• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Stand Your Groround = Vigilatism?

Eeyore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
551
Location
the meanest city in the stupidest state
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rman_examining_the_roots_of_vigilantism_.html

This is a classic example of a "journalist" reaching a conclusion and then misreading or ignoring facts in such a wasy as to support their conclusion. She tries to say that the recent shootings in Tulsa were indirectly encouraged by SYG, even though SYG clearly doesn't apply to these circumstances. And of course, everything has to be racial. She even finds a university professor to imply that SYG laws will encourage the wholesale slaughter of blacks because, since all [armed] white people assume all blacks are criminals, they can shoot them and then claim self-defense to get off scott-free. Since both premises in this syllogism are ridiculous, the conclusion is also ridiculous. And this guy is a PhD.

Obviously, both the writer and the professor are ignorant of the actual workings of the law. Fortunately, many of the comments following the story reasonably point out her logical absurdities.
 

gunns

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
270
Location
Minnesota
I read this article, the comments below are worse. Almost all think carrying is awful and stand your ground will end up causing more murders. People can be so stupid.
 

Xulld

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
159
Location
Florida
Obviously, both the writer and the professor are ignorant of the actual workings of the law.
I wouldn't be so quick to believe its ignorance over a malicious political agenda.
 

lysander6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
74
Location
AZ
The government-media complex will always question a mundane who defends themselves. After all, once citizens realize cops are there to protect the rulers and not their banal lives, they may get a clue.

As with Zimmerman, if the cops had gunned Trayvon down, there would not be a whisper of dissent from the talking heads.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
"PhD" stands for Piled Higher and Deeper. Unfortunately, the vast majority of academicians seem to be socialist-"progressive", left-wing liberals - not because of their "superior intelligence", but because they are too lazy to actually perform physical labor. University professors of a conservative bent rarely gain tenure - not because of any "inferior intellect", but because they don't "sing the company song" (aka: "aren't a good fit for the school culture"). :uhoh: Just my personal observation (shared by many)

"Stand Your Ground" laws are not a hunting license, and anybody with half a brain understands that. As for Zimmerman (I've wearied of hearing/seeing his name), had he never exited his car (stood his ground), there would be no question about who/what/where/when or how. From that one act of stupidity, he effectively removed himself from the criminal protections offered by SYG. He chose to place himself in a confrontational situation! I see that he has finally been arrested and charged with murder 2 (which should have happened immediately after the shooting). A jury will now decide if his actions fell under the protections of SYG, and he is innocent of criminal wrongdoing, or that he initiated what turned into a deadly confrontation, and he should be imprisoned for a significant period of time. The inordinate delay between the death of Trayvon Martin (another name of which I am tiring), and the arrest and detention of Zimmerman (even for "suspicion") did more damage (justified or not) to the existing racial divisiveness in our country - especially in those southern states with an established history of apartheid. Just my thoughts. Pax...
 
Last edited:

Sky1

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2011
Messages
40
Location
Raleigh
Confrontation situation? For asking a question?

That is like saying if a girl gets raped because she asks someone for a light she deserved it.

No, we have the right to ask someone a question without fear of repercussion and physical attack. If someone is so high strung that they will snap and start attacking you when asked a question they are not fit for society and should be incarcerated it is as simple as that.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
What do you expect from Slate?

I once got into a discussion (debate/argument) with one of their editors/contributors about using a Club on my steering wheel. I mentioned that I did this so thwart potential car thieves and to cause them to consider someone else's car instead of mine. Somehow he didn't think this was fair to other people.... that I would use something that would cause a criminal to turn their attention to another victim's car. I had to wonder about the man's sanity with statements like that. But then again, wasn't Michael Kinsley the founder of Slate magazine?
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Confrontation situation? For asking a question?

Pay attention - take notes if you must - ZIMMERMAN CHOSE TO APPROACH AND CONFRONT, as opposed to just observing the kid until LE (those people who have the legal responsibility and the authority to stop and question) arrived. Neither you nor I were there, and we know nothing more than that which is reported/distorted in the media. There is only one living person who knows the real deal, and he will skew the facts to favor himself.

That is like saying if a girl gets raped because she asks someone for a light she deserved it.

Unquestionably one of the WORST, most ignorant, topically unrelated analogies I have ever seen.

No, we have the right to ask someone a question without fear of repercussion and physical attack. If someone is so high strung that they will snap and start attacking you when asked a question they are not fit for society and should be incarcerated it is as simple as that.

You take the responsibility upon yourself when you exercise that right. Unless they are on private property belonging to you, the other person then has the right to tell you to "mind your own business and stuff it"... and what's your response to that, "Harry Callahan"? Ya gonna shoot him? Sheeeesh... :banghead:

UPDATE: It was revealed today - 4/12/12 - that Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara does not intend to use Florida's SYG law as a defense. (Maybe because he realizes it doesn't apply to his client?)
 
Last edited:

rscottie

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
608
Location
Ashland, Kentucky, USA
You take the responsibility upon yourself when you exercise that right. Unless they are on private property belonging to you, the other person then has the right to tell you to "mind your own business and stuff it"... and what's your response to that, "Harry Callahan"? Ya gonna shoot him? Sheeeesh... :banghead:

You are absolutely correct that Trayvon could have told Zimmerman to "mind your own business and stuff it."

What Trayvon did instead was to start attacking Mr. Zimmerman by punching him in the nose and then beating his head in to the sidewalk. A witness saw this and tried to get him to stop as Mr. Zimmerman hollered for help. This witness had to run in to the house and call 911 and Mr. Zimmerman's pleas were heard in the background on one of the calls.

Having ones head slammed in to the sidewalk is a deadly threat.

If Trayvon was so afraid of the person that was following him, he should have been the one calling 911 and telling them about it. Instead he was talking to his girlfriend. I would speculate that he was also telling his girl how he was going to take care of this dude that was following him. They should question her extensively.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
Pax, no one is claiming that SYG applies to Zimmerman, because we all know it does not. What does apply is common law self defense.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Pax, no one is claiming that SYG applies to Zimmerman, because we all know it does not. What does apply is common law self defense.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2

Apparently somebody (the left-wing anti-gunners) is claiming exactly that, or there wouldn't be such a big stink being raised about SYG laws... and that big stink has popped up all over the country! The ubiquitous "they" (none of whom are known by name to the rest of us) wish to blame the SYG law, rather than accepting that we (including "them") do have an inalienable right to defend ourselves, and may not - for any number of reasons - always be capable of withdrawing. Zimmerman's choice of actions placed him outside the protections of SYG. SYG means STAND YOUR GROUND if confronted with a potentially life-threatening situation. It does NOT mean advance upon and initiate contact with a suspicious individual in a public area. IMO Zimmerman's unnecessarily dangerous actions portray him as a frustrated wannabe cop. Pax...
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
Pax, no one is claiming that SYG applies to Zimmerman, because we all know it does not. What does apply is common law self defense.

+1

Thank you for reiterating what we've been saying all along. I just wished you hadn't HAD to have done it.

It has been the media playing on the buzzword unfortunately used by a police officer at the time that has everybody talking about SYG, when this wasn't it.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Apparently somebody (the left-wing anti-gunners) is claiming exactly that, or there wouldn't be such a big stink being raised about SYG laws... and that big stink has popped up all over the country! The ubiquitous "they" (none of whom are known by name to the rest of us) wish to blame the SYG law, rather than accepting that we (including "them") do have an inalienable right to defend ourselves, and may not - for any number of reasons - always be capable of withdrawing. Zimmerman's choice of actions placed him outside the protections of SYG. SYG means STAND YOUR GROUND if confronted with a potentially life-threatening situation. It does NOT mean advance upon and initiate contact with a suspicious individual in a public area. IMO Zimmerman's unnecessarily dangerous actions portray him as a frustrated wannabe cop. Pax...
If....IF....he was on the ground, with Martin on him, then SYG, or retreat for that matter, is a moot point.

If....IF, those two items are fact, then all of the previous items of 'fact' prior to Zimmerman being on the ground are moot. Then it is, by default at that point, a simple case of SD. You either accept that you have the right to defend, to shoot, in that particular scenario, or you do not.

But, until the facts are determined, let the rationalizing and arrangement of the sequence of events continue.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
If....IF....he was on the ground, with Martin on him, then SYG, or retreat for that matter, is a moot point.

If....IF, those two items are fact, then all of the previous items of 'fact' prior to Zimmerman being on the ground are moot. Then it is, by default at that point, a simple case of SD. You either accept that you have the right to defend, to shoot, in that particular scenario, or you do not.

But, until the facts are determined, let the rationalizing and arrangement of the sequence of events continue.

The point is that SD and SYG don't have to be the same thing. IF the reported facts are true and accurate, at the point Z was on the ground he was in SD mode. BUT... had he remained in his vehicle, he wouldn't have found himself on the ground in SD mode. He was OTG because of a conscious decision he had made. There is no cure for individual stupidity - that's why they have the "Darwin Awards". :banghead: Pax...
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The point is that SD and SYG don't have to be the same thing. IF the reported facts are true and accurate, at the point Z was on the ground he was in SD mode. BUT... had he remained in his vehicle, he wouldn't have found himself on the ground in SD mode. He was OTG because of a conscious decision he had made. There is no cure for individual stupidity - that's why they have the "Darwin Awards". :banghead: Pax...
Your 'if he remained in his vehicle' speculation is irrelevant to the shoot, Zimmerman was not in his vehicle, he is allegedly on the ground with Martin on top of him. At that point, given what Zimmerman was allegedly experiencing, was he justified to shoot.

Would Martin have continued the contact if he had know that Zimmerman was armed?
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
I have always been of the mind that Stand Your Ground is about not being beat, shot, stabbed, clubbed, kicked, etc., in the back. Stand Your Ground is the individual facing their attacker, and being prepared for whatever might be waged against them.
 

rushcreek2

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
909
Location
Colorado Springs. CO
The verdict in this case will will rest upon WHO initiated the actual VIOLENT PHYSICAL confrontation - not who inititiated, or engaged in either an annoying, or verbally abusive confrontation. It will be about WHO - AGGRESSIVLEY laid hands upon who FIRST.

Personally, I predict early dismissal of the highly questionable 2nd degree murder charge with a trial date set to determine the only remaining question of fact = Was the discharge of the weapon done intentionally in self-defense while Zimmerman was being assaulted - did the discharge of the weapon occur accidentally during the physical altercation between Martin and Zimmerman - or was Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter ?


I also predict that the first trial will end with a hung jury- due to the probable demographic focus involved with the jury selection. In the absence of any clear evidence indicating that Zimmerman actually fired the weapon without any reasonable justification that Martin's actions constituted an imminent threat to his life -I predict an acquittal.
 
Last edited:

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
The verdict in this case will will rest upon WHO initiated the actual VIOLENT PHYSICAL confrontation - not who inititiated, or engaged in either an annoying, or verbally abusive confrontation. It will be about WHO - AGGRESSIVLEY laid hands upon who FIRST.

Personally, I predict early dismissal of the highly questionable 2nd degree murder charge with a trial date set to determine the only remaining question of fact = Was the discharge of the weapon done intentionally in self-defense while Zimmerman was being assaulted - did the discharge of the weapon occur accidentally during the physical altercation between Martin and Zimmerman - or was Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter ?


I also predict that the first trial will end with a hung jury- due to the probable demographic focus involved with the jury selection. In the absence of any clear evidence indicating that Zimmerman actually fired the weapon without any reasonable justification that Martin's actions constituted an imminent threat to his life -I predict an acquittal.

I think you're right... assuming politics doesn't get involved. Then all bets are off. There are a lot of angry black folks in Sanford, FL (and elsewhere) and it's not impossible that the trial and resulting verdict could become an act of social appeasement to avoid further, more serious, social unrest. :(

I never said I thought Zimmerman was "guilty" of anything other than gross stupidity. Pax... :)
 

aadvark

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
1,597
Location
, ,
To Whomever it may Concern:

So Called 'Stand-Your-Ground' Laws are Applicable in 22 States.

Hence, in The Remaining 28 States, there is NO 'Stand-Your-Ground' Law.

In The States where 'Stand-Your-Ground' became Law, The Legislature Deemed it a Public Policy that a Law-abiding Citizen should NEVER have to Surrender Personal Safety or Private Rights to a Criminal.

aadvark
 
Top