Florida's Stand your Ground law

@FreeDuck,

There may be many more of these types in pristine enclaves, just a guess.

Our town, Venice, CA, was, at least back then, famous for intricate and volumetrically escalating contretemps, and that's among lots of 'liberals', but, again, at least back then, people talked stuff out ad infinitum.

0 Replies

@FreeDuck,

This is obnoxious supposition on my part, but I am guessing the shooter took the later shot teen as stealing chips and soda. It's obnoxious since I haven't read enough. On the other hand, it's even worse if he was shot for being black, walking.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

My take on this is... The big tough Zimmerman was a very lucky man. The hooded kid could of been a young gun nut like David, who would of filled him with lead before he could blink.. If I was him, I would hand my gun in and go live in another state. their gun laws would make it sooo easy to do the same thing to him.

1 Reply

@tenderfoot,

tenderfoot wrote:

My take on this is... The big tough Zimmerman was a very lucky man. The hooded kid could of been a young gun nut like David, who would of filled him with lead before he could blink.. If I was him, I would hand my gun in and go live in another state. their gun laws would make it sooo easy to do the same thing to him.

Soooo, u think he needs to find another State
where the criminals obay all the gun laws?? Was that your point ?

David

0 Replies

@panzade,

panzade wrote:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukeHdiszZmE[/youtube]

I loved that movie.
I own a copy of it on videotape. Thank u.
I saw it in a good theater in 1969.

David

0 Replies

So in Florida now all you need to do to murder someone legally is to say you felt threatened. As an alleged lawyer, does that strike you as good law, David? Would the Founding Fathers approve?

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

defend the immutable right
of every American citizen to defend his life & property,

DrewDad wrote:

Except Zimmerman's life, and Zimmerman's property were never in danger.

He was an aggressor, not a defender.

Maybe U know that, Drew; maybe u were there looking. I dunno. I am IGNORANT
(as C.I. is so obsessively fond of pointing out) of what happened at that time & place.

I really don 't care much about Mr. Z,
but I care A LOT about protecting and proliferating strong Castle Doctrine
and extra-Castle Doctrine laws such as Florida 's, as well as annihilating all gun control law.

I am a reactionary who yearns to restore the status quo ante thru out America
so that each citizen can and will be able to aggressively defend himself,
his family and his property, with no fear of his own hired government.

David

0 Replies

I've hired the government to protect me from wacko gun nuts like you, thank you very much.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

So in Florida now all you need to do to murder someone legally is to say you felt threatened.

That 's really not the actual law, mere emotion,
but in this case we know only that there was a struggle
in which both parties were injured; 1 was killed n 1 survived.

MontereyJack wrote:

As an alleged lawyer, does that strike you as good law, David? Would the Founding Fathers approve?

R u gonna pay me an alleged consultation fee ?

DaVid

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

I've hired the government to protect me from wacko gun nuts like you, thank you very much.

"When seconds count,
the police r only a few minutes away."

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

In one breath, you say you're ignorant of what happened. In the next you say we know there was a struggle.

Way to impeach yourself, Dave.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

This is ODD coming from you David.
What facts do we have?
An armed person follows an unarmed one and eventually kills him.

In most cases you would be arguing that the person being followed should have been armed to protect himself from his attacker. You don't see the hypocrisy in the outcome here Dave and how you are now trying to defend it?

2 Replies

@parados,

Actually that's what really should happen: two armed persons meet on a pavement, both defend their castle, the one who's faster, is the good guy.

I think, I've seen that a couple of times at high noon ... Wink

1 Reply

@JTT,

What do ignorant Americans have to do with the Federal govt getting involved in a shooting? There were no federal laws broken. Murder is local issue not a federal issue.

3 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

This is ODD coming from you David.
What facts do we have?
An armed person follows an unarmed one and eventually kills him.

In most cases you would be arguing that the person being followed
should have been armed to protect himself from his attacker.

Of course; every citizen shud.
Failure to be sufficiently well armed = death, with no appeal.
If he HAD been, he 'd have a decent chance to remain alive.
This is a good lesson for everyone else. Let his death not be in vain.

parados wrote:

You don't see the hypocrisy in the outcome here Dave and how you are now trying to defend it?

Yes, I DON 'T. What hypocrisy is that, Mr. Parados??????

David

3 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

you live in a very scary world, dave.

mostly the only time I fear for my safety any more is when I come here and start reading some of the crazy stuff that gets posted...

I should add that I don't have brown skin.

maybe you need to start a garden...

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

So..
The shooter would be safer if he carries a gun as evidenced by his killing the other person
The person shot would be safer if he carried a gun in which case he could have killed the original shooter rather than being killed himself.

Your hypocrisy is in arguing that someone carrying a gun is safer when this case would only lead to one of the other probably being killed. If neither had a gun, no one would have been killed which directly contradicts your argument.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I see you deleted your post about how "new evidence" had come to light.

I assume you went back and saw that the posts where you contradicted yourself were a mere 12 minutes apart?

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

you live in a very scary world, dave.

No. This is a low crime area.
I am never in fear.

Rockhead wrote:

mostly the only time I fear for my safety any more is when I come here and start reading some of the crazy stuff that gets posted...

I recommend that u keep your emotions under control.

Rockhead wrote:

I should add that I don't have brown skin.

Sounds good.

Rockhead wrote:

maybe you need to start a garden...

No. My hands might get dirty.
I let 1 of my tenants have a little garden.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I don't think you get to judge my emotional state, mister bold type and red letters...

I don't froth at the mouth when a gun thread starts. know what I mean...?

0 Replies

Florida's Stand your Ground law

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know