its still funny they're posting like 3-5 year old pictures of trayvon.After Zimmerman arrest, questions about ‘stand your ground’
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trendin...QDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3
its still funny they're posting like 3-5 year old pictures of trayvon.After Zimmerman arrest, questions about ‘stand your ground’
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trendin...QDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3
Originally Posted by Stephen Cue
I feel that IF Zimmerman was fleeing and IF Martin attacked him, SYG does not apply. His defense is stronger without it IF that is what happened.
Prior to SYG, one's first obligation when threatened with assualt was to retreat. SYG allows one to not be burdened with an obligation to retreat and to literally 'stand his or her ground and meet force with force when attacked'.
So unless Zimmerman lied about fleeing and "stood his ground" when he shot Martin, SYG doesnt apply IMHO.
I disagree but I'm not a lawyer or any type of legal expert for that matter. The way I understand "stand your ground" laws is that the obligation to retreat is removed. To me this doesn't take the option of retreating off the table, it simply states that you aren't obligated to do so.
Im confused, what are you disagreeing with?
You stated that you don't believe that stand your ground applies if you exercise your first option of retreat, in effect taking the option to retreat off the table. I think that it leaves the retreat option on the table but gets rid of your obligation to retreat first.
There is a misinterpretation. Maybe I didnt articulate it well
Yes, SYG takes away an obligation to retreat, but....
If one retreats FIRST, then SYG does not apply simply in definition. If one did not stand his/her ground, then why would SYG apply?
Stand Your Ground ONLY applies if one stands their ground to meet force with force. If someone retreats, they are not standing their ground; and are in a better legal position thus not needing the criminal/civil protection from prosecution that the SYG law gives and was the sole purpose of its intention.
The law is there only to protect victims that meet force with force by standing their ground when threatened, not fleeing. Previous to SYG, one would be lawful if they were threatened with force, retreated, then was forced to defend themselves with the same level of force they were threatened with.
I think I just maybe made you more confused.
So by your interpretation, you give up the right to self defense if you first flee? Or just that SYG does not apply if you first flee? In which case you still have a right to self defense under the laws previous to SYG. I can see no scenario where you would lose the protection of the law if you practice lawful self defense. I think you are taking things a little bit too literally without regard to the intent and practice of the law.
...additionally, stand your ground wasn't intended to provide cover for someone who acts as the aggressor and then retreats or gets their ass kicked when things don't go right.
How would that apply in this case?
Seriously, I've seen some incredible leaps and contortions of logic concerning this case, ones that would make Cirque du Soleil performers clap appreciatively. Same for made up scenarios that didn't happen, or no one knows if they did or didn't happened. What do we actually know for a fact?
Zimmerman and Martin were present.
Zimmerman called 911.
Zimmerman relayed the information to the 911 dispatcher.
Zimmerman began following Martin.
The 911 dispatcher asked him if he was, and told him "We don't need you to do that".
Zimmerman acknowledged what the dispatcher told him.
We hear heavy breathing.
The call ends.
Martin was on the phone with his gf.
Martin eventually hung up.
A witness says they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman when he was shot.
What else do we know for a fact? Not a damned thing. If everyone in the country would stop assuming facts not in evidence, this wouldn't be such a debacle. All it's become is a 3 Ring Circus with everyone jockeying to be "right" before anyone else. I wonder what the Vegas odds are right now, seeing as how this incident has become a prime time spectator sport?
Enter your email address to join: