Florida jury instructions, before and after SYG

[_ldsfaqs]

One other thing.... that is important to understand why Stand your Ground laws were enacted.

Police

Police even though it's their JOB to face and deal with criminals, are "trained" to deal with violence, EVEN THEY are not expected to just "allow" a person beat them, to instead either face the person using force back, or to run.

Police are allowed (just as stand your ground) to kill or shoot someone if they have a "reasonable" threat of violence to their person or another, or are in fact receiving violence.

Thus, if police who it is their job even to deal with criminals don't have to just "allow" harm to occur to them or to run away, in contrast to the public who are NOT TRAINED to deal with violence generally, it is thus not at all "reasonable" to EXPECT the public to do something different than the police, to in other words not also be able to stand their ground if in reasonable fear of life.

Again, another important fact that shows the liberal cannot think beyond simply someone died and race when they make judgments.

[_MeDotOrg]

A. If you are in your home and a rapist comes at you and you "could" have jumped out your window and you didn't and you instead kill the rapist with your gun, liberals like those here would put you in jail.

Actually that's incorrect. There are three basic levels of obligation to retreat in the United States:

1. Obligation to retreat in all areas.
2. Obligation to retreat outside the home. (Castle Doctrine)
3. No obligation to retreat, irrespective of location. (Stand Your Ground Doctrine)

Sometimes 'Castle Doctrine' and 'Stand Your Ground' are thrown around interchangeably, but there is a difference. Stevie Wonder is boycotting the Stand Your Ground laws. He said nothing about Castle Laws.

B. If you were being pummelled to death by Mike Tyson, and you could "reasonably" have ran away, but you instead pull out your gun and kill the bastard, the liberals like those here would have put you in Prison for it.

First of all, if you are being pummeled to death by Mike Tyson and can still 'reasonably' run away, my hat's off to you.

But why Mike Tyson? Why not Ingemar Johansson? ;-)

Thus, stand your ground laws were created to stop the "injustice" of innocent people from going to Prison simply because they defended themselves with lethal force from reasonable suspicion or actual violent assault with potential for death.

You see, liberals do not have the mental and moral intelligence to understand that a person is not obligated to "flee" like a victim, when their personal space is being violated by violence. They don't understand that a person has the personal RIGHT to be free in their own space from molestation, and that we are not obligated to create more harm emotionally or mentally in ourselves by running away and HOPING we don't get chased and beat to death.

One scenario that is conspicuously absent is one where both antagonists see themselves as being in the right.

What if two neighbors, both armed and a little drunk, get into an argument at a poolside barbecue? Does it really matter which guy thinks he's in the right?

What if two groups of people arrive at a public park on a weekend, and both want to use the softball diamond? Maybe there's a little testosterone-induced antagonism. Maybe a little drinking, maybe a little name calling.

I think it's significant that the only scenarios you can think of are situations where one party is absolutely right and the other party is absolutely wrong. It mirrors your worldview. Thinking of a scenario where both parties were both innocent and guilty is too analog a shading for your binary world.

But like it or not, not all situations are free from moral ambiguity. Reality confirms this every day.

[_cinepro]

It does make you wonder what would happen if a black man shot a white teen in a state without a "Stand Your Ground" law.

Oh wait..

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_st ... ot-guilty/

[_beastie]

It does make you wonder what would happen if a black man shot a white teen in a state without a "Stand Your Ground" law.

Oh wait..

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_st ... ot-guilty/

Which of these things it not like the other?

[_krose]

I'm sure Brother fax can easily show you doubters how many people were beaten to death in the dark days before they were allowed to pull out a gun and kill their battle opponents with superior fighting ability, as true Christian Americans should.

I, for one, am in awe of his presumed ability to get to his hidden gun and accurately shoot it while being beaten to death by Mike Tyson. That's impressive.

[_Bazooka]

Let me articulate the problem I'm having with this.

Regardless of the ultimate outcome, who is to blame for this incident occurring?
1. Trayvon for walking home to his Dad's house and reacting badly to an unidentified stranger following and confronting him?
2. Zimmerman for ignoring police advice to stay in his car and confronting someone who he had no evidence had committed, or was going to commit any kind of wrongdoing.

Had Zimmerman stayed in his car, Trayvon would not have been shot dead.

[_ajax18]

It does make you wonder what would happen if a black man shot a white teen in a state without a "Stand Your Ground" law.

Oh wait..

http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_st ... ot-guilty/

Which of these things it not like the other?

I don't know from just reading the link. Tell us exactly what was different about this case.

[_ldsfaqs]

Let me articulate the problem I'm having with this.

Regardless of the ultimate outcome, who is to blame for this incident occurring?
1. Trayvon for walking home to his Dad's house and reacting badly to an unidentified stranger following and confronting him?
2. Zimmerman for ignoring police advice to stay in his car and confronting someone who he had no evidence had committed, or was going to commit any kind of wrongdoing.

Had Zimmerman stayed in his car, Trayvon would not have been shot dead.

And if pigs flew we wouldn't usually eat pork.
The person to "blame" is Trayvon, not Zimmerman. Man you people are dunce.

Zimmerman DID not "confront" Trayvon, and even if he had, human beings are ALLOWED to speak to each other. Is that so complicated to understand? "Recommendation"s are not any sort of moral imperative, and if fascinates me that you think they are.

Let me put this another way.....

There's a case in which the Police put a guy in Coma when he was tackled by a cop.
This guy was actually an innocent bystander. But, a witness pointed in his direction and he apparently not knowing what was going on, ran briefly. And because he ran, the cops thought he was guilty, which resulted in a 10 Million dollar award.

Now, despite the verdict, was the innocent man "guilty" simply because he "jogged" briefly?
Was it "contributory", yes..... But, was he the "cause" of the event happening? Or was the cop at fault for an over-use of force when there was no evidence he was the actual criminal?

You are doing the same thing, you are judging a potential unwise action as being at fault, compared to the actual action that was at fault for Trayvons death. Being stupid, or dumb, or unwise, etc. (in your opinion) is not guilt or fault. The ONLY person who had guilt and was unwise that DIRECTLY caused his death was Trayvon.

No one is saying Zimmerman didn't "contribute" to the event happening, just like if he hadn't even cared if some man was walking around suspiciously the event wouldn't have happened. But, the only one who "caused" the event to happen was Trayvon, by using violence in a situation that didn't require violence.

Is that really so complicated to understand?

[Tator]

I don't know from just reading the link. Tell us exactly what was different about this case.

The white teenager who was shot in cinepro's link was caught in a criminal act. He was breaking into cars. The kids even admitted that.

Travyon Martin was walking home from the store.

I have a real problem with any comparison to these two cases that begins with the presumption that the teenagers in question were equivalent except for the color of their skin.

[_just me]

And if pigs flew we wouldn't usually eat pork.

Sig worthy. My siggy was getting stale, so thanks.