General Discussion

indie9197

(509 posts)

76. Sorry but Stand Your Ground was never brought up in this case

Sat Jul 20, 2013, 02:20 AM

Jul 2013

Martin was the first person to break the law in this case by attempting to kill Zimmerman. (yes, pounding somebody's head in cement is likely to cause death) If Martin was successful in killing Zimmerman he would be on trial for the same thing Zimmerman was.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

96 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Travyon�s parents propose �Trayvon Martin Amendment� to self defense law [View all] Bjorn Against Jul 2013 OP

K&R MotherPetrie Jul 2013 #1

That would be nice to see. Hoyt Jul 2013 #2

Err, except the law already accounts for that.. X_Digger Jul 2013 #3

Well the Stand Your Ground law was the law that got applied in this trial Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #5

SYG is not separate law! Scootaloo Jul 2013 #7

If that is true... Pelican Jul 2013 #39

Zimmerman is likely to be immune from a civil suit from the Martins Pennycat Jul 2013 #46

I agree... Pelican Jul 2013 #52

No, actually, it wasn't. X_Digger Jul 2013 #8

And it is completely fucked up that the law did not consider him the aggressor Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #9

bullshit. i can walk up to you anywhere and anytime i want and talk to you. period. galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #12

And if I don't want to talk to you you have no right to continue to pursue me Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #14

That doesn't rise to the level of an aggressor. X_Digger Jul 2013 #19

False, because popping a mentally unbalanced homeless person simply for MillennialDem Jul 2013 #71

The poster's criteria of 'following you aggressively' / chasing you and yelling at you.. X_Digger Jul 2013 #83

Well, except for Rachel Jeantel's testimony. Tommy_Carcetti Jul 2013 #86

Her rationale for Trayvon not being the aggressor XemaSab Jul 2013 #88

Her testimony was actually very consistent with the evidence. Tommy_Carcetti Jul 2013 #95

Did we watch the same testimony? I think not. n/t X_Digger Jul 2013 #89

I think so. Tommy_Carcetti Jul 2013 #96

No Lee-Lee Jul 2013 #13

George Zimmerman aggressively pursued Martin who had done nothing wrong Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #15

I see, you're (unintentionally?) conflating English vernacular with the legal concept X_Digger Jul 2013 #20

I am arguing that Florida law is wrong Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #22

You're also arguing that common law in all 50 states is wrong (unintentionally). X_Digger Jul 2013 #25

Yes, I do think gun laws in all fifty states are wrong Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #28

It's not a gun law. It's common law from the 1700's, before FL existed. X_Digger Jul 2013 #30

Sorry, there are 1700's laws I disagree with Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #31

No, I think you don't understand the implications of what you propose in your heartfelt desire to.. X_Digger Jul 2013 #32

You would have a point if Zimmerman had been chasing him to give him his credit card back Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #33

So GZ's legal actions should have made him the legal aggressor?!? X_Digger Jul 2013 #34

George Zimmerman killed a child, I do not believe his acts were legal. Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #35

You're assuming your premise. X_Digger Jul 2013 #37

No I am not assuming anything, George Zimmerman really did kill a child Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #38

The premise you're working backwards from is that the shooting was an illegal act. X_Digger Jul 2013 #40

And I am telling you that law is idiotic Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #41

Please, spend some time with an attorney (preferably criminal) in your circle of aquaintances.. X_Digger Jul 2013 #44

If she didn't know why he was chasing her. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #43

And you would go to jail, and rightly so. n/t X_Digger Jul 2013 #47

Okay. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #55

Anecdote trumps law! Love it. n/t X_Digger Jul 2013 #56

If you chase me, I'm going to mace you. Deal with it. n/t Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #58

I think you'll be the one dealing with it, from a jail cell. X_Digger Jul 2013 #61

K bye. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #64

Jesus, remind me not to go for a jog on your street. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #67

Jeeze. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #69

Look, I know things don't come across right in text sometimes and all AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #70

I'm finished playing. Sorry. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #72

Do people who are going to give someone their credit card back follow you slowly in MillennialDem Jul 2013 #73

Stealing that... Pelican Jul 2013 #42

:-P n/t X_Digger Jul 2013 #45

Wait, what exactly do you want 'aggressor' to be? X_Digger Jul 2013 #18

Grabbing someone makes somebody the aggressor Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #21

If the jury had believed that Lee-Lee Jul 2013 #23

Had the state argued that GZ tried to detain TM, the defense would have argued that.. X_Digger Jul 2013 #24

And I am telling you that law is bullshit Bjorn Against Jul 2013 #26

Oh fer chrissakes. 'Shoot to Wound' is a hollywood / TeeVee concept, not reality. X_Digger Jul 2013 #29

+2 on the stupidity of "Shoot to Wound" Pelican Jul 2013 #48

Does SYG only apply if you have a gun? HockeyMom Jul 2013 #94

The memes are thick with you. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #66

. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #53

Nice sidestep, but still a dodge. X_Digger Jul 2013 #54

I don't know why paparazzi would be interested in me. Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #57

(Me either, but that's still a dodge.) X_Digger Jul 2013 #60

OK, it's a "dodge" (whatever the hell you mean by that). Crunchy Frog Jul 2013 #63

Incorrect. AtheistCrusader Jul 2013 #65

Sorry but Stand Your Ground was never brought up in this case indie9197 Jul 2013 #76

Cool, until a judge says this statute won't be allowed in the case SaveAmerica Jul 2013 #92

If the state can't meet the burden of proof to call the defendant an 'aggressor' X_Digger Jul 2013 #93

Mahalo for this news, Bjorn.. which I missed the Cha Jul 2013 #4

A better--but unrelated--revision would be to SYG itself. Igel Jul 2013 #6

So you want Lee-Lee Jul 2013 #16

You would rather that the rapist shoot the victim dead? reusrename Jul 2013 #74

Making policy only using one case Lee-Lee Jul 2013 #81

This would be good. HappyMe Jul 2013 #10

This message was self-deleted by its author HappyMe Jul 2013 #10

Wouldn't have changed the outcome of the trial Taitertots Jul 2013 #17

Fear of death or GBH opens the floodgates for use of deadly force. Pennycat Jul 2013 #51

Nope, the fear has to be reasonable... Taitertots Jul 2013 #59

Pretty pointless...irrelevant to the case. dkf Jul 2013 #27

Exactly right. Zoeisright Jul 2013 #36

Your honor... He was walking in the same direction as I was... Pelican Jul 2013 #50

Staring at me from a vehicle, then chasing me on foot, then yelling at me is a little fucking MillennialDem Jul 2013 #75

Look at that logically... Pelican Jul 2013 #77

Oh horseshit. Staring is different than looking, and I don't stare at someone while running or MillennialDem Jul 2013 #82

The point is that... Pelican Jul 2013 #84

Again it's about a sum total of parts, not individual actions. I can yell "Hey fatty" at someone MillennialDem Jul 2013 #87

I don't think this would have made a difference. Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #49

why bring facts to Niceguy1 Jul 2013 #80

As if on cue, the "Zimpologists" barrel in with a plethora of reasons bullwinkle428 Jul 2013 #62

If they are legitimate reasons... Pelican Jul 2013 #68

"Zimpologists"? Like Jimmy Carter? (nt) Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #85

K&R. JDPriestly Jul 2013 #78

This message was self-deleted by its author JDPriestly Jul 2013 #79

What is the proposed revision? Vattel Jul 2013 #90

Hopeless gulliver Jul 2013 #91