Jump to content


Welcome to Tennessee Gun Owners

Welcome to Tennessee Gun Owners -- The Premier Website for Tennessee Firearms Owners and Enthusiasts

If you have an account with us, please Sign In.

If you do not have an account, register now for one! It's 100% free and easy to do. »» Join TGO Now ««

As a member of Tennessee Gun Owners you can...
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Get your own profile and make new friends
  • Customize your experience here
Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Don't think this is how the "stand your ground law" works


  • Please log in to reply
1347 replies to this topic

#961 East_TN_Patriot

East_TN_Patriot

    If cops are sheepdogs, then I'm a shepherd.

  • TGO Benefactor
  • 1,851 posts
  • Location:
    Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
Carry Permit Holder Law Enforcement NRA Member

Posted 08 April 2012 - 01:35 PM

Too funny! We know that Jackson and Sharpton have selfish motives whenever they get involved in social issues, but after reading a lot of these post I have come to realize that they are not alone in their racial hatred.

I know, I know. You are not a racist. You are just tired of all of the politically correct crap, the affirmative action, the social program and the overall general existence of the non-white humanoid. Good news for you. You are still in America and it's ok to feel that way, but eagerly anticipating a race war/riot. I'm at a loss for words.

I hope that a few years from now people are not talking about what a good sight this was for guns and debate before a bunch of like minded individuals high jacked it to serve their own selfish and hateful purposes.


What many people fail to realize is the comparison between blatant racism and it's cousin "prejudice." Seeing racism is easy to do and easy to deal with. Prejudice is not. It hides behind rhetoric and attitudes that people keep inside. It rears it's head in words like "they" or "them" when referring to a racial or ethnic group as if they are a monolithic group who all believe exactly the same way. This is the problem we see here. Sharpton and Jackson are talking about "them" when referring to whites, and many whites, including some here, are using the word "they" to refer to blacks in general. Let's be clear, should there be rioting or further violent behavior from members of the black community, it is "some" from that community. Many blacks are as outraged at this morbid circus as we are. We need to stop acting like all blacks/Hispanics/whites/etc. are all the same.

Perhaps many people who use the broad labels of "they/them" don't really mean to put everyone in the same basket, but in times when tensions are high and emotions are on edge, these broad categorizations tend to be interpreted more literally (think about the argument with the spouse when "you always" or "you never" rear their head and it results in a bigger argument about how the accusation is inaccurate and unfair). My point is that words have significant meaning and whether we like it or not, we should be careful not to lump people together and criticize them as a group, especially based on an arbitrary label like race/ethnicity.
  • Lester Weevils likes this

#962 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:40 PM

And prejudice comes from bias. Try to get rid of that. That's almost to the point of being genetic. It
also depends on the prejudice you are referring to. I don't think you're trying to justify hate crimes,
but prejudice can cause a lot of things, that is, it's cousin, bias can. It can cause you to do or not do
something also. That's how you differentiate one thing from another. It can keep you from making
the wrong choice in a situation.

Racism is a tool for a group to use to get something from another group, or an excuse to use for
their own behaviour. It's an invented word that is, all too often, used by a group to mask their own
attitude, and it's representation by that group is almost never exclusive for the whole group. In other
words, like Links said about some of his friends, I know plenty of hard working blacks that just want
their families to be left alone and respected. So I, too, know that there is a group of the mischievous
in their own group that are trying to stir things up, and is for totally different reasons.

The class or group known as "white" are put on a pedestal when it comes to junk law like "hate crimes"
and the thought of that is offensive, since it only appears to apply to one group or another. Laws
like that only cause more "prejudice" than they stop. People like Jackson and Sharpton are not even
necessarily racists. They are more opportunists and appear to be looking out for themselves and
how much money they can get their hands on, or power of some sort. If they really cared for the things
they say, why aren't they more concerned for the majority of black deaths caused by other blacks in
their own neighborhoods? Instead, they bypass a typical day in Chicago where they could actually be
helping to stop the slaughter of their own race. There's more to it that simple prejudice and you know
that, ET. I'm not even arguing with you, just bringing out the obvious that seems to be forgotten.

One case out of literally thousands that involved a non black killing a black and the word "racist" had
to appear. That's disingenuous and does nothing good to stop any problems. It is because the power
that some choose to extract from isolated events like this cause political mischief to keep the
problem going.
I don't accept being called a racist by anyone. In fact, I resent it.

When I and others used the term, "bring it on", you should note I also said, "if they want a race riot or
war", and that doesn't even closely mean I'm racist, so that would make an assumption a very bad one.
When someone uses the word "they" it is not necessarily a sign of hiding prejudice or whatever. It is
pointing out the subject of the topic. I have no control of what "they" do, but I do have control of my
actions and beliefs.
So, before anyone around here decides I or others are racists, you better do it by some other means,
like meeting me and finding out for yourself before you draw that poorly made assumption. You might
be surprised.
  • Mike.357 and MattCary like this

#963 mikegideon

mikegideon

    TGO Senior Member

  • Lifetime Benefactor
  • 16,865 posts
  • Location:
    Nashville
Carry Permit Holder NRA Member

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:57 PM

They doesn't have to mean all black folks. In this thread, it has meant Sharpton and all his friends. That excludes a LOT of black folks.

#964 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 02:59 PM

A huge number of them. But the thread has drifted, somewhat, and has included the
name calling of "racist" and "prejudice". I think this is the intended consequence of
these types of situations. They are used to inject what isn't there.

Edited by 6.8 AR, 08 April 2012 - 03:01 PM.


#965 mikegideon

mikegideon

    TGO Senior Member

  • Lifetime Benefactor
  • 16,865 posts
  • Location:
    Nashville
Carry Permit Holder NRA Member

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:00 PM

As a LEO we were trained on how to deal with such a situation and it was made very clear that we could not use deadly force against someone who was pounding on us unless the beating was so severe that we were concerned that we were about to lose consciousness and/or risk having our firearm taken from us.


I always assumed this would be the basis of his defense.

#966 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:06 PM

And even though he's not a LEO, it is still reasonable to assume that defense if the "facts" and "witnesses"
indicate he was underneath and trying to defend himself, which some seem to think just doesn't fit the
narrative, but I do.

#967 mikegideon

mikegideon

    TGO Senior Member

  • Lifetime Benefactor
  • 16,865 posts
  • Location:
    Nashville
Carry Permit Holder NRA Member

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:06 PM

A huge number of them. But the thread has drifted, somewhat, and has included the
name calling of "racist" and "prejudice". I think this is the intended consequence of
these types of situations. They are used to inject what isn't there.


The story has drifted. Thugs threatening to riot, and Nazis showing up for some of the fun.

#968 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:09 PM

I know. I had to say a few things on my own defense because of that. Some that might accuse others
around here of "racism". Yeh, I saw the NAZI's down there. Irony is found in all biologic life forms, isn't
it?

#969 Sheepdog

Sheepdog

    TGO Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 265 posts
  • Location:
    Chattanooga, Tennessee

Posted 08 April 2012 - 03:24 PM

Florida law justifies the use of deadly force in cases where an individual has a reasonable belief that there is an imminent risk of death or serious bodily injury, which basically means catastrophic injury that could potentially result in death, serious disfigurement, permanent loss of bodily function like eyesight, etc., or to prevent a forcible felony such as rape or kidnapping. A kid punching you in the face hardly qualifies as any of these.


Strongly disagree with you, there, ETP. When a "kid" is strong enough to get you on the ground, sit on top of you, and punch you in the face repeatedly, I can most definitely see that fear for one's life or of debilitating injury is reasonable. It doesn't matter if it's rare for people to die from it. When you're being attacked, you're not calculating odds. Statistical probabilities are not the point. The point is that you are getting your ass kicked. You might not know your attacker's strength, or his fighting skill, or how old he is, or his level of rage, or his reasons for beating you, or if he has a weapon, or if he'll be able to take your weapon, or if he's got friends who are coming to join in.

As a LEO we were trained on how to deal with such a situation and it was made very clear that we could not use deadly force against someone who was pounding on us unless the beating was so severe that we were concerned that we were about to lose consciousness and/or risk having our firearm taken from us.


As a LEO, you were trained to fight. You were given a number of non-lethal (pepper spray, taser) and less lethal (baton) options to improve your odds in a fight. You were given a radio which, with a single press of a big button, would connect you to someone who would summon aid far faster and in far greater numbers than would come for any regular citizen.

Zimmerman did not have that spectrum of options. He had fist, foot, tooth and claw, which were proving ineffective. And he had a gun, which was overwhelmingly effective. He was receiving head injuries which could have led to a loss of consciousness, which could have then led to him having his firearm taken from him.

If one would return a no true bill because they think the decedent is a dirtbag and deserved what they got, then they have no respect for the law.


I agree. Conversely, however, if one would indict Zimmerman simply because he didn't get beaten enough, they have no respect for the inviolability of one's person.

The correct reason to return a No Bill is if it is reasonable to believe Zimmerman was attacked, brought to ground, and battered further. The correct reason to indict Zimmerman would be if there were reason to believe he initiated the physical altercation.

Deadly force can only be used in the face of grievous harm. This is a very important point that far too many CCW permit holders fail to understand at it will be at the risk of their freedom as Mr. Zimmerman is currently learning firsthand.


Due to the lack of grievous harm to his face, you have indicted Zimmerman. So do you believe that deadly force can only be used in the face of grievous harm, or after it? As you've said, Tennessee and Florida law say that you may use deadly force when *you* are in reasonable fear of your life or serious injury. They don't say you have to actually allow yourself to be harmed.

According to the available evidence, I believe it reasonable to think Zimmerman was in fear of his life or serious injury. The lesson he's learning is not that deadly force can only be used in the face of grievous harm. The lessons are (A) life is not fair, and (B) deadly force used against a member of a protected class will get you into a world of hurt, whether it was justified or not.
  • canadienmike and Clod Stomper like this

#970 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

I think a problem in any argument made for or against a situation is the use of the term "reasonable" at
the time of the occurrence, as opposed to the classroom situation where you have time to tear apart all
the nuances that might not be apparent to the person in the situation. If you're the one getting the short
end of an ass whooping and fear for your life, you might not be able to reasonably determine otherwise.

Also, LEO's should be held to a higher level, due to their training and the tools at their disposal. It's really
not reasonable to compare a LEO to a civilian, is it? But a cop wasn't involved in this situation, so I'm not
sure of the relevance when comparing Zimmerman to Martin.

#971 CQB Elite

CQB Elite

    Business Handler

  • Lifetime Benefactor
  • 637 posts
  • Location:
    Arlington, TN
Carry Permit Holder NRA Member

Posted 08 April 2012 - 05:07 PM

I think a problem in any argument made for or against a situation is the use of the term "reasonable" at
the time of the occurrence, as opposed to the classroom situation where you have time to tear apart all
the nuances that might not be apparent to the person in the situation. If you're the one getting the short
end of an ass whooping and fear for your life, you might not be able to reasonably determine otherwise.

Also, LEO's should be held to a higher level, due to their training and the tools at their disposal. It's really
not reasonable to compare a LEO to a civilian, is it? But a cop wasn't involved in this situation, so I'm not
sure of the relevance when comparing Zimmerman to Martin.


Each situation is different from the next so you can't compare them. This is especially true in use of deadly force cases. Imagine you are sitting on a jury in the trial of a 32 year old construction worker who got in a fight with a 19 year old kid and ended up shooting & killing him. The defendant is 6'2" and weighs 225 lbs. He's in very good physical shape. The 19 year old is 5'11"/185 lbs. The trial starts and thru testimony you learn the "victim" had earned a Black Belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and was in the U.S. Navy and a recent graduate of BUD/S and therefore in fantastic physical shape.... You got to hear all of the story before making a decision.

I guess in theory LEO's should be held to a different standard because of their training, but not all LEO's are trained to the same level. They are trained to the basic minimum but often its up to them to seek training beyond that. In my case- I wanted to become a firearms and vehicle operations instructor. I also wanted to be able to teach in the academy. To be able to do this I had to take a 80 hr instructor techniques course followed by a 44 hour firearms & a 40 hr driving instructor course. I also did a lot of shooting each month. Others I worked with came and did their quarterly qualifications and that was it. Their weapon was never fired outside of that. In my mind I consider all LEO's to be not much more than any other citizen, that is until I get to know them and their background.

#972 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:10 PM

I wasn't intending to appear critical toward LEO's. The comparison was made as to what a civilian might
do compared to what a cop might do. I was only intending to separate them. I agree that variations will make
juries lean one way or another.

#973 TMF

TMF

    OFP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,536 posts
  • Location:
    Clarksville
Carry Permit Holder Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:36 PM

According to the available evidence, I believe it reasonable to think Zimmerman was in fear of his life or serious injury. The lesson he's learning is not that deadly force can only be used in the face of grievous harm. The lessons are (A) life is not fair, and ( deadly force used against a member of a protected class will get you into a world of hurt, whether it was justified or not.


Or ©: stay in your truck instead of pursuing someone on foot whilst armed, or at least have your HCP badge visible when you're playing pretend cop.

#974 TMF

TMF

    OFP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,536 posts
  • Location:
    Clarksville
Carry Permit Holder Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:40 PM

Also, LEO's should be held to a higher level, due to their training and the tools at their disposal. It's really
not reasonable to compare a LEO to a civilian, is it? But a cop wasn't involved in this situation, so I'm not
sure of the relevance when comparing Zimmerman to Martin.


And that's why LEOs are the ones tasked to approach/pursue "suspicious" characters.

#975 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:48 PM

That's right, but read post 972 again. We're good :D

It's still not clear, anywhere, whether he was pursuing him on foot. I gathered he was trying to get a sight on him, or
reading the street sign and returning to his truck when possibly assaulted.

#976 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    TGO Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts
  • Location:
    Oak Grove, Ky
Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:54 PM

And that's why LEOs are the ones tasked to approach/pursue "suspicious" characters.


Where are you getting this? Everything I've read said that followed Martin and called the police, just like neighborhood watch is supposed to do.

He didn't chase him down the street or anything. Any it looks like Martin approached Zimmerman, not the other way around. But don't let that interrupt your witch hunt. Cheers!
  • tnhawk and QuietDan like this

#977 Mark@Sea

Mark@Sea

    TGO Senior Member

  • TGO Benefactor
  • 2,760 posts
  • Location:
    Mooresburg on the mountain
Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 06:57 PM

Don't get too judgemental, far as I can see you're pretending to be unbiased.

#978 TMF

TMF

    OFP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,536 posts
  • Location:
    Clarksville
Carry Permit Holder Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:00 PM

Where are you getting this? Everything I've read said that followed Martin and called the police, just like neighborhood watch is supposed to do.

He didn't chase him down the street or anything. Any it looks like Martin approached Zimmerman, not the other way around. But don't let that interrupt your witch hunt. Cheers!


Witch hunt is a little dramatic and unnecessary. He is on the phone with 911 following him then getting out of his vehicle to pursue on foot. That is not the role of neighborhood watch. His duties were to call the police and that's all. Martin hadn't committed any crime. If he was burglarizing one of Zimmerman's neighbors my opinion would be the other way.

I welcome anyone here to just go out and start following someone at night who is minding their own business and see where that road leads you.
  • Lester Weevils likes this

#979 TMF

TMF

    OFP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7,536 posts
  • Location:
    Clarksville
Carry Permit Holder Military

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:01 PM

Don't get too judgemental, far as I can see you're pretending to be unbiased.


No, I'm very clear what my opinions are and why I have them. What ever biases I have I am aware of and will freely admit to you. One of those biases is against wanna be mall ninjas.

#980 6.8 AR

6.8 AR

    TGO Addict

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14,607 posts

Posted 08 April 2012 - 07:05 PM

I have enough of a problem "policing" my own back yard. I don't intend on following where my abilities
might be limited. and I have had to go out back at night a bunch of times. I'm usually not thrilled at
having to do it.

From everything I read, I didn't get that he was a mall ninja. Of course, that doesn't mean very much.