Skip to main content

View Diary: Is the "Stand Your Ground Law" a license to kill? (92 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't see my wife as that much of a physical (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KVoimakas

    threat, even if she was wielding a golf club, (not that much upper body strength). Nevertheless I don't fuck with her cause she knows where the guns are too. That and she has family in Louisiana that can lose a body quite easily.

    Is it possible for a man to be sufficiently threatened that the use of deadly force is justified? Sure. Is it probable? I'm not so sure, at least not in the majority of situations but those would have to be looked at on a case by case basis.

    Are the stand your ground laws necessary? Were there enough instances of people being negatively impacted by the lack of such a law to justify enacting one? That's a tough one to call too.

    Regarding the case this diary is about I think it is clear Mr. Zimmerman unnecessarily initiated contact with Trayvon Martin. Mr. Zimmerman was not being threatened before he got out of his vehicle and approached Trayvon. Trayvon was not engaged in the commission of a felony or other crime that justified Mr. Zimmerman involving himself to try and prevent. Because of this I don't believe the protections Florida's stand your ground law provides should be afforded him.

    Any power that government amasses will not be relinquished and any right we give up we give up forever.

    by oldpunk on Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 08:12:34 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  So basically, what you're saying is yes, (0+ / 0-)

      it's okay to shoot her.

      You see, the important bit about your reply is that things need to be looked at 'on a case by case basis.'  In reality, this is what happens in cases that don't have stand-your-ground laws.  The homocide is investigated, and if it's established that, yes, the shooter was acting in self-defense and had a reasonable reason not to flee, the case generally doesn't go anywhere -- or if it does go to court, the jury acquits them.

      In a stand-your-ground state, it seems like that doesn't happen.  It essentially places the burden of proof on the dead guy to show that he didn't deserve to get shot, unless, like in this case, it's particularly egregious.

      •  The use of deadly force against someone who is (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hagagaga, KVoimakas

        trying to attack me while I am in my car would be justified regardless of gender if the person had made entry into the car or were trying to pull me out. Otherwise I don't see how bashing the outside of my car could be construed as a threat to my life.

        Any power that government amasses will not be relinquished and any right we give up we give up forever.

        by oldpunk on Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 09:41:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are you being intentionally obtuse? (0+ / 0-)

          The person is in the process of attempting to breach the shell of the car to hurt you.  

          In other words -- you have a brief time and the capability to remove yourself from danger, but if you do not do so, you -will- be in danger.

          •  Obtuse? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            hagagaga, KVoimakas
            not quick or alert in perception, feeling, or intellect; not sensitive or observant; dull.
            Nice, so I am either intentionally dull or being not quick or alert in intellect is my natural state. I think that is a bit messed up thing to say but nevertheless, I understand what you have written down. You posed a very specific scenario to me.
            How about when your wife finds out that you were cheating and confronts you in the driveway, bashing at your car with a golf club and a taste for blood in her eye?
            I got some clarification on bashing at and bashing on which led to this.
            She's attacking your car 'cause she wants to get at you to beat the crap out of you because she's just tested positive for syphilis/herpes/got crabs, whatever, and you're the only person she ever had sex with.  She's gotta get through your rolled-up windows first to get at the meaty, adulterous center.
            I responded to your query honestly. I am not physically threatened by my wife even if she were to be wielding a golf club. I went on to explain that if I was in my car and a person, regardless of their gender, was bashing my car I would not feel that my life was in jeopardy or that I was in immediate danger of suffering serious bodily injury. Only if the attacker was able to gain entry into the car or they attempted to drag me out of the car would deadly force be justified. While I don't have the duty to retreat, the shell of the car protects me until they get inside or try to remove me.

            Any power that government amasses will not be relinquished and any right we give up we give up forever.

            by oldpunk on Wed Mar 21, 2012 at 12:34:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Edit, the above should read, (0+ / 0-)

      Is it possible for a man to be sufficiently threatened by his wife that the use of deadly force is justified?

      Any power that government amasses will not be relinquished and any right we give up we give up forever.

      by oldpunk on Tue Mar 20, 2012 at 09:12:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (130)
  • Community (63)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (28)
  • Culture (28)
  • 2016 (27)
  • Climate Change (27)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Science (23)
  • Environment (23)
  • Spam (21)
  • Law (19)
  • Labor (18)
  • Media (18)
  • Republicans (18)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • White House (14)
  • International (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site