Post: #1

How ALEC Took Florida's 'License to Kill' Law National

John Nichols on March 21, 2012 - 11:57 PM

…. In states across the country, with support from the gun lobby, ALEC’s model legislation—sometimes in mirror form, sometimes with modest alterations—has been enacted over the years since Peadon and Bush dismissed the warning by Florida state Senator Steve Geller that the “Stand Your Ground” law ran the risk of encouraging Floridians to think that “you ought to be able to kill people that are walking toward you on the street because of this subjective belief that you’re worried that they may get in a fight with you.”

http://www.thenation.com/blog/166978/how...w-national

Post: #2

(03-23-2012 09:54 AM)JayMillz Wrote:  How ALEC Took Florida's 'License to Kill' Law National

John Nichols on March 21, 2012 - 11:57 PM

…. In states across the country, with support from the gun lobby, ALEC’s model legislation—sometimes in mirror form, sometimes with modest alterations—has been enacted over the years since Peadon and Bush dismissed the warning by Florida state Senator Steve Geller that the “Stand Your Ground” law ran the risk of encouraging Floridians to think that “you ought to be able to kill people that are walking toward you on the street because of this subjective belief that you’re worried that they may get in a fight with you.”

http://www.thenation.com/blog/166978/how...w-national

How often do shootings take place within the parameters of the 'Stand Your Ground' law?

Post: #3

Quote:FAST FACTS

Florida Statute 776.013 (3)

"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Justifiable homicide

Reports of justifiable homicides in Florida

2000 32

2001 33

2002 35

2003 32

2004 31

2005 43

2006 33

2007 102

2008 93

2009 105

2010 (through June) 44

Source: Florida Department of Law Enforcement

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafet...128317.ece

Post: #4

Reading about the Trayvon Martin slaying is like peeling back the layers of a giant, rotting onion.

Post: #5

Was Zimmerman engaged in an "unlawful activity" when he first tried to stop Martin? Zimmerman did not have any law enforcement authority, so if he instigated the contact that would be at least battery. Thus, it would seem he is precluded from benefiting from 776.013(3). I think the law should have an objective standard for reasonableness instead of the subjective one they have now.

Post: #6

(03-23-2012 02:04 PM)Menace Wrote:  Was Zimmerman engaged in an "unlawful activity" when he first tried to stop Martin? Zimmerman did not have any law enforcement authority, so if he instigated the contact that would be at least battery. Thus, it would seem he is precluded from benefiting from 776.013(3). I think the law should have an objective standard for reasonableness instead of the subjective one they have now.

Quote:Stalking


Fla. Stat. § 784.048. Stalking; definitions; penalties. (2008)

(1) As used in this section, the term:

(a) "Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

(b) "Course of conduct" means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct." Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

© "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

http://www.ncvc.org/src/main.aspx?dbID=DB_Florida108

Post: #7

(03-23-2012 12:53 PM)Baldwin81 Wrote:  Reading about the Trayvon Martin slaying is like peeling back the layers of a giant, rotting onion.

How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...-date.html

Post: #8

(03-23-2012 03:33 PM)Samseau Wrote:  How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...-date.html

That was a very unfortunate and senseless murder as well. Not a "License to Kill" incident, but tragic nonetheless.

Post: #9

Members of the Miami Heat wear hooded sweatshirts. (Photo via LeBron James' Twitter account)

Post: #10

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/0...-zip-it-up

Here's the inevitable direction this was going to go in - finding something, anything, that somehow provoked this tragic incident. The hoody. An article of clothing that is worn by pretty much every member of society everyday, by both genders. Let's avoid the REAL reason, and distract from that by raising weak mitigating factors. It's one thing for a person to walk into a bank wearing a hood or a ski mask (there would be a reasonable question as to whether or not this person was attempting to rob the bank), but walking the street in the rain with your hood up? And again, he made it a point to single out black and latino males, making it just fine for others to wear hoodies, because naturally no one would ever suspect them of wrongdoing. What's next? New Era caps? You know how popular THOSE are with blacks and latinos, right? The bottom line, no matter what he's wearing, black and latino males are "threatening" to some simply for looking the way they look, not because of what they're wearing. Geraldo tried to soften this by making it personal - he, as a father, gives this same warning to his own son. Just the same, it's a crime in and of itself that a man with a criminal record (yes, he was arrested for assault on a peace officer) hasn't been taken into custody for essentially executing a young man on the street. We can talk about how much things have changed, but then something like this happens and justice is either extremely slow, or non-existent.

Post: #11

(03-23-2012 04:11 PM)JayMillz Wrote:  

(03-23-2012 03:33 PM)Samseau Wrote:  How about this one:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...-date.html

That was a very unfortunate and senseless murder as well. Not a "License to Kill" incident, but tragic nonetheless.

Same outer layer of the same proverbial onion.

There's no trust between blacks and whites in this country.

Before someone goes on saying, "Well, the shooter was Hispanic..."

Do me a favor. This is in the news because black people spoke up about it and white-controlled media outlets began reporting it. Furthermore, most white people of certain social class know the kid who wanted to be cop or a soldier and for whatever reason couldn't cut it. Fast-forward ten years, a hundred Chuck Norris movies later, and you have Mr. Zimmerman. This says nothing of Zimmerman's guilt, innocence or of his race. I can tell you that there are no shortage of angry, afc white dudes who'd do the same thing. Any American white man who disagrees with me needs to get their eyes and ears checked.

That mistrust, distrust, lack of trust goes way back and is more complicated than one message board post could hope to cover.

The absolute worst of both races is what gets publicized. This absolute worst, and the charlatans - white and black - who exploit "racial issues" for fame and profit is what attracts readers and what sells advertising. There are exceptions to every rule. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's fair to say that, in general, a white man and a black man coming up in the US view things from different perspectives.

Everyone's perspective is the truth in their own mind. Anyone who doesn't share your perspective is "racist," or a "lazy n*****," or a "dirty Mexican."

Shit's just become so politically correct that you either say what you're supposed to say in public or don't say anything at all. In private, of course, we say all kinds of things to a like-minded audience.

We make it about hoodies, about laws on the books, about oppression, about fear, about social justice, about Obama, about the 1%, etc., etc., etc...,

We make it about everything except what it is...

We have different experiences. From different experiences come different perspectives. Understand another person's perspective and you go a long way in understanding the person. Nobody wants to do that, of course, because it's hard and will more than likely reveal some unpleasant truths about you and your respective "people."

I know it sounds like idealistic, John Lennon-betamale shit but without understanding there'll never be trust. Without trust we'll just keep on being distracted, xenophobic simps trapped fighting for scraps of a currency worth less and less each day.

Post: #12

(03-23-2012 12:49 PM)jariel Wrote:  

Quote:FAST FACTS

Florida Statute 776.013 (3)

"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Justifiable homicide

Reports of justifiable homicides in Florida

2000 32

2001 33

2002 35

2003 32

2004 31

2005 43

2006 33

2007 102

2008 93

2009 105

2010 (through June) 44

Source: Florida Department of Law Enforcement

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafet...128317.ece

Interesting, so the stand your ground law was passed in 2005, and only a couple years later the murder rate from "self-defense" triples.

Post: #13

What are we in the fucking late 1800s?

Post: #14

this shit pisses me off i skip past it when it comes up on my msnbc news on the xbox

the kid was yelling for someone to help him an then he gets shot... an this other guy was acting in self defense??

how many people to you know scream out for help while they are beating someone up....

Post: #15

The biggest problem now is that the process is going so slowly. Even the right wingers, who were largely silent about this before, are (justifiably) throwing Zimmerman under the bus. I have no doubt that Zimmerman will be arrested and prosecuted. I also have little doubt that he will be convicted and sent to prison. The challenge is that his arrest hasn't happened yet, and his conviction might not happen for another year. So people have to just sit here and fume about it.

Honestly, shit like this makes me want to move to a state with concealed carry and walk around armed all of the time. Some asshole wants to follow me, start shit, then "Stand his ground" against me, fine. I'll "Stand my ground" too. We'll just see who is the better shot.

Post: #16

(03-23-2012 08:36 PM)joehoya Wrote:  The biggest problem now is that the process is going so slowly. Even the right wingers, who were largely silent about this before, are (justifiably) throwing Zimmerman under the bus. I have no doubt that Zimmerman will be arrested and prosecuted. I also have little doubt that he will be convicted and sent to prison. The challenge is that his arrest hasn't happened yet, and his conviction might not happen for another year. So people have to just sit here and fume about it.

Honestly, shit like this makes me want to move to a state with concealed carry and walk around armed all of the time. Some asshole wants to follow me, start shit, then "Stand his ground" against me, fine. I'll "Stand my ground" too. We'll just see who is the better shot.

Guess that's legal as long as you're white.

Post: #17

And people on this forum wondered why some of us keep pistols around.

Post: #18

While I don't support Zimmerman's actions in this case (confronting this kid when the kid posed no immediate threat to him or anyone else and with the police already being notified and on their way), I support the stand your ground doctrine. Why the fuck should anyone have to retreat before defending himself against an attacker? An obligation to retreat treats the aggressor more favorably than the victim, but I guess that is par for the course in this politically correct country. And calling 'stand your ground' a 'license to kill' is leftist progaganda at its finest.

As for this particular case, who knows what actually happened, but if all Zimmerman did was ask the kid questions, while he may be a dick, that does not give the kid the right to assault him.

Post: #19

The Stand Your Ground laws were enacted to remove ambiguity from the case of a homeowner protecting his property - i.e. to make sure that if someone was threatened on his property, he had no obligation to "retreat" before using deadly force. This law does in no way extend to stalking and shooting a person, no matter whether the person is threatening or not.

The point is, Trayvon could have been a threatening gangsta with a hoodie, full of tattoos and with a satchel of grenades and a bag of cocaine strapped to his belt, and still no law would justify what Zimmerman did - seeking him out, following him and then shooting him.

Shooting after retreating < Shooting without retreating < Shooting after seeking out
Allowed under common law < Allowed under SYG laws < Not allowed under any law

The proliferation of new SYG laws around the States needs to highlight this important distinction so that this tragedy doesn't happen again.

Post: #20

No doubt a tragic case,and the guy should be arrested but what about the right for two guys to walk home after a drink without getting shot...where were the rallies and protests at those innocents?
Non existent!

We all have prejudice it seems,doesn't matter what colour...acting before knowing the full facts seems to be a habit too!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...orida.html

Post: #21

Leftists wasting no time trying to capitalize on this case to repeal stand your ground (i.e., forcing us to turn our backs and flee from attackers b/c everyone knows bullies back down when you run from them ). http://www.wltx.com/news/article/180384/...Ground-Law

The comments thus far to the article are spot on.

Post: #22

(03-24-2012 07:02 AM)Pilgrim37 Wrote:  No doubt a tragic case,and the guy should be arrested but what about the right for two guys to walk home after a drink without getting shot...where were the rallies and protests at those innocents?
Non existent!

We all have prejudice it seems,doesn't matter what colour...acting before knowing the full facts seems to be a habit too!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...orida.html

The distinction between the case you linked to and this one is important. In fact, it highlights why people are so angry about this crime. In the case you mentioned the assailant WAS ARRESTED AND IS CURRENTLY ON TRIAL FOR MURDER. The police made AGGRESSIVE efforts to find and arrest the person guilty of that crime.

Now, what if in the story you linked to, the assailant was questioned, told the police that he was just defending himself when he shot those two tourists because he thought they were going to rob him, and the police ACCEPTED HIS CLAIMS AND DID NOT ARREST HIM? That sounds absurd, doesn't it?

THIS IS THE ISSUE. It is not just the fact that some trigger happy fool shoots a 17 year old kid. That shit happens. It is that the police accepted his claim of self defense at face value and made no attempts to do a more thorough investigation.

Underlying the whole investigation is the direct implication that it is reasonable for a 240lb man to stalk an unarmed 140lb black teenager in a hoodie confront him, then SHOOT HIM, because he was "in fear for his life".

The fact that the police so readily accepted his claims is the most appalling part of this story. I am absolutely certain that if the family had not pressed the issue and alerted the media the police would have just written this off as another accidental, yet JUSTIFIABLE shooting.

This is a protest about the SYSTEM. There are always going to be hotheads (whether they are racists or not) who are going to act irrationally and shoot innocent people. However, when the system PROTECTS those hotheads it validates those behaviors.

Post: #23

I just want to add that I support "Stand your ground" laws. If someone attacks me, I should not have to run away. HOWEVER, I assume that if I am required to "stand my ground" and the incident results in the death of my attacker it will be thoroughly investigated to see if I used reasonable force.

If I am 240lbs and some guy with a gun or knife or some other weapon attacks me or attempts to rob me, I want the right to shoot that guy without having to run away. HOWEVER, I don't believe I have the right to shoot an UNARMED person that is 100lbs lighter than me. There has to be a concept of proportionate force.

Think about it. If I am at a club or a party and some dude pushes me on purpose that is an assault. Now do I have the right to respond to that assault by pulling out my glock and pumping a round in his chest because I was "Standing my ground" and "feared for my life"?

Post: #24

Here's the case of a man in Iowa, which has no stand your ground law. Look at what happens to this man who exercised his natural right to self-defense ('natural' in that right to self-defense is not a privilege granted to you by government, as the leftists would have you believe). He spends 112 days in jail, loses his home, his job, and all his belongings.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article...y=nav|head

Post: #25

(03-24-2012 07:31 AM)joehoya Wrote:  

(03-24-2012 07:02 AM)Pilgrim37 Wrote:  No doubt a tragic case,and the guy should be arrested but what about the right for two guys to walk home after a drink without getting shot...where were the rallies and protests at those innocents?
Non existent!

We all have prejudice it seems,doesn't matter what colour...acting before knowing the full facts seems to be a habit too!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...orida.html

The distinction between the case you linked to and this one is important. In fact, it highlights why people are so angry about this crime. In the case you mentioned the assailant WAS ARRESTED AND IS CURRENTLY ON TRIAL FOR MURDER. The police made AGGRESSIVE efforts to find and arrest the person guilty of that crime.

Now, what if in the story you linked to, the assailant was questioned, told the police that he was just defending himself when he shot those two tourists because he thought they were going to rob him, and the police ACCEPTED HIS CLAIMS AND DID NOT ARREST HIM? That sounds absurd, doesn't it?

THIS IS THE ISSUE. It is not just the fact that some trigger happy fool shoots a 17 year old kid. That shit happens. It is that the police accepted his claim of self defense at face value and made no attempts to do a more thorough investigation.

Underlying the whole investigation is the direct implication that it is reasonable for a 240lb man to stalk an unarmed 140lb black teenager in a hoodie confront him, then SHOOT HIM, because he was "in fear for his life".

The fact that the police so readily accepted his claims is the most appalling part of this story. I am absolutely certain that if the family had not pressed the issue and alerted the media the police would have just written this off as another accidental, yet JUSTIFIABLE shooting.

This is a protest about the SYSTEM. There are always going to be hotheads (whether they are racists or not) who are going to act irrationally and shoot innocent people. However, when the system PROTECTS those hotheads it validates those behaviors.

Well argued.
But,I didn't want to draw a parallel with this particular case.
The case obviously needs to be investigated and it's ridiculous they've taken this guy at his word.

I just meant that it seems strange to me that the "black community" aren't screamin' and hollerin' and calling for changes when so many of their young guys are involved in perpetrating these crimes, not just when they're innocent victims of them.

If that happened ,maybe there would be a lot less black street crime and maybe the reputation for being involved in it would go down, and not every idiot wannabe cop/soldier with a gun and an inferiority complex would immediately conclude a young black kid walking round a nice neighborhood is up to no good.

These kind of incidents will continue as long as young black guys are saddled with the "street" label...but a lot of them are their own worst enemy when it comes to what they get up to....they help reinforce the wider stereotype about them.
And that's just sad,considering how difficult life can be in the first place!

Oh,and don't get me started on Florida's ,and the USA's gun laws in general!Want to stop so many shootings...get rid of so many guns!

I'm digging a hole for myself here so I'll stop!