"Stand You Ground" Laws

[Dodo_David]

If the Lord were here now he would ban guns. I know he will when He returns!

It sure does take gall to claim what the LORD would do without any biblical evidence to support the claim.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

I would say that anyone who takes up arms against someone who is unarmed is lacking faith. I've been a gun owner most of my life and I have no problem with people defending themselves. But even during the 1800's if you shot an unarmed person you were likely going to be convicted of murder. Stand your ground is an evil law. If I don't like you all I have to do is shoot you while nobody is looking and for my defense claim "I feared for my life or feared bodily injury." I'm sick of the attitude of American gun owners. They put their politics above common sense and above God's Word. I believe there's people on this forum who value their guns more than life itself and who would give up their bibles before their guns, and who love their guns more than the Lord Jesus Christ.

If the Lord were here now he would ban guns. I know he will when He returns!

America is the only civilized country with an extreme cowboy mentality toward guns.

Your opinion on the trial is certainly respectable. I'm still undecided because I can't get past the fact that the whole thing could have been avoided if Rambo just listened to the 911 operator.

But regarding an unarmed assailant, I think your view is a tad narrow. Many states have laws specifically allowing for the use of deadly force when there's a significant disparity between the assailant and the victim, say an 80 year old grandmother against a 200 pound man, for example. In the case of Martin/Zimmerman, the gun didn't come out until Zimmerman feared for his life, which tends to happen when one's head is being slammed against the concrete repeatedly. When you knock a man to the ground, that's simple assault, but when you continue to pummel a man who's already on the ground either by fist or foot, it's considered felony assault and borders on criteria by which a person can reasonably fear for his life.

This is why the verdict couldn't have been anything else. Because even if you argue that Zimmerman could have listened to the 911 operator, by the same token, Martin could have backed off after Zimmerman was on the ground. I have never in my life continued to accost somebody who I've knocked down because I know it crosses a line, both legally and morally. Anger will knock a man to the ground, but murderous rage is what fuels any further assault; "monkey stomping", slamming a head against the concrete, these are actions of somebody trying to kill a man.

And this is why the shooting was justified.

It sure does take gall to claim what the LORD would do without any biblical evidence to support the claim.

Or even with the Bible, for it doesn't tell us everything and certainly doesn't give license for rash speculation. But I think Blacksheep is trying to say that when Jesus returns it will bring an end to the age of war, violence, and bloodshed. And I do look forward to that day with yearning and anticipation.

 

[Dodo_David]

As I understand it, shooting in self defense, which is what Zimmerman claimed to do, isn't necessarily the same thing as "Stand Your Ground". The latter, I believe, involves a case in which a person can get away from an attacker. I could be mistaken about the latter, but it isn't what happened in the Zimmerman case.

Whether or not "Stand Your Ground" laws are good laws is not something that I have decided. I just know that there is no biblical prohibition on using deadly force to defend one's self.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

What kind of love would it be to just stand back and have faith and not defend one's wife or children if they were attacked?

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

As I understand it, shooting in self defense, which is what Zimmerman claimed to do, isn't necessarily the same thing as "Stand Your Ground". The latter, I believe, involves a case in which a person can get away from an attacker. I could be mistaken about the latter, but it isn't what happened in the Zimmerman case.

Whether or not "Stand Your Ground" laws are good laws is not something that I have decided. I just know that there is no biblical prohibition on using deadly force to defend one's self.

This is a red herring by the Left. Stand your ground wasn't even used as a defense for the reasons you highlighted. But because the tyrannical Eric Holder Justice Department has targeted these laws, it's now become a national debate, however irrelevant it was to the trial.

What kind of love would it be to just stand back and have faith and not defend one's wife or children if they were attacked?

Some people have a very misguided view on what faith is.

 

[Foreigner]

all weapons are concrete examples of a lack of faith.

-- You mean like the Sword of the Spirit?


The Stand Your Ground law had nothing to do with the Zimmerman case. The defense wasn't based on it and the Prosecution didn't argue against it.
Zimmerman didn't shoot Martin because he felt threatened that Martin MIGHT do something.
He shot him because he was in the middle of having felony assault committed against him.

Trayvon Martin didn't like Zimmerman following him (more than understandable. Zimmerman was an idiot for following him).
But Martin didn't know that Zimmerman was armed so he threw the smaller Zimmerman to the ground and began to "pummel him" (even the Prosecution used that phrase), opened up his head on the pavement and broke his nose.
To stop the beating Zimmerman drew his gun and shot Martin. The coroner confirmed that the shot was fired into Martin while he was on top of Zimmerman.

If Trayvon Martin hadn't assaulted what he thought was an unarmed man, he would be alive today.

 

[Dodo_David]

If Trayvon Martin hadn't assaulted what he thought was an unarmed man, he would be alive today.

If Zimmerman had not prejudged Martin when Zimmerman first saw Martin, then Martin would be alive today.
It all started with Zimmerman making the false assumption that Martin was up to no good.

 

[Angelina]

I think there was a lack of communication on both sides. In my country you cannot carry a gun or any form of weapon on your person at all unless you are part of the "Armed Offenders Squad." and they only come when there's a shooting going on or a possible shooting. :huh:

Shalom!!!

 

[Dodo_David]

I agree that Zimmerman used his gun to defend himself, and, thus, the jury in his trial reached the correct verdict.
However, Zimmerman went beyond the duty of a neighborhood watch by pursuing Martin while carrying a gun.
Zimmerman was not a law officer, and he was not a security guard.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

I agree that Zimmerman used his gun to defend himself, and, thus, the jury in his trial reached the correct verdict.
However, Zimmerman went beyond the duty of a neighborhood watch by pursuing Martin while carrying a gun.
Zimmerman was not a law officer, and he was not a security guard.

I think if you do a little investigation you will see that basically all Zimmerman did was get out of his truck and walk from the front of an apartment bldg where his truck was parked to the back of it, probably to get a view down the greenway between two rows of apt bldgs. To suggest that he pursued Martin, or did something wrong is ridiculous and succumbing to the media-driven narrative.

If Zimmerman had not prejudged Martin when Zimmerman first saw Martin, then Martin would be alive today.
It all started with Zimmerman making the false assumption that Martin was up to no good.

It was Z's job to watch his neighborhood. He saw somebody he had never seen before acting suspicious in his neighborhood. The nice thing about being an armchair quarterback is that you never have to suffer the consequences of making tough calls.

 

[Foreigner]

If Zimmerman had not prejudged Martin when Zimmerman first saw Martin, then Martin would be alive today.
It all started with Zimmerman making the false assumption that Martin was up to no good.

-- What Zimmerman did was not illegal. What Trayvon Martin did - commit felony assault on what he thought was an unarmed man - was.

But if you want to make arguments like what you just tried, if Trayvon Martin had just decided to go home, he would be alive today.

We can do this all day, but what it comes down to is that the only one who did anything illegal that night was Trayvon Martin.

 

[[email protected]]

An Observation: Despite these difficulties where your "stand your ground" laws apply. There seems to be an pervasive agenda of those in authority, who want to remove your right to defend yourself as your constitution allows. I believe that this pivotal piece of legislature, is the very thing that "restrains" the NWO regime. :huh:

Shalom!!!

The media is having a field day with the Zimmerman acquittal. I notice, though, that when OJ Simpson was acquitted everything was fine and dandy.

The bottom line here is that Al Sharpton and company are drinking Treyvon Martin's blood. They're like vultures dining on roadkill and are taking personal advantage from a tragedy that ought to be limited to a single family. I note that initial comments by the Martin family were kind. Justice has been done in court, but that is not enough to satisfy the black community. They want vengence and a reckoning for imagined slights against them.

Mr. Hope and Change, along with his chief jackal Mr. Holder, is moving the country toward open season on all non-blacks. No one is to be allowed to defend himself or herself in the future. Guns or no guns, only blacks will be entitled to kill.

I do not espouse such an attitude nor do I welcome it, but it is a clear and present danger that is now among us whether we like to admit it or not. Logic has no place in American society today. Neither does forgiveness or justice. From now on it will get increasingly difficult for society to rid itself of retribution.

and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

 

[John S]

"Mr. Hope and Change, along with his chief jackal Mr. Holder, is moving the country toward open season on all non-blacks. No one is to be allowed to defend himself or herself in the near future. Guns or no guns, only blacks will be entitled to kill".

You are nothing but a scared little bigot - a pathetic excuse of someone who refers to himself as Christian.
Not only should you be ashamed of yourself but you should be thrown off this site. You are a disgrace.

 

[lforrest]

"Mr. Hope and Change, along with his chief jackal Mr. Holder, is moving the country toward open season on all non-blacks. No one is to be allowed to defend himself or herself in the near future. Guns or no guns, only blacks will be entitled to kill".

You are nothing but a scared little bigot - a pathetic excuse of someone who refers to himself as Christian.
Not only should you be ashamed of yourself but you should be thrown off this site. You are a disgrace.

As ridiculous as that sounds, I consider your views equally ridiculous.

My interpretation of these events is that the left is rallying it's base through manipulation. They aim to pressure the states into imposing more restrictive gun control policies.

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

:mellow:

Look at this face. This is the face of stark terror at the anticipation that a Leftist will think I'm a bigot.

I'm

Really

Scared!

 

[Dodo_David]

Hey, would it be possible to get this thread back to the topic of "Stand Your Ground" ? We have already agreed that the Martin/Zimmerman case has nothing to do with "Stand Your Ground" .

 

[lforrest]

It stands to reason that if your no longer permitted to defend yourself there isn't a reason to carry a gun. It would be a back door means of gun control; why have a gun if your not permitted to defend yourself with it? Then it will be much easier to pass gun control legislation..

 

[aspen]

I do not trust many drivers on the road, why would I trust people with lethal weapons and the permission to kill whoever they want to kill, as long as they are the only witness, which is exactly what 'stand your ground' permits. It is just another attempt by the NRA to support their base - gun manufactures.

I just heard a statistic on the radio today that 30% of white people who kill black people with a gun are not convicted. Only 3% of blacks who kill whites are found innocent.

 

[Dodo_David]

I do not trust many drivers on the road, why would I trust people with lethal weapons and the permission to kill whoever they want to kill, as long as they are the only witness, which is exactly what 'stand your ground' permits. It is just another attempt by the NRA to support their base - gun manufactures.

I just heard a statistic on the radio today that 30% of white people who kill black people with a gun are not convicted. Only 3% of blacks who kill whites are found innocent.

What is the source of that alleged statistic?

 

[aspen]

It was an interview on a show called 'On Point' on NPR. The interview should be posted on the NPR website