Originally posted by Oliver North
you missed the fact Zimmerman and his wife attended all the requisite training and the defense witness (a police officer) who testified about the firearms safety he and Zimmerman discussed when they went to the range to learn proper shooting techniques?also, which law does this violate?
zimmerman learning shooting range safety does not apply to that evening especially seeing how disregarded the neighborhood watch training he received.
the castle doctrine would be the law, but have to check if all of it is in stand your ground but zimmerman team is going with self defense.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Talking shit and/or following someone isn't illegal, however.Thus, no crime was committed.
"The crime was shooting Marti-" Shooting Martin was lawful under the rules of Stand Your Ground.
There is nothing [b]legally
wrong with talking shit to someone.Why do you think there is? Can you point me to the law that states "thou shall not talk shit to people and follow them"? [/B]
since you don't get it, allow me to elaborate:
If you talk shit to someone ...expect repercussions for your actions.
Maybe you haven't been in a street fight before because then you would have know to keep your mouth shut rather than disrespect another man.
If you brandish a gun in a non life threatening situation then you have just committed a crime.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Talking shit and/or following someone isn't illegal, however.Thus, no crime was committed.
"The crime was shooting Marti-" Shooting Martin was lawful under the rules of Stand Your Ground.
There is nothing [b]legally
wrong with talking shit to someone.Why do you think there is? Can you point me to the law that states "thou shall not talk shit to people and follow them"? [/B]
if zimmerman had a right to stand his ground, wouldn't martin if felt threaten?
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
I understand that you see nothing wrong with starting a fight and then shooting the man when he is whipping your ass....
that is a very strange assumption to make... what am I saying that you take as support for the Castle Doctrine?
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
Maybe running your mouth to people is the thing to do nowadays since you can legally kill them if they win a fight you started.
in the weeks following the shooting of Treyvon, another SYG case came up that received almost no media coverage.
A man was driving through a drive-through with his wife and child in the car. A mentally handicapped teenager walked by the vehicle, and apparently made some type of gesture that the driver took as malicious. The driver, from his car, shot the mentally handicapped teenager dead. In interviews with the police, the driver said he never though he or his family were in danger, yet he was never brought up on charges, because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is.
Some time before Martin was shot, a woman came across a man robbing the stereo from her car. The man fled the scene, and the woman gave chase, catching him and stabbing him, to death. iirc, she was never brought up on charges, because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is.
The Zimmerman case isn't even the worst application of the Castle Doctrine... As glib as it is to say it, you need to read up more on the stuff you want to make arguments about.
Originally posted by Oliver North
that is a very strange assumption to make... what am I saying that you take as support for the Castle Doctrine?in the weeks following the shooting of Treyvon, another SYG case came up that received almost no media coverage.
A man was driving through a drive-through with his wife and child in the car. A mentally handicapped teenager walked by the vehicle, and apparently made some type of gesture that the driver took as malicious. The driver, from his car, shot the mentally handicapped teenager dead. In interviews with the police, the driver said he never though he or his family were in danger, yet he was never brought up on charges, [b]because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is
.Some time before Martin was shot, a woman came across a man robbing the stereo from her car. The man fled the scene, and the woman gave chase, catching him and stabbing him, to death. iirc, she was never brought up on charges, because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is.
The Zimmerman case isn't even the worst application of the Castle Doctrine... As glib as it is to say it, you need to read up more on the stuff you want to make arguments about. [/B]
are you talking about SYG or castle doctrine? you seem to be using them interchangeably.
Originally posted by jedi90
the castle doctrine would be the law, but have to check if all of it is in stand your ground but zimmerman team is going with self defense.
Originally posted by jedi90
are you talking about SYG or castle doctrine? you seem to be using them interchangeably.
/smh
seriously man?
Originally posted by jedi90
if zimmerman had a right to stand his ground, wouldn't martin if felt threaten?
self-defense is a criminal defense when charged with a crime, you are using a colloquialism of the phrase that has no legal relevance.
In a different world where Zimmerman were the victim and Martin accused of assault, maybe? Certainly I'd say he deserves the same benefit of SYG that Zimmerman is getting.
Originally posted by Oliver North
that is a very strange assumption to make... what am I saying that you take as support for the Castle Doctrine?in the weeks following the shooting of Treyvon, another SYG case came up that received almost no media coverage.
A man was driving through a drive-through with his wife and child in the car. A mentally handicapped teenager walked by the vehicle, and apparently made some type of gesture that the driver took as malicious. The driver, from his car, shot the mentally handicapped teenager dead. In interviews with the police, the driver said he never though he or his family were in danger, yet he was never brought up on charges, [b]because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is
.Some time before Martin was shot, a woman came across a man robbing the stereo from her car. The man fled the scene, and the woman gave chase, catching him and stabbing him, to death. iirc, she was never brought up on charges, because that is how completely ****ed the Castle Doctrine is.
The Zimmerman case isn't even the worst application of the Castle Doctrine... As glib as it is to say it, you need to read up more on the stuff you want to make arguments about. [/B]
Whoah, slow your horses. I support the right to defend oneself and property. Meaning that I will not provoke anyone into a confrontation but I will react to a threat, hence why my house has plenty of fire arms and I occasionally carry on my person.
Since you want to include outside stories, lets talk the California Hawthorne police shooting a dog......guess what..it wouldn't have happened if that man (dog owner) would have minded his own business. hmmmm mind your business...that sounds familiar.
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
Whoah, slow your horses. I support the right to defend oneself and property. Meaning that I will not provoke anyone into a confrontation but I will react to a threat, hence why my house has plenty of fire arms and I occasionally carry on my person.Since you want to include outside stories, lets talk the California Hawthorne police shooting a dog......guess what..it wouldn't have happened if that man (dog owner) would have minded his own business. hmmmm mind your business...that sounds familiar.
you really missed the point of me mentioning those cases?
EDIT: to clarify, the cases I mentioned were from Florida and related directly to SYG laws. Both of them show a far more violent and aggressive individual who was not even brought to trial.
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSON
No I didn't,You are arguing a moot point.
you know what the concept of legal precedence is, yes?
Originally posted by jedi90
seriously.
The Castle Doctrine is a statute that refers specifically to what is considered a valid self-defense defense in court. It is known colloquially as "Stand Your Ground".
just as an aside: This probably is indicative of why people are going to be pissed off if Zimmerman doesn't get the murder charge. People with literally no willingness to even inform themselves about how courts work or the most basic details of the case are calling for Zimmerman to get the death penalty... How, in the age of the internet, where the entire trial is available on YouTube, with no commentary, and all these basic facts on thousands of sites, can people really be so willing to debate something they clearly don't want to know anything about...
/RARGH thats it for tonight folks... reached the "not fun anymore" point.
Originally posted by Oliver North
you really missed the point of me mentioning those cases?EDIT: to clarify, the cases I mentioned were from Florida and related directly to SYG laws. Both of them show a far more violent and aggressive individual who was not even brought to trial.
Sir,
You are preaching to the choir.
Your issue is that Zimmerman did not commit a crime...
My issue is that if he just went along with his own business, then nothing would have ever happened.
Your issue is that Zimmerman did not commit a crime....
My issue is that the crime was committed when he plays rent a cop and approached a man carrying snacks whilst talking on the phone.
If you go looking for trouble while carrying a weapon.....you will find it. in my country we call that "INTENT"
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSONTalking shit to someone does not give that person the legal right to beat your ass, and if they try, you are legally allowed to defend yourself, regardless of whether you started the fight or not.
[B]If you talk shit to someone ...expect repercussions for your actions.
If you brandish a gun in a non life threatening situation then you have just committed a crime.
Under Florida law, no you haven't.
Originally posted by Oliver North
just as an aside: This probably is indicative of why people are going to be pissed off if Zimmerman doesn't get the murder charge. People with literally no willingness to even inform themselves about how courts work or the most basic details of the case are calling for Zimmerman to get the death penalty... How, in the age of the internet, where the entire trial is available on YouTube, with no commentary, and all these basic facts on thousands of sites, can people really be so willing to debate something they clearly don't want to know anything about.../RARGH thats it for tonight folks... reached the "not fun anymore" point.
well you started so take your ass whoopin like a man, you gonna shoot me for arguing my views?
Originally posted by SMIFF-N-WESSONI will shoot you for punching me in the face, repeatedly.
well you started so take your ass whoopin like a man, you gonna shoot me for arguing my views?
Even if I started the fight by telling you that I ****ed your mother, I am legally allowed to shoot you if you attack me for saying that, under Florida law.