
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

:mrgreen: I followed the case VERY closely. If I wanted to tell you I didn't I would say it in just those words 'I didn't follow the case very closely', but the fact is, I did. Tell me Zimmerman didn't outweigh Martin by eighty pounds! Tell me a Police dispatcher DIDN'T tell Zimmerman not to follow him! Tell me Martin didn't try to get away from Zimmerman! Tell me Zimmerman was not the aggressive pursuer of Martin! I followed the case very, very, closely. You say you're an 'Advisor' What kind of valuable advice do you give? Do you advise dogs on the best way to pee on a fire hydrant? chuck

None of that matters, the minute Trayvon the thug began assaulting Mr. Zimmerman, Mr. Zimmerman had the right to defend himself. Period.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

:mrgreen: I heard the actual recording between Zimmerman and the police dispatcher, so that's one BIG fact I know. It went something like this: Zimmerman "There's a suspicious looking black man out here. He's acting like he's on drugs". Dispatcher: "Are you following him?" Zimmerman: "Yes!" Dispatcher: "Ok, well, we don't need you to do that". Another fact I know is that Zimmerman outweighed Martin by eighty pounds. I heard the recording of Martin talking to his girlfriend. He told her some one was following him. She told him to run. He said "I'm not going to run, but I'm going to walk fast". So there's another FACT I know! Obviously, it was Zimmerman who was pursuing Martin!! Here's the biggest FACT, Kal',: If Zimmerman had complied with the Police dispatchers instructions to NOT pursue Martin, Martin would be walking around today, skittles, hoody, and all. So think that over, Mr. 'I have an answer for everything'. chuck

Apparently you did not hear the NEN call as that was NOT what was said. Nor did you apparently listen to ANYTHING in the trial. And third, the NEN is not the police, all that they can do is SUGGEST, not give instructions and another BIG FACT is that Z did not have to do anythinig that the NEN dispatcher said. And one more fact for you...Z did not pursue TM as evidenced by the change in breathing in the NEN call.

Suggestion for you Chuck71...go to YouTube, look up the Zimmerman trial and watch it from start to finish. They have it all there. And I would suggest that you do so before posting anything else about this case as all that you are doing is showing your complete ignorance on this subject.
 

SMTA

Ketsu no Anna
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
38,516
Reaction score
10,313
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

I carry a weapon every day.

I do not put myself in situations that might cause a problem.

I am not looking to prove my mettle, show that I am bad, and do not need to prove anything to anybody.

If immediate flight will save the lives of self and/or family, then we will flee.

I am not looking for trouble, and will avoid trouble whenever possible.


Having said all of this, I will not be approached in an aggressive manner.

I will not allow hands to be laid upon me or mine.

I will not back up or run if the threat decides to come at me.

If I believe threat of life for my self and/or my family is imminent, I will have drawn my weapon.

If the threat of harm continues I will shoot immediately, probably 2 fast shots at first.

I will continue shooting until the threat ceases to be a threat.

Any life that is lost will be the responsibility of the attacker due to their aggression.

That about covers it.
 

joko104

Banned
Suspended
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: Do stand your ground laws allow the ground-stander to act agressively prior to...

Personally I believe there are such things as fighting words, but then that is a conditioned instinct from my youth - an instinct I think I mostly have under control now. Firearms saved the life of a newborn now my adult adopted daughter and my own life So did a baseball bat that got me the first of those firearms. But after that I never had a firearm on me as it was strictly prohibited by my employer - very strictly - and in that employment I absolutely did not want one.

The criminal prosecution risks are dramatically lower if no weapon is involved. When a gun possibly needed, another guy along with me would be the gunner. I had my skills and tasks, he had his basically as backup should the other(s) have firearms. Firearms dramatically increase criminal jeopardy and in most states enhance jail terms significant.

Now I do carry a firearm in my opposite nature employment (regulatory cop) and have piles of firearms, will have one in all vehicles, but otherwise still never have one. My wife has one on her essentially at all times unless securely in our rather fortress-life home. She has drawn down on 4 different men in the past and has been INTENSELY trained by many people - mostly cops - not only in firearms skills, but also is very repetitious situational real-life and even real-fire (paint rounds in her regular carry) also intensely to condition automatic situational actions so all decisions pre-made to avoid any delays - and so many police officers could testify she did exactly how they as cops taught her.

The problem with the question the OP is asking is there is no absolute answer from any direction of looking at it. There are only a million variables as to what is "reasonable." The law differs state to state. The attitudes that cops and courts will take will not only vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but even be different for each judge, for each DA and for each cop. The exact same action may get you praise in one collection of variables - and life in prison for the exact action in other variables - and ones you can not know. And who the hell really ever knows that a jury will do either?

SO... the BEST response? Make your decisions about what is best for the safety of you and yours. Understand the legalities for sure best you can, but ultimately YOU bear the consequences of your decision. GZ, for example, has been put thru hell. But he is alive. He did not suffer permanent injuries. Martin is dead.

SOMETIMES there is no GOOD answer, but only picking between two bad ones. Pick the lesser bad one. Dying is the worse bad one.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom