Legal Self Defense Questions

[KungFubar]

If you are driving in a parking lot or slowly down the street and someone steps in front of your car to make you stop while other people start coming up to your car doors and try to open them, can you floor it and run over the person who is blocking your way of escape?

[Syn7]

Dunno, but that is one of those situations where if I genuinely felt like I was in real danger, I would do what I had to do and worry about the consequences after.

You should always consider the legal ramifications of your actions, but in the face of death or grave bodily harm, do what ya gotta!

[Kymus]

If they've got a gun, maybe.

If they're unarmed and just crazy, prob not a good idea.

lawyer-fu is something you don't wanna mess with.

[SoCo KungFu]

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html


776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.


(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

[pazman]

Situation: I have a serious legal question concerning a situation that might never occur. Should I:

a) go to a kung fu forum on the internet to get vague opinions from non-experts

OR

b) ask a lawyer


Which is it guys?:)

[KungFubar]

Situation: I have a serious legal question concerning a situation that might never occur. Should I:

a) go to a kung fu forum on the internet to get vague opinions from non-experts

OR

b) ask a lawyer


Which is it guys?:)

It's neither because we dont live in your doomazz world. The members on here are not retards like you that cannot see any reality further away from your face than 4 inches.

a) Your disrespectful and ignorant reply is unwanted. Not all the members of this forum are ass clowns like you that have no life experiences and no professional expertise to contribute. You should value the members on here much more than you do. They have a wealth of lifetime experience and vast professional experiences from many disciplines.

b) Ill get the crayons out here and draw you picture child. my question is not a serious question but a random passing thought that occurred to me while watching a movie. NO I did not run someone over last night and am in desperate need of legal advice. This is in large part a self defense forum, it is likely that the members (not you) are knowledgable in laws regarding self defense and have collectively thought about millions of possible self defense self preservation scenarios.

[pazman]

It's neither because we dont live in your doomazz world. The members on here are not retards like you that cannot see any reality further away from your face than 4 inches.

a) Your disrespectful and ignorant reply is unwanted. Not all the members of this forum are ass clowns like you that have no life experiences and no professional expertise to contribute. You should value the members on here much more than you do. They have a wealth of lifetime experience and vast professional experiences from many disciplines.

b) Ill get the crayons out here and draw you picture child. my question is not a serious question but a random passing thought that occurred to me while watching a movie. NO I did not run someone over last night and am in desperate need of legal advice. This is in large part a self defense forum, it is likely that the members (not you) are knowledgable in laws regarding self defense and have collectively thought about millions of possible self defense self preservation scenarios.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/271/175/601.jpg

Are there any lawyers on the forums? You asked a legal question. These are the kinds of questions I would ask my lawyer if I felt I would be in one of these situations.

[KungFubar]

Are there any lawyers on the forums? You asked a legal question. These are the kinds of questions I would ask my lawyer if I felt I would be in one of these situations.

All here ye here ye, Pazman has decreed that discussion about legal aspects of self defense is not allowed or appropriate here on kungfumagazine.com because Pazman would prefer to get his $$$$ checkbook out and call his lawyer everytime a random legal question occurs to him.

[Syn7]

There are a few lawyers here. Maybe they will step up. Although, I wouldn't blame them if they didn't. Or like John Oliver's "legal joke" the other day... they will throw down a massive disclaimer first.


If it's Texas, just make sure it's night time and anyone you kill is marginalized in some way. Then your good.

Fla? Stand your ground! Floor it!



Seriously, you prolly shouldn't kill anyone that isn't trying to kill you. **** the law, it's Jesus you have to worry about.

[Syn7]

All here ye here ye, Pazman has decreed that discussion about legal aspects of self defense is not allowed or appropriate here on kungfumagazine.com because Pazman would prefer to get his $$$$ checkbook out and call his lawyer everytime a random legal question occurs to him.

How is talking about the legal ramifications of self defense on a kung fu(self defense) forum NOT relevant? I mean, this is what we learn to do... hurt people.


Prolly not a bad idea to know if you'll get thrown in a cage for doing so.

[KungFubar]

How is talking about the legal ramifications of self defense on a kung fu(self defense) forum NOT relevant? I mean, this is what we learn to do... hurt people.


Prolly not a bad idea to know if you'll get thrown in a cage for doing so.


agree 100%, this is the perfect place to kick this topic around.

[pazman]

All here ye here ye, Pazman has decreed that discussion about legal aspects of self defense is not allowed or appropriate here on kungfumagazine.com because Pazman would prefer to get his $$$$ checkbook out and call his lawyer everytime a random legal question occurs to him.

The martial arts world is notorious for bad legal advice. I remember hearing as a kid that people with black belts had their hands registered with the police as deadly weapons.

If you are worrying about the legal ramifications, then it's probably not self-defense!

[KungFubar]

tell that to george zimmerman. clear cut case of self defense and hes on trial now. It could happen to you or anyone of us. once it becomes political it doesnt matter what the facts are.
Zimmerman is now fighting for his life .... again.

[pazman]

Self-defense?

Really?

Is it common to follow, harass, and approach random people for no reason, all the while carrying a gun, down there in Florida?

[Syn7]

tell that to george zimmerman. clear cut case of self defense and hes on trial now. It could happen to you or anyone of us. once it becomes political it doesnt matter what the facts are.

Seriously?

I will give you a chance to explain before I decide I don't like you.

[KungFubar]

Self-defense?

Really?

Is it common to follow, harass, and approach random people for no reason, all the while carrying a gun, down there in Florida?

Pazman you cant be reasoned with you have shown that with your first post in this thread.

Syn7 on the other hand is mostly rational and Im going to explain why I hold the view that I do in PM with Syn7

[Kymus]

I think he's talking about Zimmerman's medical report (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/03/2880246_doctor-george-zimmerman-had-black.html). Just a guess.

The Zimmerman case isn't a good example of self defense. Even if he was chased down and beaten to hell, he shot a dude that was unarmed and that's not an easy case to explain as far as the law is concerned; esp when they die. I'm not trying to say who's right in this case; I'm just laying out the facts as far as the law is gonna see them.

There's this dude - I forget his name - he teaches gun self defense. He talks a lot about legal ramifications. You disarm a guy and then point the gun at him, what then? If you shoot him while he's unarmed, your @ss can get sued or worse.

Unless you're in danger of death, it's probably not safe to assume the law is gonna be on your side.

(*Just a note, because I'm sure someone on here is gonna get all kinds of bent out of shape and have a giant knee-jerk with what I said: I'm not a lawyer. Never have been, never will be. I am also not a cop, judge, and I don't even work for the state :eek:. This is just my understanding of things and it makes sense to me. If anyone gets offended by these 4 short paragraphs or wants to flame me for it: please get a life. In the event that this is not possible, pull your lip over your head and swallow. Kthnxbai.)

[SoCo KungFu]

Pazman is correct. You would be far better seeking legal advice from actual legal experts, and there are plenty of "free" legal hot lines you can find on the web that for 1 or 2 days a month, a lawyer will give you about a 15 minute consult should you need help.

However, since you (kungfubar) are from Florida, you benefit from having one of the legal codes on this matter that is written fairly plain as day black and white. You can read the law and infer for yourself with probable accuracy.

As far as Zimmerman goes, if someone starts tailing me home, gets out of their car and confronts me in what I perceive as a hostile manner, I'm going to splatter their face on the sidewalk in self defense too.

What I find most distressing, is that no one seems to be asking whether Martin was protected by SYG as well? Why is it ok to talk about Zim being afraid and thus justified, but not the kid (because as far as I'm concerned an 18 y/o is still a kid) being followed?

Zim grabbed a gun and got out of his vehicle. That's not a debatable incident, that's established fact. Whether or not Martin hid, whether Zim attacked first, or whether Martin ninja styled him from a bush makes no difference. Zim began the tailing, Zim got out the vehicle after grabbing a gun, Zim chased Martin on foot. SYG does not require Martin to retreat at all. That is the exact reason the "castle" law and now SYG were created.

There's a lot that has to come out in testimony. But the arguments so far are crap. According to FL law itself, in no way did Martin have to retreat.


(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.

Public street is public.

So until someone proves Martin was doing something illegal, or they find a way to argue that the initial interaction (initiated by Zimm) ended, then I find it pretty ridiculous that the same law that was at one time going to be invoked to protect the defendant, does not also protect Martin.

[KungFubar]

Pazman is correct. You would be far better seeking legal advice from actual legal experts, and there are plenty of "free" legal hot lines you can find on the web that for 1 or 2 days a month, a lawyer will give you about a 15 minute consult should you need help.

However, since you (kungfubar) are from Florida, you benefit from having one of the legal codes on this matter that is written fairly plain as day black and white. You can read the law and infer for yourself with probable accuracy.

As far as Zimmerman goes, if someone starts tailing me home, gets out of their car and confronts me in what I perceive as a hostile manner, I'm going to splatter their face on the sidewalk in self defense too.

What I find most distressing, is that no one seems to be asking whether Martin was protected by SYG as well? Why is it ok to talk about Zim being afraid and thus justified, but not the kid (because as far as I'm concerned an 18 y/o is still a kid) being followed?

Zim grabbed a gun and got out of his vehicle. That's not a debatable incident, that's established fact. Whether or not Martin hid, whether Zim attacked first, or whether Martin ninja styled him from a bush makes no difference. Zim began the tailing, Zim got out the vehicle after grabbing a gun, Zim chased Martin on foot. SYG does not require Martin to retreat at all. That is the exact reason the "castle" law and now SYG were created.

There's a lot that has to come out in testimony. But the arguments so far are crap. According to FL law itself, in no way did Martin have to retreat.



Public street is public.

So until someone proves Martin was doing something illegal, or they find a way to argue that the initial interaction (initiated by Zimm) ended, then I find it pretty ridiculous that the same law that was at one time going to be invoked to protect the defendant, does not also protect Martin.


Im not looking for legal advise, I just want to talk about various scenarios and what different guys would do.

[SoCo KungFu]

Im not looking for legal advise, I just want to talk about various scenarios and what different guys would do.

Ok, then in that case. I'd rather take the chance and be in legal trouble than be dead.

[Syn7]

I would have ambushed Zimmerman and beat the hell out of him in that scenario. I would have stood my ground and skull ****ed him with no remorse. Period. Anyone who engages me in any sort of creepy or aggressive manner forfeits their right to personal security. I don't start fights... EVER. I do, however, finish them.


I don't do PM's. Sorry. I'm not an off the record kind of guy. I haven't read the 6 notifications and I doubt I will. However, I will give you the opportunity to paste them in this thread on your own and I will respond to them here... for all to see.

[KungFubar]

I would have ambushed Zimmerman and beat the hell out of him in that scenario. I would have stood my ground and skull ****ed him with no remorse. Period. Anyone who engages me in any sort of creepy or aggressive manner forfeits their right to personal security. I don't start fights... EVER. I do, however, finish them.


I don't do PM's. Sorry. I'm not an off the record kind of guy. I haven't read the 6 notifications and I doubt I will. However, I will give you the opportunity to paste them in this thread on your own and I will respond to them here... for all to see.

ya youd be dead like trayvon all because you decided to over react and ambush someone instead of seeing what they were so concerned about. Regarding the rest, it looks like I overestimated you. ... again.. go ahead a disregard my messages they are no longer relevant.

[SoCo KungFu]

ya youd be dead like trayvon all because you decided to over react and ambush someone instead of seeing what they were so concerned about. Regarding the rest, it looks like I overestimated you. ... again.. go ahead a disregard my messages they are no longer relevant.

You can be concerned all you want. Live in paranoia that the evil purple goblins are stealing your cheerios and probing you with tootsie rolls all you want. But walking down the street isn't illegal. And irrational paranoia doesn't give one the right to play vigilante.

You trail someone in a car, they get suspicious. You get out of that car and then chase them on foot, they have every right to perceive YOU as the threat because you have now initiated a hostile act.

[Syn7]

ya youd be dead like trayvon all because you decided to over react and ambush someone instead of seeing what they were so concerned about. Regarding the rest, it looks like I overestimated you. ... again.. go ahead a disregard my messages they are no longer relevant.


Sure... and all because some douchebag wanted to play LARPcop. Either he will spend the rest of his life in segregated PC or he'll be let go and have to change his name and hide the rest of his life. Either way, by disregarding the advice of the people he was pretending to be, he killed a child and ruined his own life. And the fact that he and his wife conspired to hide funds from the court ain't a good look.


Where I live, that stuff simply doesn't happen. Take one look at our criminal code and you will know why. It's far from perfect, but it's light years ahead of the FLA version.

[Syn7]

you trail someone in a car, they get suspicious. You get out of that car and then chase them on foot, they have every right to perceive you as the threat because you have now initiated a hostile act.


period....!!!

[Syn7]

Kungfubar:


Trayvon martin is a victim, but he is not a victim of GZ, he is a victim of his own upbringing that tells him its ok to imitate gangster lifestyle. Its true he wasnt doing anything wrong that night, but he matched the profile of those who were doing theft, vandalism and break ins in the weeks prior at that apartment complex. They perpetrators were young males, white and black, wearing the hoody so you cant see their face, wearing their pants down past their ass, wandering aimlessly around at night and in inclemet weather. Notice, the perps were black AND WHITE. So yes he matched the profile, but it was not a racial profile it was a criminal profile.

GZ is the block watch captain in charge of the security of the complex. He is supposed to report suspicious activity and this activity matched. Again, not because he was black, but because his behavior and style matched the previous perps. I understand TM did nothing wrong that night.

GZ is not harrassing or stalking or any of those other buzz / spin words. He was trying to keep visual contact with the suspicious person so when the police came he could tell them where he was.

He lost visual contact with TM and started heading back to his car when TM attacked him. If you read TM texts available online you can see the mentality the kid has. It is a mentality of fighting for sport, guns, and drugs. Im not making that up you can see the subpoened texts online. They make him out to be a little kid with skittles and iced tea but that is not accurate. You simply must read the texts to understand.

TM was not a bad kid, but he was on a bad road and that night he did try GZ. If TM wanted to get away he could have easily outrun the clinically obese GZ but he did not. According to court testimony two days ago, TM called GZ a creepy as cracker and a ******. THis is according to the girl he was talking to on the phone at the time he was walking around in the back yards.

TM double backed around and punched GZ in the face, took him down to the ground and pound position and broke GZ nose and started bashing his head on the concrete side walk. Did you listen to the 911 recording of GZ screaming for his life? You should. Also freely available on youtube.

While on the ground GZ jacket rose up revealing his 9mm, when TM saw it he told GZ he was going to die that night and reached toward GZ gun. GZ got it first and shot TM in the chest and that was the end of the fight.


That is self defense according to the law. He has a right to carry a gun, he has a right to go anywhere he wants on his own property. He wasnt stalking TM to kill him or hurt him, only to ask what he was doing there because he matched the description and circumstances of the previous criminals that were there in the past few days. Many of them got away because by the time the police got there they were gone and he lost visual contact with them. Thats why he wanted to make sure not to lose visual contact this time and tried to maintain VC.

It certainly was TM that attacked GZ, it was racially motivated by TM, GZ would have died if he didnt use his weapon.

If you watch the court proceedings you will see this is what happened. Youtube is filled with all the interviews of GZ and all the witness testimony. I have watched it all myself and I advise you to do the same if you want to discuss this topic. You should also look at TM text messages and images and then you will see where the kid was in his life and what he was all into. They also found robbery tools at TM house and stolen jewelry.

Again this is not something Im making up, it is all in the documentation.

So this is the information I used to make my opinion.

You must understand this trial is a political effort, if they were both black or both white nobody would care. And GZ isnt even white, hes latino but the media keeps calling him white. for political purposes. They can only do that because his last name is zimmerman. If he had a hispanic last name you wouldnt hear anything about this case.. Its insane.


You have to look at the facts not just with your emotions. Some on here go totally by emotions and you tend to do that but I think you have actually a good blend of both emotions and reason once you calm down and think things through. If after you think it through you still dont agree with me, I respect your opinion and will not dislike you and still would like to be your friend on here.

peace

I disagree with much of this, but I don't want to discuss the case. I'm happy to let it play out. Maybe after that. It annoyed me how you brought it up in the guise of something else.

[KungFubar]

You can be concerned all you want. Live in paranoia that the evil purple goblins are stealing your cheerios and probing you with tootsie rolls all you want. But walking down the street isn't illegal. And irrational paranoia doesn't give one the right to play vigilante.

You trail someone in a car, they get suspicious. You get out of that car and then chase them on foot, they have every right to perceive YOU as the threat because you have now initiated a hostile act.

the neighborhood block watch captiain maintaining visual contact with someone while he waits for the cops to come so he can give them an exact location does not constitute vigilante. If anyone is paranoid about monsters under their bed its you thinking the neighborhood block watch captain zimmmerman is some kind of racist pedophilic vigilante. put the koolaid down. Get serious.

[KungFubar]

It annoyed me how you brought it up in the guise of something else.

guise? paranoid much?

[SoCo KungFu]

the neighborhood block watch captiain maintaining visual contact with someone while he waits for the cops to come so he can give them an exact location does not constitute vigilante. If anyone is paranoid about monsters under their bed its you thinking the neighborhood block watch captain zimmmerman is some kind of racist pedophilic vigilante. put the koolaid down. Get serious.

Zimmerman was not part of a recognized watch group. This was reported over a year ago, you need to catch up on the details. He was never vetted by police, he was never trained (actual registered watch groups receive training) and he was never associated on even a casual basis by the majority of the neighborhood, as a watch person, let alone "captain." He and a couple buddies decided they would take it in their own capacity to police a neighborhood that had not desired their attention. All this was reported over a year ago.

Second, its on the 911 recording that he chased Martin on foot after the dispatcher already told him to stay in the car and back off.

Third, and this important because people like you don't seem to comprehend reality. Martin did nothing illegal. Walking down the street is not a crime. Walking down the street with a hoody on is still not a crime. Zimm had absolutely no reason to be profiling the kid and no reason to be following him. Now its a public street, he can do so, sure. And on that see my first post in this thread. Martin had every single right to perceive Zimmerman as the aggressor, to feel danger for his own safety, and to use (under FL law no less) any means of force to enact his own rescue.

I'd suggest you actually read something on the case, and for that matter, law in your own state, before you start throwing accusations on who is drinking what flavor of kool-aid. Oh, and take your straw man and stick it. No where did I say Zimm was racist (although his former coworkers already went on record that he is) or a pedo. He IS an idiot blowhard that had no control over his emotions and entered a situation he was entirely untrained to resolve. He incorrectly assessed a threat, made himself an aggressor in the process, and ignored the directive of the actual law enforcement rep (the dispatcher, who IS trained on advising civilians through crisis scenarios). And you know what, he's lucky he did run into an unarmed kid. Because had Martin been packing and decided to open up on him, under FL law he'd have had every right to do so.

Which makes me ask again. Why has no one mentioned that Martin is just as protected by SYG as Zim? Until someone can prove Martin was breaking a law, he had every right to use force in his own defense. All the law demands is the impression of imminent harm. (On the side, that loose requirement is exactly why this law is moronic to the 1000th degree).

[KungFubar]

my info comes from the trial that Ive been watching not from biased obsolete left wing media reports. for the record the 911 operator that you refer to was actually the NON emergency operator it wasnt 911 did not tell him to not follow, they said "You dont need to do that". quite a difference.

If you watch the trial you will see the director of the neighborhood watch program who works for law enforcement testify that he was the captain of the neighborhood watch and she commended him on what he did. Go watch it before you continue to embarrass yourself with biased obsolete information. aka koolaid.

additionally SYG is a non issue because he is not using that as a defense. His defense is simple self defense. They are not using the stand your ground law as a defense.

It seems you do not even know the basics of this case. Get yourself updated on the facts

Also, I did say that I acknowledge that TM was not doing anything wrong. he had all the right. He was reported for suspicious behavior. Heres what you do, get dressed up in a hoodie, wear your pants down past your ass, then at night go walking aimlessly around an a bank, or a mall parking lot, or an apartment complex especially a gated one and see how long it takes for the cops to show up and inform you that you are acting suspicious.

Zimmerman kept his distance and when he lost visual contact with TM he turned around and walked back to his car, on his way back he was ambushed by TM, thats what got him killed, thats why its justifiable homicide because he bashed his head on the concrete. and no that wouldnt count as SYG for TM.

[Sihing73]

Hello,

Figure I would chime in, FWIW.

Laws vary from State to State and even from Jurisdictions within states so there is no one answer which would be 100% correct in all circumstances.

However, in the scenario presented where a person has stepped in front of your vehicle and others are attempting to open the doors;

I would say that you would be more than justified in driving away and even hitting the person attempting to block your egress. But, keep in mind that you are in a vehicle which outweighs the others by over 1,000 pounds so you do not need to drive very fast nor hit them with a great deal of force. You can simple continue moving forward at a steady rate of speed and if the guy does not move you will move him. As for legal justification, as long as you can convincingly state you feared for your safety you would most likely not have any problems. If you are a woman then you can get away with things even further.

Keep in mind that people have argued, successfully, in court for not stopping for marked police cars until they got into a residential area due to all of the police imposters out there now. So do you honestly think that a jury would convict someone who could show they were in fear of their life and drove away from a potentially dangerous situation?

Here is my disclaimer :D

While I am not an attorney I have been in court numerous times. I have worked as a Police Officer, PA State Trooper and am currently working for the GA Department of Public Safety. In all instances where you need to obtain an accurate opinion regarding the legality of any given situation you should contact an attorney whose practice focuses on the area in question. You could also try contacting the local prosecutors office but they will most likely not give legal advice and also refer you to an attorney.

[Lucas]

If i had a person blocking my path and a group of others trying to get in and hurt me, not only would i run that fukker down, but i would throw it in reverse and make sure the job was done, hopefully taking out a few of the other ass holes too. If no one can id u or lead to any solid tracking evidence, then u wont have any legal issues to worry about.

[Jimbo]

If i had a person blocking my path and a group of others trying to get in and hurt me, not only would i run that fukker down, but i would throw it in reverse and make sure the job was done, hopefully taking out a few of the other ass holes too. If no one can id u or lead to any solid tracking evidence, then u wont have any legal issues to worry about.

But there most likely would be evidence left behind, at the scene and/or on the car; paint residue, pieces of headlight/tail lights: blood/hair/dents, etc., on the car. IMO, your best bet would be to simply drive through them and keep going, then report it immediately. That way, you're more likely to be viewed as the good guy in the matter, which you are, if you were in fear for your life.

[YouKnowWho]

i would throw it in reverse and make sure the job was done,...

When I was in The Univ. of Kansas at Lawrece, my friends and I were driving in Kansas City at night in some dark alley. Suddently a group of local gangs ran toward our car. We stopped, put car in reverse, drove back for more than 300 yards, and turned. This sound the most logical solution IMO.

[Kymus]

If i had a person blocking my path and a group of others trying to get in and hurt me, not only would i run that fukker down, but i would throw it in reverse and make sure the job was done, hopefully taking out a few of the other ass holes too. If no one can id u or lead to any solid tracking evidence, then u wont have any legal issues to worry about.

I would expect no less of you, Lucas! :D

[GoldenBrain]

This thread reminds me of one of my favorite quotes. "It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6." I think it's always wise to exercise your right to self preservation.

[YouKnowWho]

Sometime when people concern too much about legal issue, they may forget that their life is most important. You just don't want to finally realize this when you are in heaven.

[Syn7]

If there was a heaven, I wouldn't really worry about it. Why hold onto pain when you can just move on to bliss.


The will to survive runs deep!

[pazman]

When I was in The Univ. of Kansas at Lawrece, my friends and I were driving in Kansas City at night in some dark alley. Suddently a group of local gangs ran toward our car. We stopped, put car in reverse, drove back for more than 300 yards, and turned. This sound the most logical solution IMO.

Mr. Wang, stop trying to push this "common sense" stuff on us. :p

[KungFubar]

When I was in The Univ. of Kansas at Lawrece, my friends and I were driving in Kansas City at night in some dark alley. Suddently a group of local gangs ran toward our car. We stopped, put car in reverse, drove back for more than 300 yards, and turned. This sound the most logical solution IMO.

Two boys were walking to school one morning in small town USA. One boy said to the other, "Billy what would you do if we were suddenly attacked by a Tiger?" Billy says "I would shoot him with a rocket launcher". The other boy says "Where did you get the rocket launcher?" Billy says "the same place where you got the tiger".

[Drake]

the neighborhood block watch captiain maintaining visual contact with someone while he waits for the cops to come so he can give them an exact location does not constitute vigilante. If anyone is paranoid about monsters under their bed its you thinking the neighborhood block watch captain zimmmerman is some kind of racist pedophilic vigilante. put the koolaid down. Get serious.

If someone is stalking me with a gun, there's a problem.

[SoCo KungFu]

my info comes from the trial that Ive been watching not from biased obsolete left wing media reports. for the record the 911 operator that you refer to was actually the NON emergency operator it wasnt 911 did not tell him to not follow, they said "You dont need to do that". quite a difference.

If you watch the trial you will see the director of the neighborhood watch program who works for law enforcement testify that he was the captain of the neighborhood watch and she commended him on what he did. Go watch it before you continue to embarrass yourself with biased obsolete information. aka koolaid.

additionally SYG is a non issue because he is not using that as a defense. His defense is simple self defense. They are not using the stand your ground law as a defense.

It seems you do not even know the basics of this case. Get yourself updated on the facts

Also, I did say that I acknowledge that TM was not doing anything wrong. he had all the right. He was reported for suspicious behavior. Heres what you do, get dressed up in a hoodie, wear your pants down past your ass, then at night go walking aimlessly around an a bank, or a mall parking lot, or an apartment complex especially a gated one and see how long it takes for the cops to show up and inform you that you are acting suspicious.

Zimmerman kept his distance and when he lost visual contact with TM he turned around and walked back to his car, on his way back he was ambushed by TM, thats what got him killed, thats why its justifiable homicide because he bashed his head on the concrete. and no that wouldnt count as SYG for TM.

So by your logic, its ok to instigate an aggressive situation so long as right before the person defends themselves, you turn around and go back? "Sorry guys, I'm done playing now. Honest, I wasn't REALLY going to shoot you. See I'm walking back now."

Retarded. If I'm in a position and I feel like I have a better chance of survival by taking out the threat that now has his guard down, than trying to stay hidden or make a break for it, then I'm going to take out the threat that now has his guard down. Simple survival.

Even non emergency dispatch get training on crisis situation advising numbnuts, you know, because non emergencies can become emergencies real quick like that. That, "you don't need to do that" is a polite way of saying you're doing something stupid. And the result is what we see here. Sorry your over bloated cowboy attitude is too much to allow you to see the operator was predicting exactly what happened.

And no, Zim chased him on foot. His out of shape ass was panting to dispatch.

SYG is most definitely relevant, and I already mentioned Zim wasn't invoking it. Learn to read. I specifically stated, what he was INITIALLY going to invoke in defense. Your comment is still evading the issue. A law doesn't become null and void simply because we choose not to invoke it. I give **** all about Zimmerman. This is about Martin. Martin is dead, he can't make a choice. Why is Martin not protected by a law on the books. Zim can go **** himself with whatever defense he chooses. This is about Martin and HIS threat of harm. All the law requires is
A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm. Yeah, some ******* follows me in their car, gets out and begins chasing me down a street on foot. I'm going to "presume imminent peril."

See this is where people like you show your colors. If we live in a country where innocence is presumed until found guilty, Martin is innocent. And since Martin is not on trial, he must always be considered innocent until such proof is available that he was in progress of breaking a law. And since walking down the street, even with a hoodie, even with his pants on the ground, is not illegal (as much as idiots like you like to seem to think that's grounds for suspicion). So again, someone present a rational argument as to why SYG does not protect Martin.

[Syn7]

Heres what you do, get dressed up in a hoodie, wear your pants down past your ass, then at night go walking aimlessly around an a bank, or a mall parking lot, or an apartment complex especially a gated one and see how long it takes for the cops to show up and inform you that you are acting suspicious.

It's pretty sad that you don't see how ****ed up that really is.


American Anthropological Association

http://static.thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2012/04/trayvon2.jpg


Do these people perpetuate "gangster" culture too?

I'm just curious... Is it the jeans and the sweatshirt that is gangster? Or is it the jeans and sweatshirt combined with the black that does it?

When you walk to the store, do you choose your clothing carefully so that you don't get shot?

And how is going for a walk suspicious? Or is it going for a walk in a hoodie/w jeans that does it? Or is it going for a walk in a hoodie w/ jeans and being black that makes it suspicious?

Think it through.

[sanjuro_ronin]

As much as I disagree with racial profiling, it tends to be more effective than less.
Sad but true.
One of the first things we were taught in "counter-terrorism" classes in the military was, sadly, racial profiling.
It is one of the most common and effective tools used in airports in the countries that have a history of STOPPING terrorist attacks on planes.

Sad comment on society though.

[Syn7]

Yeah, but at what cost? We have all seen this movie before and it never ends well.

The age old debate: Security vs Liberty. Can we have one w/o the other? Where is the balance?


IMO, airport security is more about the illusion of security. So you can't bomb a plane, so what? Walk into a school. Can't do that? Walk into a mall. Can't do that? Go to a ball game. Can't do that....

Where does it end. Ya know? What does this teach us? What does racial profiling teach us, whether it works or not?

Obviously these are not easy questions. But when do we do the right thing and when do we do the smart thing? When does the right thing become the smart thing? When does the smart thing become destructive?

There is a huge difference between managing a war and managing a civilian population in peacetime. We don't use soldiers to police citizens. Why? Because soldiers fight the enemy and we don't want ourselves to become the enemy.

Personally, I'm willing to take a fair amount of risk to preserve liberties.

Does profiling a teen to prevent petty theft justify ****ting on the liberties of so many innocent people? Is criminal racial profiling the same as racial profiling in counter terrorism? And what happens next? What about Chechens? What about all the white, suit and tie cats that are willing to do harm for islam? Do we check you because your nose is too big? Skin too dark? This may work, but in the end you are ****ing on the liberties of SO SO SO many more people that have done nothing wrong, will do no harm, and just wanna take care of their fam and live life in peace. This isn't a color thing, it's a culture thing. Xenophobia is a sickness.

White privilege, it's great when you are white... To not be seen as a threat. As a criminal. As a drain on the economy. I have no issue with a comprehensive program used to prevent harm, but there are limits. And while you may have had proper training, there are a million Zimmermans to every one of you who hear you say that and take matters into their own inept hands. Choose your words wisely when you say stuff like that. Make the point that you have received extensive training and that it should be left to the professionals. And that isn't to say the professionals do no wrong. They do plenty wrong, but at least they have the proper training, whether you agree with it or not.

[Lucas]

how did running people over all in good fun turn into racial profiling? last time i flew they pulled like a 80 year old brown lady with a head covering out of line, she could barely walk. i was the most average looking 'white' guy so they swooped me up to so i didnt look 'bad'

[Kymus]

how did running people over all in good fun turn into racial profiling? last time i flew they pulled like a 80 year old brown lady with a head covering out of line, she could barely walk. i was the most average looking 'white' guy so they swooped me up to so i didnt look 'bad'

That would be post #13 good sir.

[Drake]

What they have to prove is that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

Everything outside of that is just stupid being stupid...

[KungFubar]

So by your logic, its ok to instigate an aggressive situation so long as right before the person defends themselves, you turn around and go back? "Sorry guys, I'm done playing now. Honest, I wasn't REALLY going to shoot you. See I'm walking back now."

Retarded. If I'm in a position and I feel like I have a better chance of survival by taking out the threat that now has his guard down, than trying to stay hidden or make a break for it, then I'm going to take out the threat that now has his guard down. Simple survival.

Even non emergency dispatch get training on crisis situation advising numbnuts, you know, because non emergencies can become emergencies real quick like that. That, "you don't need to do that" is a polite way of saying you're doing something stupid. And the result is what we see here. Sorry your over bloated cowboy attitude is too much to allow you to see the operator was predicting exactly what happened.

And no, Zim chased him on foot. His out of shape ass was panting to dispatch.

SYG is most definitely relevant, and I already mentioned Zim wasn't invoking it. Learn to read. I specifically stated, what he was INITIALLY going to invoke in defense. Your comment is still evading the issue. A law doesn't become null and void simply because we choose not to invoke it. I give **** all about Zimmerman. This is about Martin. Martin is dead, he can't make a choice. Why is Martin not protected by a law on the books. Zim can go **** himself with whatever defense he chooses. This is about Martin and HIS threat of harm. All the law requires is . Yeah, some ******* follows me in their car, gets out and begins chasing me down a street on foot. I'm going to "presume imminent peril."

See this is where people like you show your colors. If we live in a country where innocence is presumed until found guilty, Martin is innocent. And since Martin is not on trial, he must always be considered innocent until such proof is available that he was in progress of breaking a law. And since walking down the street, even with a hoodie, even with his pants on the ground, is not illegal (as much as idiots like you like to seem to think that's grounds for suspicion). So again, someone present a rational argument as to why SYG does not protect Martin.

you keep thinking he shot TM for walking down the street.

You forget the part where TM takes 4 minutes to wait for GZ to come back to his car after looking for the address (not following). GZ screams for his life for 40 seconds while TM impacts his head into the concrete and doesnt stop.

You think TM has a right to do that because someone is trying to maintain eye contact with him? Like TM doesnt know that GZ is on the phone with police. You are delusional if you think TM was scared of martin for one second.

Do you not like the basic self defense law that is in force in all 50 states? Is that what you want to change? or you dont like people 'like me' who think its a good law. Do you really think Zimmerman 'stalked' and wanted to kill TM because he was black? You really think that was his intent?

[KungFubar]

It's pretty sad that you don't see how ****ed up that really is.


American Anthropological Association

http://static.thesocietypages.org/socimages/files/2012/04/trayvon2.jpg


Do these people perpetuate "gangster" culture too?

I'm just curious... Is it the jeans and the sweatshirt that is gangster? Or is it the jeans and sweatshirt combined with the black that does it?

When you walk to the store, do you choose your clothing carefully so that you don't get shot?

And how is going for a walk suspicious? Or is it going for a walk in a hoodie/w jeans that does it? Or is it going for a walk in a hoodie w/ jeans and being black that makes it suspicious?

Think it through.

You want it to be racial, I understand that. Just as in my illustration that you dismissed, it would make no difference if the kid was white. He would have been just as suspicious based on the history of the complex and the profile of the criminals that were doing the robberies.

If you look at TMs texts it turns out GZ was correct anyway. GZ didnt have any intention of harming TM that night, he was only observing and reporting and trying to prevent any more crime in his community. Look at TMs texts and you will see what he was all about.

This idea that race has anything at all to do with this is ridiculous and just an excuse to try to divide us all.

[GeneChing]

Is registering your hands as legal weapons real? READ A Martial Artist’s Guide to Legal Self-Defense (https://www.kungfumagazine.com/ezine/article.php?article=1711) by Thomas D. Davenport, Jr.

http://www.kungfumagazine.com//admin/site_images/KungfuMagazine/images/ezine/7331_A-Martial-Artist_Lead.jpg