Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trayvon Martin Tragedy and Implications

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trayvon Martin Tragedy and Implications

    Listening to the news reports there seems to be (and I could have understood it wrong) that in the state of Florida there is a law that states if you are the victim of aggression you are justified in shooting. Seems more lke if you are losing the fight you can kill your "opponent".

    Please --- Im not weighing in on who the aggressor was in this case!!!!

    I'm thinking of a situation where you are walking down the street unarmed. You get jumped by someone who has a gun concealed. The fight turns and you are now pummeling this person.

    Have you become the aggressor?
    I the person who jumped you now justified in shooting you (assume gun is reg) because HIS life is in danger?
    Imagine witnesses coming only to see you in a dominant position?

    Any thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: Trayvon Martin Tragedy and Implications

    Originally posted by KMMAN View Post
    Listening to the news reports there seems to be (and I could have understood it wrong) that in the state of Florida there is a law that states if you are the victim of aggression you are justified in shooting. Seems more lke if you are losing the fight you can kill your "opponent".

    Please --- Im not weighing in on who the aggressor was in this case!!!!

    I'm thinking of a situation where you are walking down the street unarmed. You get jumped by someone who has a gun concealed. The fight turns and you are now pummeling this person.

    Have you become the aggressor?
    I the person who jumped you now justified in shooting you (assume gun is reg) because HIS life is in danger?
    Imagine witnesses coming only to see you in a dominant position?

    Any thoughts?
    Normally, these laws are written that you have no protections under the law if you are committing a crime.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Trayvon Martin Tragedy and Implications

      Originally posted by KMMAN View Post
      I'm thinking of a situation where you are walking down the street unarmed. You get jumped by someone who has a gun concealed. The fight turns and you are now pummeling this person.

      What is your definition of "get jumped" - specifically? And what do you mean by "pummeling" - exactly?

      Have you become the aggressor?

      What relative positions are you both in? Is the other person still fighting or still presenting some kind of legitimate threat OR fully covered up and only defending? Did you already have an opportunity to disengage and leave? What else was going on (totality of the circumstances, including what was being said between you)?

      I the person who jumped you now justified in shooting you (assume gun is reg) because HIS life is in danger?

      YMWV (based upon the totality of the circumstances, the local statutes, who you have in the various parts of the courtroom, what happens in court, etc)!

      Imagine witnesses coming only to see you in a dominant position?

      One of the "bad" things that could happen in a fight.

      Any thoughts?
      3 assumptions I always make - until proven otherwise, the other person has fighting skills, the other person is armed with more than one deadly weapon, and the other person has friends ready to jump in and help him.

      3 continual assessments I always make - assessing myself, assessing the BG, and assessing our surroundings. I have the ability to escalate but I also have the responsibility to DE-escalate whatever force I am using. That goes for both LEOs and non-LEOs.

      IF you are physically assaulted/attacked by a real BG, I find it hard to believe that the BG is not going to attack you with his best tool first - i.e. if a real BG has a gun, chances are, he's going to assault you or threaten you with that gun (or the possibility of him being armed with a gun) right off the bat.

      Re: the Zimmerman/Martin case - not enough info for me to form a conclusion. My questions from the first time I heard about the incident was what happened during the primary and/or secondary contact (secondary IF Zimmerman did in fact lose sight of Martin and was headed back to his truck).

      The circus that has erupted since is reprehensible and pathetic.
      Last edited by Don; 04-01-2012, 11:24 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Trayvon Martin Tragedy and Implications

        Stand your ground laws don't give you permission to shoot an aggressor, only to respond to deadly force with deadly force AND not require you to retreat first. Not enough reliable information in circulation to make an informed opinion.

        Comment

        Working...
        X