Castle doctrine

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Double D, Apr 13, 2012.

  1. Jerryboy

    Jerryboy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,007
    Location:
    Virginia
    I can hardly wait for mintaka to become a former guest
  2. mintaka

    mintaka New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    55
    So martins lifestyle made him deserving of being killed or eventually killed, but zimmermans previous arrest for assaulting a LEO doesnt count...
    I think its fair to say that there are strong opinions on both sides, but to cut me off for my words or opinions is really not what the constitution is all about...
    How someone can say martin deserved to die in march or in the future is as sickening a statement as can be said on a site that has a religious theme...what gives...or does everyone agree with this....if so you should be ashamed...
    I'm not trolling, I have my opinions, and if you read my previous remarks they are not really onesided as far as race goes..I'm just trying to be honest and not a hypocrite..
  3. norahc

    norahc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,649
    Location:
    An hour's drive from the nearest McDonald's
    Nobody said that. What was said was that his lifestyle made him statistically more likely for it to happen.
    If you really want to bring in previous charges/arrests into the discussion, what about Martin's history of burglary and drugs?
    True.
    The Constitution only restricts what the government can do to the people, not what an internet forum can do to it's members. Also, if you're going to claim the Constitution for your protection here, at least respect it and capitalize it as a proper name (sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine).
    If he was assaulting Zimmerman, to the point of beating his head on the concrete after breaking his nose, what did Martin deserve? How much more should Zimmerman have taken before he put a stop to it?
    So should you for failing to get your facts straight and changing what people said here into what you want them to have said here.
    And everyone else has theirs. But you're the one tossing about words like "supercop" and making racial comments here. If you were truly being honest, you would avoid such inflammatory descriptions and wording which clearly show you have an agenda, and focus on facts.
  4. jlloyd73

    jlloyd73 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,965
    LOL....pick and choosing what you want huh. So, its OK to bash Zimmerman's past, but you can't handle the truth when it comes to that thug punk Trayvon.

    We have too many punks like him running around already.....so pardon me if I feel no sympathy for his loss. It was a punk (race not a consideration either...just a young punk thug) like him that tried to car jack my wife a few months ago...........so boo hoo, cry a river, I won't.

    This has nothing to do with religion or my beliefs.

    I refuse to condemn Zimmerman based on assumptions and a clear distorting of the truth by race baiters.

    When are people going to finally quit giving the black communities a free pass for all their crap (based on sympathy over slavery decades ago) and hold them accountable for how they are raising their little black thugs. They don't want people to look at them sideways.....then act like decent human beings. I am sick of seeing some black kids underwear because a a stupid fad....I am sick of going places and having black (primarily black women) being loud, obnoxious and rude........

    Martin jumped the wrong man.....his error.
  5. Appliancedude

    Appliancedude Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,861
    Location:
    The true northern Cal
    The only thing I'm going to interject here is Zimmerman was advised by 911 not to follow him. That's in the 911 recordings. He was not told not to, just told that it wasn't necessary. To me if a 911 officer tells me its not necessary I would take it as advise. However I very rarely follow advise I didn't ask for so I probably would have done as Zimmerman did.

    Personally I think Zimmerman should have been charged with manslaughter. I also think unless he gets totally railroaded he's gonna walk. He also has no life from here on out. He's already been convicted in the court of public opinion.
  6. Double D

    Double D Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    10,202
    Location:
    North Florida
    I sure would like to know how my thread got hyjacked.
  7. norahc

    norahc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,649
    Location:
    An hour's drive from the nearest McDonald's
    I think it started at about post #4...and I'm just as guilty as everyone else for continuing it. :eek:
  8. Double D

    Double D Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    10,202
    Location:
    North Florida
    No, I dont think carver read my original post before posting and then everyone else followed suit.
  9. BobMcG

    BobMcG Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Messages:
    1,267
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Twilight Zone.
    Ya gotta love how T.M. is always referred to as "the unarmed black teenager". Not "the unarmed teenager", mind you, but "the unarmed black teenager". You see and hear it over and over again. What a load of race baiting crap.
  10. Caneman

    Caneman Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,454
    what is interesting is that the "castle doctrine" is not uniform and has different flavors depending upon which state you are in...

    FL - the castle doctrine applies to your home and extends to your car

    CA - only applies inside your home

    NY - applies inside your home only, and you must make an attempt to "retreat" before you can use lethal force to defend yourself

    TX - applies inside your home, outside on your own property, extends to your car, and also you can pursue a thief who steals your belongings from your property and use lethal force!
  11. Ed~

    Ed~ New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    AridZona
    That was a very good article DD. It gave me a better understanding of history of the Castle Doctrine and it's current developments.

    It doesn't come out and say it but implies exactly why Zimm- is facing 2nd Degree Murder rather than Manslaughter: the prosecution is using this case to limit the Castle Doctrine pushers. As the article states, the NRA and ALEC were/are pushing to allow shootings beyond your house and yard to any place one has a right to be. That means Shootouts At The OK Corral again folks.

    Now I live in a fairly gun-friendly state (30 mins from Tombstone...) where folks are sometime seen open-carrying on the streets for no obvious reason (not on their farm, the range, or out in the back-country) even though it is legal to conceal-carry without a CCW. They do it for show. Police here have to file a report every time they unholster their weapon but obviously Civies don't. I have no desire to have any organization tell me what I can or cannot do, but the work of the NRA and ALEC is just plain dangerous and leads exactly to unjustified shootings as the Zimm- Martin case.

    Stupid folks like Zimm- give all gun owners a bad rap. But stupid laws are far worse: they give stupid people the idea that they are free to wreak havoc in society and hurt folks if they can prove it was justified. Problem being they almost never can, will spend their lives in jail (food, shelter, and healthcare on our tax dollars), but someone still stays shot or killed.

    The Castle Doctrine gives protection for homeowners and belongs at HOME. Do some research on the bills it sponsors and you'll discover ALEC does everything it does simply to stir up controversy and pit folks against each other so we ignore that we are being raped and looted by an Oligarchy. The NRA is just one of their political whores stealing the limelight for influence to exist.

    To hell with the Dems... and Repugs!
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2012
  12. Caneman

    Caneman Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,454
    "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" are not the same thing... SYG is a provision for self-defense laws, and can also be included in CD laws...

    the CD does not apply to Zimmerman, but SYG does... FL does not require someone to retreat before they can defend themselves using a lethal weapon (they can "stand their ground" and retreat is not required) if they are are in "fear of their life, or great bodily harm"...

    Zimmerman's problem is a imbalance of force issue, imo... was his use of force disproportiate to the attackers? These are all imbalance of force issues: teenager attacking an old man, any man attacking a woman, professional fighter/boxer attacking any man, etc... but did an unarmed Martin impose an imbalance of force when he attacked Zimmerman? And was Zimmerman at the point of being in "fear of his life, or great bodily harm"? IMO, those are the legal arguments, all the rest are just side issues... I personally believe Zimmeran has a strong case in his support, but with the FL legal system you never really know... remember Casey Anthony?
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2012
  13. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    10,542
    Location:
    NW Florida
    >"Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" are not the same thing<

    I was beginning to wonder if anyone besides me realized that.

    >where folks are sometime seen open-carrying on the streets for no obvious reason (not on their farm, the range, or out in the back-country) even though it is legal to conceal-carry without a CCW. They do it for show.<

    Or maybe they do it because they do not like having to carry concealed. I carry a gun all the time. I have a 5-shot 38 in my pocket. Why such a small caliber, small capacity gun? Because it has to be concealed. If open carry was legal in Florida, I'd walk around with a 1911 on. But that 1911 is kinda hard to hide, especially in t-shirt and shorts weather.
  14. norahc

    norahc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,649
    Location:
    An hour's drive from the nearest McDonald's
    Or they are attempting to show people that just because somebody is carrying a gun does not mean that they are a bad guy or breaking the law.
  15. whirley

    whirley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    542
    Here's the latest.. The Feds have now charged Zimmerman with second degree murder. it's now possible that Zimmerman could be found not guilty in Fla. court and then retried in Fed court. You think that's double jeopardy? Wrong..I believe it was used against some police officers in California, and the cops lost to the feds. The cops did time. But don't worry, Obama won and he'll do whatever he wants to do! Ask any black panther, they're gonna give that honkie what he deserves.
  16. norahc

    norahc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,649
    Location:
    An hour's drive from the nearest McDonald's
    Source? The reason I ask is that Martin was not in one of the groups that would allow the feds to charge Zimmerman with Murder 2 (federal law enforcement officer, judge, etc...). That would mean that the murder charge would be a state charge.

    The more likely scenario is that they've charged him with a civil rights violation, which is what they actually charged the LAPD officers with in the Rodney King incident.
  17. Ed~

    Ed~ New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    AridZona
    SYG in Zimmerman Defense

    Excerpts rom Wikipedia on Stand Your Ground with regard to Zimmerman's defense:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

    Apparently the prosecution will try to prove that Zimmerman did not fulfill the requirements of immunity under this law because:
    1) Zimmerman failed to withdraw from physical contact nor exhausted all means of escape;
    2) Was not actually in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm;
    3) Initially provoked the confrontation when told to stay in the car and wait for the police.

    They chose 2nd Degree murder because it is criminal homicide, exactly what this SYG law is designed to protect defenders from. The bar is set reasonably high enough so that most people in their own homes would pass but vigilantism would not.

    Given what I've read above, I don't see how Stand Your Ground, as it is written in FL, will provide Zimmerman from immunity.

    But neither do I believe that they will hurt SYG laws with this case. If anything, it will show the public how such laws work to protect true defenders but not vigilantes.

    On the other hand, if Zimmerman does get off based on some part of SYG, you can believe a wave of public anger will go after the law itself.

    Kind of a Catch 22 situation don't you think?
  18. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    10,542
    Location:
    NW Florida
    From your own post.

    >776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
    (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.<

    So, why should this matter?
    >1) Zimmerman failed to withdraw from physical contact nor exhausted all means of escape;<

    The law specifically states you don't have to try to escape.

    As to your other two points
    >2) Was not actually in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm;
    3) Initially provoked the confrontation when told to stay in the car and wait for the police.<

    Since you weren't there, you have no idea whether he was in imminent danger or not. and
    As has been said, numerous times in this thread already, he was not told "STAY IN THE CAR", he was told, "We don't need you to follow him". There is a difference.

    And even if he HAD been told to stay in the car, the guy/girl at 911 is a flippin' telephone operator. Not a cop. A telephone operator. Has no authority of any kind to tell someone to do or not do something.
  19. carver

    carver Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    15,049
    Location:
    DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of East Texas, just we
    I read it, and I apologize for the thread drift, but I was responding to the link on the Zimmerman case in the article, which is where I thgought you were going! Again I apologize!
  20. Ed~

    Ed~ New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    AridZona
    To Alpo's reply

    Yes, Alpo, you are completely right. I wasn't there. I was merely thinking out loud what the prosecution would have to show to strip SYG immunity from Zimmerman in this case.

    Having said that, it doesn't appear hard for the prosecution to do. 2nd Degree Murder, on the other hand, would be a higher bar for the prosecution to reach and they may accept a plea-bargain before this is over.

    In either case, SYG will probably not protect Zimmerman from going to jail IMHOpinion.

    BTW... reread line 2a in Statute 776.041 unless you willingly fail to understand the requirements of SYG. You will find it says, "exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger," which I interpreted as Zimmerman has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger before shooting an unarmed assailant.

    Stand-Your-Ground still includes the requirement to withdraw in the case where one provokes the confrontation, which is what Zimmerman did. Ironic isn't it? That last part probably included to appease those damned bleeding hearts who just don't have the balls to met justice most efficiently: one-man judge, jury, and executioner. ;)
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Gov Goofy Vetoes "Castle Doctrine Self Defense Bill Bill. Mar 5, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Castle doctrine, what SHOULD it mean ? Jul 24, 2011
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Pennsylvania Castle Doctrine Vetoed Nov 29, 2010
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum ‘Castle Doctrine’ Protects Ohioans Jun 10, 2008
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Victory---Castle Doctrine” Bill Approved By Missouri House May 3, 2007