Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: George Zimmerman is a good example of bad problem [View all]Straw Man
(6,799 posts)45. Rights.
Why does Zimmerman have the right to put a hole in Trayvon Martin, but Trayvon Martin does not have the right to bash an armed aggressor's head into the sidewalk?
The "aggressor" is the person who initiates violence. The court did not determine that this was Zimmerman. You may have beliefs to the contrary, but they have no bearing on the legal issue.
Gun owners are pretty much always allowed the use of deadly force, even if they start a fist fight, then lose, then pull their gun.
That varies from state to state. Florida state law does not allow the aggressor to use deadly force, with two exceptions:
(a) Such force or threat of force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use or threatened use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use or threatened use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use or threatened use of force.
--http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use or threatened use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use or threatened use of force.
--http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
In other words, even though you may have initiated the fight, you are not legally obligated to allow the other person to kill you. If you stop fighting and the other does not, you are no longer the aggressor.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
66 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
OK, as a touchstone, let's replace activities about guns with voting, or using free speech.
Big_Mike
May 2016
#38
I don't think Zimmerman should have as much as the right to freedom of movement.
Giggity
May 2016
#3
I have a right to go where I want without the threat of being jumped, raped or robbed.
Boudica the Lyoness
May 2016
#33
A wife beating man who seems to get into various other conflicts including being
MillennialDem
May 2016
#42
Ok, so 4 separate women (1 in 2005 and 3 in 2013-2014) all accuse Zimmerman of domestic
MillennialDem
May 2016
#53
And recantations during domestic violence are not uncommon either - I know, my mother was a
MillennialDem
May 2016
#56
His ex in 2005 alleged domestic violence. Poor poor Georgie, he must date some really
MillennialDem
May 2016
#58
Yet, you still defend his as a great fella, because he's on team gun (note I'm not talking about
MillennialDem
May 2016
#61
So if I'm in a fist fight, if I scream for help I'm no longer a threat? Pretty hard to not be a
MillennialDem
May 2016
#65
Pretty much if you shove someone, and they hit you, then you blast them into oblivion, you're
MillennialDem
May 2016
#46