Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gun Control

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

  • Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by matapule View Post
    Zimmerman was not charged with violating "stand your ground" law, but juror B37 said that in jury deliberations they did consider whether Zimmerman violated "stand your ground." The jury DID NOT do their job. They did more than "that's all."
    The judge charged the jury with considering whether the "stand your ground" principle made Martin's killing lawful. From the jury instructions:
    If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
    http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/07...trayvon-martin
    The reason this is relevant, contrary to what you say, is that one of the elements of second degree murder, which Zimmerman was charged with, is that the killing is unlawful (from the same reference):
    In order for the jury to find Zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder, the prosecution must prove the following three things, beyond a reasonable doubt:

    1. Trayvon Martin is dead.
    2. The death was caused by the criminal act of George Zimmerman.
    3. There was an unlawful killing of Trayvon Martin by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.
    Note the third element. If the killing was lawful, Zimmerman was not guilty of second degree murder. That is why the jury had to consider "stand your ground".
    Greg

    Comment


    • Re: Gun Control

      Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
      Actually character witnesses are fairly common.
      From the Wikipedia:
      In the United States, character evidence is inadmissible in a criminal trial if first offered by the prosecution as circumstantial evidence to show that a defendant is likely to have committed the crime with which he or she is charged—the prosecution may not, in other words, initiate character evidence that shows defendant's propensity to commit a crime.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_evidence
      Greg

      Comment


      • Re: Gun Control

        Originally posted by GregLee View Post
        The judge charged the jury with considering whether the "stand your ground" principle made Martin's killing lawful.
        Zimmerman was NOT charged with violating SYG law. The prosecution did not prosecute on SYG law. The defense offered no defense of SYG law.

        Note the third element. If the killing was lawful, Zimmerman was not guilty of second degree murder. That is why the jury had to consider "stand your ground".
        I disagree, but I am not an attorney, perhaps you are. I really don't think you want to go there. If Zimmerman had a right to SYG, so did Trayvon when he was followed at close range by Zimmerman over approximately 10 minutes, who did not identify himself, who was instructed by law enforcement not to follow, and who was acting like a "creepy a$$ cracker" in the mind of a 16 years and 21 days old minor. If Trayvon had the gun and not Zimmerman, would he have been justified in shooting and killing Zimmerman because Trayvon "was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself."

        STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!
        Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

        People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

        Comment


        • Re: Gun Control

          Originally posted by matapule View Post
          I disagree, but I am not an attorney, perhaps you are. I really don't think you want to go there.
          I am not an attorney. Did you notice that I was quoting from the judge's instructions to the jury? When you "disagree", do you mean to be saying that the jury (which you criticized) was wrong to follow the judge's instructions? Or are you saying the judge's instructions were incorrect? Or what?
          If Trayvon had the gun and not Zimmerman, would he have been justified in shooting and killing Zimmerman because Trayvon "was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself.
          Perhaps it would have been legal for Martin to have shot Zimmerman. I don't know what relevance you think this has to Zimmerman's trial and acquittal. Are you saying that Zimmerman should have been convicted because Martin could have legally killed him? Or what?
          Greg

          Comment


          • Re: Gun Control

            "Character. The aggregate of the moral qualities which belong to and distinguish an individual person; the general result of one's distinguishing attributes. That moral predisposition or habit, or aggregate of ethical qualities, which is believed to attach to a person, on the strength of the common opinion and report concerning him. A person's fixed disposition or tendency, as evidenced to others by his habits of life, through the manifestation of which his general reputation for the possession of a character, good or otherwise, is obtained..." Law Dictionary, Black's, Edition Fifth, Abridged.

            Comment


            • Re: Gun Control

              Future hopeful shooting survivor: You shouldn't wait until gun violence affects you to start shooting.
              If the kid had been armed and killed his relentlessly pursuing assailant in self defense he'd possibly be alive today, only to face another idiotic Florida court system that would have probably found him guilty of murder.
              https://www.facebook.com/Bobby-Ingan...5875444640256/

              Comment


              • Re: Gun Control

                Originally posted by GregLee View Post
                When you "disagree", do you mean to be saying that the jury (which you criticized) was wrong to follow the judge's instructions? Or are you saying the judge's instructions were incorrect? Or what?
                I'm saying that the judges instructions had nothing to do with the SYG law. I'm saying the jury willfully misinterpreted the judges instructions (if we believe juror B37) and chose to instead engage in "jury nullification."

                Perhaps it would have been legal for Martin to have shot Zimmerman. I don't know what relevance you think this has to Zimmerman's trial and acquittal. Are you saying that Zimmerman should have been convicted because Martin could have legally killed him? Or what?
                You don't seem to understand or acknowledge that Trayvon had an equal right to defend himself, even more so when he was followed for no apparent reason in his mind, but he was killed by the "pudgy, physically unfit" (Zimmerman's attorney's words) gun nut, because he had a gun and Trayvon didn't. The jury said (through juror B37) that they DID NOT consider Trayvon's right to stand his ground. Apparently this jury feels that Trayvon should have bashed Zimmerman's brains out on the sidewalk (if that indeed was the case of which only Zimmerman is a witness) and killed Zimmerman because they would then be obligated to take Trayvon's word for it since the other guy is dead. Like that would have ever happen in Florida if a 16 years 21 days old black kid murdered an Ecuedoran/white guy and used self defense as an excuse.

                The bravado of carrying a fully loaded semi-automatic gun with no internal safety was the cause of the demise of a black youth. For Maui's sake, Zimmerman was taking a fully loaded gun to Target to purchase groceries. I'm glad I don't live in Florida when the person next to you in Target is fully locked and loaded, especially when it is a pudgy, physically unfit idiot like Zimmerman.

                STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!
                Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

                People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

                Comment


                • Re: Gun Control

                  If there were adequate background checks maybe a cop wanna be guy with a history of beating up girls and molesting girls might not have been allowed to pack. Doesn't sound like a very stable sort, not the sort to be trusted with a gun, was he? We can all be thankful it wasn't our kid he fixed on. The key to understanding is to imagine how we would feel if it HAD been your kid that got blown away, and whose shooting death the jury (5 whites, one hispanic) approved.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Gun Control

                    Originally posted by matapule View Post
                    You don't seem to understand or acknowledge that Trayvon had an equal right to defend himself, ...
                    This makes no sense whatsoever as a comment on whether the jury acted properly. Of course, Martin had a right to defend himself. But Martin was not on trial -- he's dead. You just seem to be completely disoriented. I give up.
                    Greg

                    Comment


                    • Re: Gun Control

                      Originally posted by GregLee View Post
                      This makes no sense whatsoever as a comment on whether the jury acted properly. Of course, Martin had a right to defend himself. But Martin was not on trial -- he's dead. You just seem to be completely disoriented. I give up.
                      Trayvon was shot and murdered while he was trying to defend himself. Trayvon had a right to defend himself, Zimmerman did not have a right to murder him. The jury never considered that according to juror B37. What can't you understand about that? Of course you know nothing about this case other than what you read on the Internet. You didn't watch the trial in its entirety (or at all) like I did.

                      STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!
                      Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

                      People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

                      Comment


                      • Re: Gun Control

                        Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
                        she had some interesting facts on Zimmerman: girlfriend got a restraining order against him because he beat her up, a female cousin claims he molested her, and his mom is a "loud and proud" racist.
                        Lopeti, I believe that the irresponsible, pudgy, unfit gun nut, Zimmerman will eventually wind up in jail for future crimes he is going to commit because he is a loser. Just like Simpson ( who I believe is guilty of two murders) who is another irresponsible loser wound up in jail and I believe he is still a menace to society like Zimmerman and I hope he never gets out.

                        STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!
                        Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

                        People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

                        Comment


                        • Re: Gun Control

                          Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
                          Interesting, the law enforcement peoples reactions against background checks. On the surface you might expect that they'd like background checks because it would make their work easier.
                          In business and politics, a lot of ideas sound good on paper until you actually have to implement them.

                          Politicians don't have to be experts in law enforcement to draft and vote on new laws. What they're experts at is getting elected. They mainly pander to the public, who react with emotion and prefer "easy" solutions.

                          My guess is there was something about the bill which the audience felt was impractical to enforce or wouldn't make law abiding citizens any safer.



                          The biggest bully in my high school became a cop. I have met good cops, nice cops, but also rude ones who knew they had the upper hand and used their power to abuse, humiliate, and insult.
                          I agree bullies are attracted to positions of power, such as law enforcement. My gut feeling is the majority want to do good, but they may turn mean because they are stuck in a difficult situation. A retired cop told me, "You're not a real cop until you've been divorced and sued by a civilian."

                          The way I see it, the ultra wealthy use their power to take more wealth from the majority. This impoverishes the majority, who start to suffer and get angry. Instead of fixing this social injustice, law enforcement is tasked to "keep the peace". In other words, the majority is abused and then made to shut up.

                          We're expecting law enforcement to "solve" society's problems, much like public school teachers.

                          I agree with you that there's a volcano waiting to blow. When it does, I don't think there's enough cops to protect us. Everyone will have to take care of themselves, their family, and their community.
                          Last edited by MyopicJoe; July 20, 2013, 01:54 PM.
                          "By concealing your desires, you may trick people into being cruel about the wrong thing." --Steven Aylett, Fain the Sorcerer
                          "You gotta get me to the tall corn." --David Mamet, Spartan
                          "
                          Amateurs talk technology, professionals talk conditions." --(unknown)

                          Comment


                          • Re: Gun Control

                            Snippet of criminologist David Kennedy's op-ed in the LA times:

                            The fact is that most of the recent debate entirely missed the point about the nature of most gun violence in America. The largest share — up to three-quarters of all homicides in many cities — is driven by gangs and drug crews. Most of the remainder is also concentrated among active criminals; ordinary citizens who own guns do not commit street robberies or shoot their neighbors and wives.

                            ...

                            In the absence of any movement in the larger gun debate, mayors, police chiefs, prosecutors and academics have been moving on their own — and have made real progress. The way forward lies in two directions. One is to focus on "hot" groups and individuals. Gun violence turns out to be driven by a fantastically small number of people: about 5% of the young men in the most dangerous neighborhoods. It is possible to identify them, put together a partnership of law enforcement, community figures and social service providers, and have a face-to-face engagement in which the authorities say, "We know who you are, we know what you're doing, we'd like to help you, but your violence has to stop, and there will be serious legal consequences if it doesn't."


                            ...


                            The second strategy involves focusing on "hot" places. Even in high-crime communities, gun violence is concentrated geographically. It is particular blocks and corners, not whole neighborhoods, that are at highest risk.
                            The downside to this strategy is it sounds like racial profiling. More importantly, it only tackles gun crime, which is just a symptom of a deeper social problem.

                            But it's interesting to see where law enforcement (at least the academic side of it) sees where the problem is.
                            "By concealing your desires, you may trick people into being cruel about the wrong thing." --Steven Aylett, Fain the Sorcerer
                            "You gotta get me to the tall corn." --David Mamet, Spartan
                            "
                            Amateurs talk technology, professionals talk conditions." --(unknown)

                            Comment


                            • Re: Gun Control

                              Originally posted by matapule View Post
                              The bravado of carrying a fully loaded semi-automatic gun with no internal safety was the cause of the demise of a black youth.
                              Would it be less bravado and more acceptable if the gun was only half loaded?

                              Technically the Kel-Tec PF9 has an internal hammer block safety. Perhaps the term you're thinking of is an "external safety"?

                              By claiming a lack of an internal safety, your statement implies Martin was accidentally shot, when in fact Zimmerman pulled the trigger deliberately.

                              By highlighting the fact the gun was fully loaded, your statement implies Martin was killed because he was shot too many times, when in fact he was killed by a single shot, at point blank range, near the heart.


                              For Maui's sake, Zimmerman was taking a fully loaded gun to Target to purchase groceries.
                              If someone could predict the exact time and place they would be the victim of a violent crime, they could just carry their firearm on that occasion (or better yet avoid it). Since that's not possible, people conceal carry throughout their daily routine, even if it's just grocery shopping. Not so much inside the store, but rather for the riskier time where you are walking in the parking lot.


                              Here's an example of a properly holstered Kel-Tec PF9. Notice how the trigger is completely covered. Also the holster is made out of Kydex which is stiff enough to prevent indirect contact with the trigger.

                              "By concealing your desires, you may trick people into being cruel about the wrong thing." --Steven Aylett, Fain the Sorcerer
                              "You gotta get me to the tall corn." --David Mamet, Spartan
                              "
                              Amateurs talk technology, professionals talk conditions." --(unknown)

                              Comment


                              • Re: Gun Control

                                Originally posted by MyopicJoe View Post
                                Politicians don't have to be experts in law enforcement to draft and vote on new laws. What they're experts at is getting elected. They mainly pander to the public, who react with emotion and prefer "easy" solutions.
                                So you are saying "Stand Your Ground" laws are "easy" solutions?

                                My guess is there was something about the bill which the audience felt was impractical to enforce or wouldn't make law abiding citizens any safer.
                                Or it meant that gun nuts will always be gun nuts. Your conclusions are simplistic.

                                The way I see it, the ultra wealthy use their power to take more wealth from the majority. This impoverishes the majority, who start to suffer and get angry. Instead of fixing this social injustice, law enforcement is tasked to "keep the peace". In other words, the majority is abused and then made to shut up.
                                A perfect reason not to vote Teapubican!

                                We're expecting law enforcement to "solve" society's problems, much like public school teachers.
                                Who is "we?" Don't presume to speak for me. I expect law enforcement to keep the peace and not abuse their power, that's all.

                                I agree with you that there's a volcano waiting to blow. When it does, I don't think there's enough cops to protect us. Everyone will have to take care of themselves, their family, and their community.
                                My greatest fear is not law enforcement but all the gun nuts in the US who appear to be willing to take the law into their own hands.

                                STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!
                                Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

                                People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X