Comments on: Stand Your Ground laws, cont’d

By: No, Paranoid Progressives, the Koch Brothers Had Nothing to Do with Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” Law

Fri, 20 Apr 2012 19:10:02 +0000

[…] Ground laws that exist in two dozen states were not invented by or advocated by the Koch brothers, nor did these laws radically change when people are allowed to use firearms in self-defense, as I explained […]

By: ALEC Unfairly Demonized Over “Stand Your Ground” Laws

ALEC Unfairly Demonized Over “Stand Your Ground” Laws — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 22:20:30 +0000

[…] codified existing judicial interpretations of the defense. As law professor Michael Mannheimer has noted, “the law in America has always been ambivalent about the duty to retreat, with about half […]

By: Will Stand Your Ground change the outcome of the Martin/Zimmerman case?

Will Stand Your Ground change the outcome of the Martin/Zimmerman case? — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:28:52 +0000

[…] on the role of “provocation” in the Martin/Zimmerman case at PrawfsBlawg. Earlier here, here, and […]

By: Stand Your Ground Laws « convincingly

Stand Your Ground Laws « convincingly — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:46:56 +0000

[…] http://overlawyered.com/2012/03/stand-your-ground-laws-contd/ […]

By: Krugman, Brady, and Stand Your Ground laws

Krugman, Brady, and Stand Your Ground laws — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:35:28 +0000

[…] Hmm. So despite hundreds of press assertions to the contrary in the past week, the actual content of the Florida law (as opposed to its supposed furtherance of a vague “mentality”) doesn’t turn out to be the main issue after all. Earlier here and here. […]

By: Jim Collins

Jim Collins — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 22:23:56 +0000

Noah,
There is a difference. I have a bad knee, before this law and other laws like it were passed, I had to show an intent to flee before defending myself, even if it ment moving from a place of tactical advantage to a place of no advantage. They also mean that I can move to a place of advantage even if it means moving toward my attacker. When I say “tactical advantage” think cover.

By: Noah

Noah — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 18:23:20 +0000

Is SYG that big a factor in the Zimmerman/Martin tragedy? Unless a person has a realistic opportunity to flee, there isn’t much difference between flee first and SYG. Other than staying in the car and waiting for the police to arrive, nobody has offered any evidence that Zimmerman had the opportunity to flee once the actual fight started.

By: asdfasdf

asdfasdf — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 05:48:28 +0000

Why wade into the murky facts and political discourse in the Trayvor case? People’s minds are mostly made up. If you concur with the main factual narrative, your voice is (to say the least) repetitive at this point. If you disagree, you (a) will have no impact; (b) will subject yourself to criticism; and (c) will get drawn into an endless realm of speculation and obscure forensics.

The main interesting feature of the case is how it has managed to capture national media attention for so long. There are plenty of cases with fact patterns sympathetic to conservative legal viewpoints – to advocate those viewpoints, I would try and publicize those cases, rather than argue about a case like this one whose fact pattern lies somewhere between unsympathetic and obscure.

It is odd how it is large-government adherents who time and again seem able to choose the cases and issues and fact patterns that dominate public discourse. It is very hard to win public opinion with these fact patterns.

By: A Schmails

A Schmails — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 03:16:52 +0000

The Immunity afforded in the Statute, which the “soon to be former” Police Chief sited as his reasoning behind not making an arrest, is predicated on an intereting requirement: The officers can not charge the suspect, if they had reasonable belief that the suspect was in imminent fear of death – (from a bag of skittles and an iced tea). In other words the Poorly Managed Police Departmen, led by a Chief who can not interpret statute, mis uses the staute to justify his weak decision making. The Supreme court has ruled on the constitionality of State Laws allowing police officers to shoot fleeing felons absent imminent threat if not stopped, How will Florida’s unchallenged Law (which, by the way has a similar fleeing felon section) fare under Federal Scrutiny ? not well I suspect.

By: anoNY

anoNY — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:36:21 +0000

I have spent the last few hours mapping out the times and events that happened that day using Google Maps. Looking at the record and the times that things were alleged to have happened, there is no way that the media portrayal of this incident is correct.

I suggest you do as I did and mark off where and when each event took place and then think about the timing of the calls. All of this info is widely available.

Here are some interesting facts:
– Trayvon ran away from Zimmerman and was lost to Zimmerman’s view for 5 whole minutes. Trayvon’s father’s condo was only 100 yards away, why didn’t he go and stay there?
– Trayvon’s girlfriend talked to him for 4 minutes AFTER Zimmerman had already lost sight of Trayvon.
– How did the heavyset Zimmerman ever catch up to the athletic Trayvon? Especially since Trayvon had a 5 minute head start (Zimmerman lost Trayvon for 5 minutes)
– What does Trayvon’s stepbrother say about that night? He was at the condo and the two kids were supposed to watch the All Star game together. Did he hear the gun shot?
– If Trayvon ran from Zimmerman for 5 minutes, how did he not cover the 100 yards to his house, and how did he end up only about 30 yards from where he ran past Zimmerman in the first place?

I personally think Trayvon ran away and then came back. I cannot otherwise explain the fact that he did not run straight home, 100 yards away.