homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

Forum Home Post A Reply

my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home

» The Geek Culture Forums! » News, Reviews, Views! » Politics/Religion/Current Affairs » Stand your ground law » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password (max 13 characters):
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.


Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused   Happytears  
blush   Beard of Peter Gabriel!   crazy   tired   ohwell   evil  
shake head   cry baby   hearts   weep   devil wand   thumbsup  
thumbsdown   Geek   Applause   Angel   Envy    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?

Disable Graemlins in this post.


T O P I C     R E V I E W
Member # 4924
 - posted April 13, 2012 15:54
There is something that really bothers me about this law taht surprisingly the over-active 24h news media freak show hasn't dug into yet. Or at least I haven't heard them bring this particular point up.

Specifically, Not how the stand your ground law relates to Zimmerman's actions, but how it realtes to Martin's actions.

Zimmerman says he had the right to stand his ground. He was trying to protect his community after a string of break-ins. So, for the sake of argument about this law. Lets say Zimmerman has represented the accoutn of that night very accuratly. And that he was justified in the killing.

But, as a thought expirement, let's reverse thing. If Trayvon Martin had killed Zimmerman tht night in thier struggle. Would not the "stand your ground" law protect him as well? He had the right to be there. He had some guy stalking him, with a gun no less. He had a legitimate right to fear for his life. Those are the grounds to use deadly force in Florida. SO I come to the conclusion that Trayvon Martin would have had the right to kill George Zimmermann.

My point?

How can anyone write a law that makes it perfectly legal to kill someone over a misunderstanding. George Zimmerman didn't know Trayvon Martin had a right to be there and only had skittles with him. Trayvon Martin didn't know that George Zimmerman was just trying to stalk him he was just trying to stop a rash of burgleries.

This is why sane places have the law that you have to retreat if you can. So just in case it was a misunderstanding, You don't have a circumstance where both parties have teh right to kill each other.

Thanks for reading my rant.


I do not know what happened that night, this was a theoretical exercise.
Member # 1659
 - posted April 13, 2012 16:26
Ash, I too have many misgivings about this tragedy, however in many states a woman/vs man all she has to say is I had great fear.

I am sure that the jury will hear a ton of testimony, you and I will not get to hear all of that and wonder how did they come to that decision.

The sad part is a young man is dead.
Member # 170
 - posted April 13, 2012 17:35
Ashitaka wrote:
How can anyone write a law that makes it perfectly legal to kill someone over a misunderstanding.

It's the same mentality that results in bills submitted to grant people the right to carry handguns in bars.

The same mentality that results in this:
[TN Rep. Curry Todd, who sponsored the bill,] was arrested while allegedly driving under the influence. He had a loaded handgun "in a holster stuffed between the driver seat and center console."

There are people who are self-centered and care only about their own right to do what they want with no regard for the rights of others. Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons too idiotic to go into, we tend to elect a lot of that type of person in this country and they shove through legislation like the stand-your-ground law.
Member # 780
 - posted April 13, 2012 18:37
Originally posted by GrumpySteen:

It's the same mentality that results in bills submitted to grant people the right to carry handguns in bars.


I'm from New York, and we just don't see the point in people walking around with guns. Why?

An argument I've heard from someone Down South about guns at home has to do with slow response time from the "PO-lice." Well...we pay taxes, and have a good number of police departments, offering a pretty decent response time.

I can /maybe/ get the 'gun at home' mentality about self-defense...but not in public. I realize the argument seems to be one of deterrence, but it allows situations to escalate way too easily, and as you [Steen] call to mind...alcohol surely can't help things. FFS, England has required bars to use shatterproof glasses to keep people from stabbing/slashing people in bar fights -- this is /way/ more dangerous.

After Martin was killed, curiosity got the better of me, and I did read up on what NY's laws are - ours is the so-called "Castle doctrine." I'm not 100% clear on the details, but I'm pretty sure you're only really clear to use deadly force if you believe you can't safely flee. However, that permission is granted only to your place of residence. The notion of "standing your ground" out in public is utterly absurd. Zimmerman was clearly on the offensive - the only 'defensive stance' was in his mind, fearing a situation that never would have come to pass if he obeyed the 911 operator and simply went on his merry way. He sickens me, and assuming he's found guilty of the charges now brought against him, I hope they give him the maximum sentence possible.
Member # 1659
 - posted April 14, 2012 06:13
Dman, Amen. We live rural so even fire department response is slow, plus twenty minutes. We use a dog and a cat for our alarm system. We do have smoke and gas detectors, at least we could get out of the house, in case of fire. All the Sheriff or State Police are good for is giving you a report for the insurance company.

This link may help or make things worse.

YaHoo News
Member # 46733
 - posted May 04, 2012 10:25

Your points are absolutely valid.

The people defending zimmermans actions are excusing the original actions that set up the situation in question.

Imagine someone is following your daughter and her friends. She chooses to confront the follower and that person feels threatened and shoots them all. How does the defending yourself right be transferred to the original aggressive person.
Member # 1089
 - posted May 04, 2012 10:50
Originally posted by TheMoMan:
All the Sheriff or State Police are good for is giving you a report for the insurance company.

Precisely. A few years ago when I still lived on Merseyside (UK), some youffs set fire to my piece-of-shit Nova. When the nice PO-lice came 'round they basically told me that they DO NOT EVEN investigate crimes like this -- there were far to many in the area on any one night. All they did was issue me a 'crime number' with which to make my insurance claim. The cops don't even pretend to fight such crimes any more -- they've given up on that, it simply wasn't working for them.

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2018 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0

homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam