[FlashCube]

They are based on someone's opinion of those things. I'm not sure what you are calling case law is really case law, either. When one talks about case law in a legal context, it is generally a case that can be cited as legal precedent. Refusals to prosecute are not precedent and even jury verdicts are not binding on the next court.

Again, that is the issuing agency for a concealed carry permit and Zimmerman signed that he understood this when he got his permit. But if you look, they often do list at least one case law at the end of the q&a. The ccw site is the official ccw site and the legal opinions of state attorneys based on Florida case law.

Like this one, already posted (this time with a case example:

Q. What if I point my handgun at someone but don't use it?
A. Never display a handgun to gain "leverage" in an argument. Threatening someone verbally while possessing a handgun, even licensed, will land you in jail for three years. Even if the gun is broken or you don't have bullets, you will receive the mandatory three-year sentence if convicted. The law does not allow any possibility of getting out of jail early.
Example: In a 1987 case, a woman refused to pay an automobile mechanic who she thought did a poor job repairing her car. They argued about it, and the mechanic removed the radiator hose from the car so she couldn't drive it away. She reached into her purse, pulled out an unloaded gun, and threatened to kill the mechanic if he touched her car again. The mechanic grabbed the gun and called the police.
The woman was convicted of aggravated assault with a firearm and sentenced to serve a mandatory three-year prison term. The fact that the gun was not loaded was irrelevant. Even though she was the mother of three dependent children and had no prior criminal record, the statute does not allow for parole. Her only recourse was to seek clemency from the Governor.

Those are not the law, but a Q&A about weapons. As I said, maybe what he did was legal and maybe not. His statement about this f--ing [whatever] always getting away indicates some intent to do more than call the police. Having someone follow you in the dark is an overt act. It is not clear here that he was or was not within his rights.

Of the 28 cases that went to trial regarding (3), 19 of them were found guilty and at least 22 cases are still pending.[/quote]

[GeneV]

Again, that is the issuing agency for a concealed carry permit and Zimmerman signed that he understood this when he got his permit. But if you look, they often do list at least one case law at the end of the q&a. The ccw site is the official ccw site and the legal opinions of state attorneys based on Florida case law.

Of the 28 cases that went to trial regarding (3), 19 of them were found guilty and at least 22 cases are still pending.

There is no "issuing agency" where the criminal law is concerned, and these quote appear to have nothing to do with the question at hand. There was a lot more to that article (including a listing of non-prosecutions), which had the lawmakers wondering if this statute didn't need to be improved. There seems to be a good deal of misuse and misunderstanding.

[Wheatfield]

Quote As far as the racism issues in this case, I don't think they are as great as made out to be. The neighborhood was 49% white. Zimmerman's mother is a Cuban.

Are you saying Cubans can't be racist?

[Parallax]

Are you saying Cubans can't be racist?

Only if they're Republican.

[GeneV]

Only if they're Republican.

By the way,Jim, I think your analysis of the facts leading up to the shooting is spot on. There is too much focus by others on the handling of a gun later. The initial cause of this problem is a guy following a kid in the dark and scaring the crap out of him.

I remember when I was in school (a few years younger than Trayvon Martin), another, stockier, kid in a leather jacket followed me home from the bus stop. At some point, I got scared and decided I needed to do something. I turned around suddenly pasted him one in the eye, threw him (1 year of YMCA judo) and got on top of him. I asked him what the heck he was doing as I had him in a hammerlock. It turned out one of my "friends" at school had bet one of his "friends" that this kid couldn't take even a skinny guy like me, and he was about to jump me to prove them wrong. I think we all, even as kids, have the sense that someone who is following us is up to no good.

Luckily, I was a teen in the 60s, when no one carried weapons. I ended up letting him up, shaking his hand and suggesting we say it was a draw. I figured otherwise, we'd probably be doing this again next week, and I might not be so lucky.

[jogiba]

Speaking on Friday's "Fox and Friends," Rivera said, ""I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was."

Geraldo Rivera: Trayvon Martin's 'Hoodie Is As Much Responsible For [His] Death As George Zimmerman' (VIDEO)

Liberals love Obama because they all share something with him . Their mommas are wh ores also !

BUT THISPIECEOFSHIT IS MORE CONCERED ABOUT A NIGA FROM THE HOOD THAT GOT HIS COME-UP-INS

OBAMA....by definition

A GRAPE SODA DRINKING..PORK RIND.MOON PIE, CHICKEN EATING, WATERMELON PIT SPITTIN, SILVERBACK, KNUCKLE SCRAPING, MOTHER****IN******

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/23/obama-calls-florida-shooting-deat...#ixzz1q3o0rCIw

[metaglypto]

Speaking on Friday's "Fox and Friends," Rivera said, ""I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was."

Rivera is trolling for ratings and popularity. I don't like the guy, never have. He is still in his talk show mode, masquerading as a journalist. I put him in the same category as Jerry Springer, except I have more respect for Jerry Springer. At least Springer is not trying to pretend he is anything other than a sensationalist trying to find the most absurd elements of society.

I have stated in this discussion myself that certain attire, worn a certain way might raise someone's, including my own, suspicions. That, in no way is meant to mean that someone wearing clothing that is popular these days is responsible for getting blown away.

This short paragraph from that article I think sums it up very well, "Martin was unarmed when he was shot dead by a self-appointed neighborhood watch volunteer named George Zimmerman in late February. His death has become a national tragedy fueled by the police's handling of the situation." emphasis added.

[FlashCube]

Are you saying Cubans can't be racist?

No more than different groups of blacks are to each other and various Hispanic groups are to each other. Check out the circle K shootout link and then follow back the different trials that resulted out of it. The alleged north side group and west side group obviously didn't (don't) like each other.

[seacapt]

Gene, good story but this wasn't one kid following another. It was an adult following an unfamilliar kid in a neighborhood recently plauged with break ins. I just don't get why Trayvon didn't simply stop and explain that he was staying with his Dad at the house in the neighborhood.
I'm not condoning Zimmermans actions but there just seems to be more to the story than is factually evident at this time.


To all those who are stating the increase in justifiable homicides since this law was passed , You may want to look at the decrease in overall violent crime since it was passed as well. Also look at the sucsess rate (or lack there of) where lawyers tried to use this law in BS cases.
Yes there are some possible changes in verbage that may improve the law as written but in my opinion it's premiss and intent are sound.

[Parallax]

Gene, good story but this wasn't one kid following another. It was an adult following an unfamilliar kid in a neighborhood recently plauged with break ins. I just don't get why Trayvon didn't simply stop and explain that he was staying with his Dad at the house in the neighborhood.

Probably for the same reason that I wouldn't have felt compelled to explain. Yes, it may have prevented the whole incident, just as Rosa Parks giving up her seat would have simplified things. I realize that isn't a direct analogy, perhaps, as the latter was clearly a racial incident. Whether there was a racial component to the Zimmerman issue is not completely certain, but the principal is the same.
If I'm not doing anything illegal, or intending to do anything illegal, I'm probably not going to make any attempt to explain my presence or activities to a stranger unless he shows me a badge.

[seacapt]

Jim thats not even close to a fair analogy!
There is nothing to indicate that Zimmerman would have acted differetly if the kid was white , latino or a Latvian dwarf.
All I'm saying is that there is at this time far more speculation than factual information available to the general public and that the assumption of innocense until guilt is proven has been thrown out the window by the media and a number of political action groups.
I think I'll wait for the grand jury's findings before I form conclusions

AND YES I HOPE THAT IF ANY OF MY 3 BOYS AGES 14-17 WERE QUESTIONED BY AN ADULT THAT THEY WOULD GIVE AN APPROPRIATE ANSWER.

[Parallax]

Jim thats not even close to a fair analogy!
There is nothing to indicate that Zimmerman would have acted differetly if the kid was white , latino or a Latvian dwarf.

I know, Ken. I stated that it wasn't certain; but on the surface, it seems there could have been a racial component. I just think we need to be careful about trying to assign any portion of the blame to Martin.
Martin had a lawful, legitimate reason to be where he was. Zimmerman had no legal entitlement to to know what that reason was. I'm not saying he didn't have a right to ask, but he had no entitlement to an answer, and he certainly had no right to detain or interfere in any way with Martin; which I suspect is what he tried to do.

[newarts]

Regardless of the detailed dynamics between two scared, testosterone charged young men, the popular understanding of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law "as you can shoot someone if you claim you were scared" was positively reinforced.

Maybe Zimmerman was emboldened by the law, maybe not. But the actions of the police in accepting his explanation at the site demonstrated yet again to any Floridian with a gun that s/he'd might best shoot first.

It is so silly; if I threateningly wave a gun at someone I commit a felony - if I kill him because I was scared, that's ok.

[Parallax]

It is so silly; if I threateningly wave a gun at someone I commit a felony - if I kill him because I was scared, that's ok.

Strange world, isn't it?

[Wheatfield]

AND YES I HOPE THAT IF ANY OF MY 3 BOYS AGES 14-17 WERE QUESTIONED BY AN ADULT THAT THEY WOULD GIVE AN APPROPRIATE ANSWER.

Has that old adage about not talking to strangers been thrown out the window recently? There seems to be a bit of a disconnect. We've spent the past couple of generations teaching kids that strangers (especially men) are dangerous, and now we are expecting them to accept that angry men with guns are safe?
How about the other old adage about minding one's own business?
I know it's a "different world since 9/11", the difference seems to be that now it's OK to shoot each other, where before 9/11 it was not OK. I suppose if we want to keep the terrorists out, we have to do their jobs for them? I wonder if Al Qaeda appreciates that America is turning into scab labor on their behalf.