Out of Pod Experience

Neighborhood watch goon thought he was a cop. Even if he did believe he was acting in self defense, I don't think this guy should ever be allowed to touch a firearm again. He created that situation through his own actions. It was irresponsible and someone lost a son for his stupidity.



I'm confused...so there are places where I have to...what? Run away before shooting the guy charging me with a knife? Should I backpedal and risk tripping? Self defense should not have prerequisites. "Oh, you weren't defending yourself because you weren't backed into a corner yet." Absurd.

.

The point of those laws is that you can't just use lethal force as your first response if you have a legitimate way to escape the situation safely. For example, the morons in the other thread who claimed they would open the door and beat the guy threatening them would be facing criminal charges, since they had the alternative option of simply keeping the door closed and waiting for the police to arrive.

Murder always == intent to kill, or murder 2 were you had to have known your actions would/could result in a death. Which is what it sounds akin to. Reason for the difference is because frame of mind are startlingly different...Mostly due to premeditation v. being ********, and what did you think was going to happen?

The reason for the differentiation goes down to punishment if convicted the results may be the same, but should societies revenge a.k.a prison time be the same even though one meant to and one did not? From that is the person remorseful or not? True murder sentences also carry the weight of the death penalty as well.

Negligent homicide and manslaughter are the same thing...

^

Dont ask me I didn't make the law. Personally if anyone breaks in they didn't have your safety in mind...or theirs in the first place. They have have committed a crime knowingly. Now having said that should you shoot someone attempting to flee or say some dumb kid looking for a few bucks if you get the jump on them? Perhaps a little "unsporting" All situation dependent IMO.

I knew there was going to be a big push behind this.

Ok the "Stand your ground" law passed in Florida a few years ago came from an incident in 2004 when an old geezer, unable to escape from an intruder as was previously required (called "duty to retreat") ended up having to shoot. Do you expect an old man to do a cartwheel out of his bedroom window?

When the new law was passed, the usual moneyed disarmament interests made huge ads in newspapers stating that it's going to become a free fire zone.

They were wrong because the law clearly states the conditions involved. Basically it means there is no "duty to retreat" if you are threatened, but it was not meant to construe that you can just shoot people. In other words, there was protection for self-defense cases against overzealous prosecutors following the "all guns are bad and anybody who has them should not have them" mentality.

But it was clear from the start, if you escalate a situation, you would still be in trouble.

So, why the heck is this Zimmerman character not charged?

Because the politicized police do not like the law either. And by not charging Zimmerman, who clearly escalated the matter and put himself into a position where he ended up shooting somebody, it is making people angry.

And as we learned from what Kony 2012 attempted to do, angry people do not think.

So, what about all those innocent-looking black kids out there who get gunned down by real cops? Where are the marches? Where are the protests? Where are the calls to change the laws regarding police engagement tactics? Where are the questions around how the police are trained?

Nope. Nothing.

So now I get to watch the usual people suffering from vaginosis, as usual, go knee-jerk, being played like fiddles.

And we will be back to what? What a certain kind of people want, those politicking police chiefs, the victim-disarmament crowd, and the usual suspects who seek to replace social power with state power at every step (because to them, they are the state). So when someone pinned in their bedroom by some creep ends up having to shoot, some former community activist in the 60s type turned District Attorney can still charge the would-be victim and the latte-slurpers in the gated and guarded communities can feel good about themselves.

Florida is unique in that finances - being able to afford an expensive house far away from the cheap houses - is not common. Town are build in such a manner that you leave your expensive mansion and go a mile and at the stoplight the guy on the left is probably an ex-con, the guy on the right probably has warrants out on him. It's not like, say, Long Island New York where you have to pay half a million for a small house with $8K a year in property taxes just to "get away from those people". (the biggest racists are in those places where they pretend not to be racists). On those places, it would be a cop who stops the black kid and escalates the sitaution to the point of shooting him - because on "those places" (aka "Whitelandia" as Ron Kooby used to call it ) there are no black kids.

Yet those monied disarmament interests don't care so much about it, being socialists, and cops being tools of the state.


If they get their way, it will be back to the "Three S's": Shoot. Shovel. Shut up. It's possible still to totally kill somebody you have no connection to and bury them in the swamps (or feed them to the gators) and if you don't say a damned word about it to anybody you will still get away with it. So if having to defend yourself means you go to jail anyway, then it's 3S time because people will still do whatever they want and need to do.

As I said:

As outrage over the incident coalesces, a grand jury has been called to investigate the shooting and the FBI has announced that it will “monitor” the inquiry. Martin’s family has suggested that racial bigotry underlies both Zimmerman’s actions and the refusal by police to charge him. ABC News reports that “The Sanford Police Department says it stands by its investigation, and that it was not race or incompetence that prevented it from arresting Zimmerman but the law.” The civilian disarmament lobby loudly opposes “stand your ground” and “castle doctrine” laws recognizing the individual right to armed self-defense. In recent months, police unions have lobbied against “castle doctrine” laws in Minnesota and Indiana that explicitly recognize the natural right of citizens to use lethal force against police officers who unlawfully invade their property or threaten their lives.


Again:


In recent months, police unions have lobbied against “castle doctrine” laws in Minnesota and Indiana that explicitly recognize the natural right of citizens to use lethal force against police officers who unlawfully invade their property or threaten their lives.

So OF COURSE the police are not going to charge the moron.

Make the law look bad, people will vote against it - it's "weaponized democracy" and the new weapon of 5th Generation Warfare.

What's option C?

I was going to go with "Zimmerman was a mind-controlled agent of the Illuminati, and he was framed for the crime to prevent him from going public with the secret {WWII-era German political party} moon base and preventing Obama (a socialist Muslim and high-level agent of Xenu) from winning re-election over Ron Paul, the one true champion of the people (and the gold standard)."

But I suppose yours is a decent explanation too.

Heh, did read several articles on it, still pretty iffy on this and awaiting results from the investigation. Makes me wonder if the situation would've been different if Zimmerman didn't call 911 first.

But I must stress, even if I had a gun, it shouldn't be that difficult to shoot on the arms or legs to disable any individual. It is quite terrible it happen. :(