Gun Mania

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21594
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:55 am

Zimmerman (and his lawyer) won't have to "convince the prosecutor or jury" of anything, because the police didn't even arrest him. They just took his word that killing the teen (who was talking on his cellphone) was justified.

Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:59 am

rabble wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:
Detritus wrote:"Taking the law into your own hands" is, for example, shooting a teenager in the back because you think he might be a criminal rather than, for example, calling the police and letting them handle it.


Are you claiming that Trayvon Martin was shot in the back and that Zimmerman did not call the police? If so, then you might want to check your information.

If you are not making those claims, then why are you putting it that way?

Are you claiming that he let the police handle it?


He called the police, right? Zimmerman was found with grass stains and a bloody nose, indicating that he had been in a fight. Other people called reporting two people fighting. Once you're in the middle of a struggle you hardly have the luxury of waiting for the police to arrive. (Remember the adage "When seconds count the police are only minutes away.") What started that physical fight is uncertain and may never be determined.

I don't advise people to pursue "suspects" under most circumstances, let alone apprehend them. But it is not illegal to do so, just not prudent under most conditions.

jman111
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3612
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby jman111 » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:03 am

Dangerousman wrote:Would you rather have no self-defense law? Do you think that nobody can claim self-defense if there are no witnesses to corroborate the incident?

As I understand it, the Castle Doctrine creates a presumption for the Court that the force was necessary and, therefore, removes the fact-finding issue. I think there should be at least a modicum of burden on the shooter to establish that force was necessary, that the act was, indeed, self defense.
A group within the State Bar of Wisconsin representing more than 600 criminal defense lawyers, prosecutors, judges and academics opposed the castle doctrine bill because "malevolent, reckless, or paranoid people who shoot trick-or-treaters or repairmen on their porch will be presumed to be acting in self-defense." Members of that group say they can't come up with a single case where a homeowner was charged with a crime for defending himself or herself against an intruder.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 97918.html
Last edited by jman111 on Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:14 am

Detritus wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:
Detritus wrote:"Taking the law into your own hands" is, for example, shooting a teenager in the back because you think he might be a criminal rather than, for example, calling the police and letting them handle it.


Are you claiming that Trayvon Martin was shot in the back and that Zimmerman did not call the police? If so, then you might want to check your information.

If you are not making those claims, then why are you putting it that way?

It's called a "hypothetical," D-Man, typically signaled by the use of phrases such as "for example" (twice in one sentence, as it happens). Anyway, back to your bald assertion that opining on the internet is "taking the law into your own hands," whereas shooting someone in the back because you think they might be a criminal is not. That's your assertion, right?


You think the phrase "for example" signals that something is a hypothetical? Tell me if I'm signaling a hypothetical when I say "... great scientists, for example Newton and Einstein" or "unpopular wars, for example Vietnam." Are those hypothetical examples or real examples? If you want to signal a hypothetical maybe you ought signal it by saying "hypothetically" or "imagine a situation where..."

Well since you have created an imaginary situation, unrelated in the details to the non-hypothetical case under discussion. Do I think shooting a teenager in the back because I think they are a criminal is "taking the law into one's hands"? Yes it is. So is shooting a person who is hacking small children with a machete an example of "taking the law into one's hands." Sometimes one MUST take the law into one's own hands, unless one is a complete coward or helpless. And when you think about it, the laws of self defense are an example (and not a hypothetical example) of the law being given to your hands. But it is still a law and must be done within the law.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:15 am

Henry Vilas wrote:Zimmerman (and his lawyer) won't have to "convince the prosecutor or jury" of anything, because the police didn't even arrest him. They just took his word that killing the teen (who was talking on his cellphone) was justified.

Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.


You don't think this is having the hell investigated out of it? I don't believe you've been following the news Henry.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7845
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Gun Mania

Postby rabble » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:17 am

Dangerousman wrote:He called the police, right? Zimmerman was found with grass stains and a bloody nose, indicating that he had been in a fight. Other people called reporting two people fighting. Once you're in the middle of a struggle you hardly have the luxury of waiting for the police to arrive. (Remember the adage "When seconds count the police are only minutes away.") What started that physical fight is uncertain and may never be determined.

I don't advise people to pursue "suspects" under most circumstances, let alone apprehend them. But it is not illegal to do so, just not prudent under most conditions.

Yeah he called the police and it's probably not illegal to follow somebody with a gun. It might be in some instances, there's an investigation under way right now.

But one quote from a legal expert in one of the articles I read sort of says it all: "He wasn't standing his ground; he was hunting."

That will probably be the crux of the matter. If your ground keeps moving towards the other guy, are you really standing your ground? Or was the dead guy standing HIS?

jman111
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3612
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby jman111 » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:21 am

Dangerousman wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:Zimmerman (and his lawyer) won't have to "convince the prosecutor or jury" of anything, because the police didn't even arrest him. They just took his word that killing the teen (who was talking on his cellphone) was justified.

Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.


You don't think this is having the hell investigated out of it? I don't believe you've been following the news Henry.

I suspect that without all the recent media attention (note that this occurred over 3 weeks ago), there would have been much less investigating.

Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Detritus » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:25 am

Dangerousman wrote:Do I think shooting a teenager in the back because I think they are a criminal is "taking the law into one's hands"? Yes it is.

Excellent. Now how about that other part, in which you asserted that giving one's opinion on a case constitutes "taking the law into one's own hands?"

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21594
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:26 am

Dangerousman wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:Zimmerman (and his lawyer) won't have to "convince the prosecutor or jury" of anything, because the police didn't even arrest him. They just took his word that killing the teen (who was talking on his cellphone) was justified.

Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.


You don't think this is having the hell investigated out of it? I don't believe you've been following the news Henry.

If one is involved in a fatal automobile accident, a blood test for drugs and alcohol is mandatory. Yet in the Florida homicide "investigation" Zimmerman was not tested. That doesn't sound like much of an investigation.

If a middle aged black man shot dead a white teen he was pursuing because he thought the teen looked suspicious, do you think the shooter would have been charged?

lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3365
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby lukpac » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:28 am

Dangerousman wrote:He called the police, right? Zimmerman was found with grass stains and a bloody nose, indicating that he had been in a fight. Other people called reporting two people fighting. Once you're in the middle of a struggle you hardly have the luxury of waiting for the police to arrive.


You have that luxury if you avoid getting into the struggle in the first place:

Zimmerman continues: "He's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is. Can we get an officer over here?"

"These assholes always get away," he says later to the operator. Zimmerman is then heard giving directions to the dispatcher.

"Shit, he's running," Zimmerman says.

"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asks.

"Yes," Zimmerman responds.

"We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher says.


And that doesn't even touch on the question of who may have "struck first" or who had the upper hand in the eventual fight.

Dangerousman wrote:(Remember the adage "When seconds count the police are only minutes away.") What started that physical fight is uncertain and may never be determined.


Another adage that doesn't actually apply!

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:28 am

jman111 wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:Would you rather have no self-defense law? Do you think that nobody can claim self-defense if there are no witnesses to corroborate the incident?

As I understand it, the Castle Doctrine creates a presumption for the Court that the force was necessary and, therefore, removes the fact-finding issue. I think there should be at least a modicum of burden on the shooter to establish that force was necessary, that the act was, indeed, self defense.


There is, jman. In order to invoke the castle doctrine, the person you use force against (shooting is only one form of force) must have unlawfully and forcibly entered, or be in the process of entering into your home, business or vehicle. If you can't establish that's what happened, then no castle doctrine defense.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7845
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: Gun Mania

Postby rabble » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:28 am

Dangerousman wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.


You don't think this is having the hell investigated out of it? I don't believe you've been following the news Henry.

They tried to let him go. The parents made enough noise to start one, but the police made a mighty strong attempt to just let it go without any investigation at all and almost got away with it.

Kinda makes you wonder how many times this has happened and there wasn't anyone around to make a noise, don't it?

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:29 am

Detritus wrote:
Dangerousman wrote:Do I think shooting a teenager in the back because I think they are a criminal is "taking the law into one's hands"? Yes it is.

Excellent. Now how about that other part, in which you asserted that giving one's opinion on a case constitutes "taking the law into one's own hands?"


Insofar as you have pronounced someone guilty without the benefit of a trial.... it is.

Dangerousman
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby Dangerousman » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:31 am

Henry Vilas wrote:Zimmerman (and his lawyer) won't have to "convince the prosecutor or jury" of anything, because the police didn't even arrest him. They just took his word that killing the teen (who was talking on his cellphone) was justified.

Spin it all you want, but Florida's law has allowed Zimmerman to get off scott-free without an investigation.


Tell us why he couldn't still be arrested.

lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3365
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison
Contact:

Re: Gun Mania

Postby lukpac » Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:34 am

Dangerousman wrote:
Detritus wrote:Excellent. Now how about that other part, in which you asserted that giving one's opinion on a case constitutes "taking the law into one's own hands?"


Insofar as you have pronounced someone guilty without the benefit of a trial.... it is.


One would presume that "taking the law into one's own hands" would have some sort of tangible effect. I.e., somebody being apprehended, jailed or killed. What exactly is the tangible effect of somebody saying "I think they are guilty"?

Message board posts = the new vigilante justice?


Return to “Local Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TheBookPolice, Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests