How Trayvon Martin shooting is relevant to AS rights

Post Reply New Topic

So basically the police taser excuse being applied to everyday people is your idea here...I'm in FLorida, so that scared me.

I do think people should be less antagonistic and use restraint before attacking others. It is easy enough to just do aikido on them while you ask them questions.

Hi Ancalagon,

"Reasonable belief" includes "reasonable fear". While not agreeing, nor disagreeing, with this particularly quoted case, but simply for the example of "fear" being included as a possible element of a "reasonable belief" under the "Stand Your Ground" Statute, for instance, near the bottom of page 8 to top of page 9 (the lines aren't numbered in this copy of the official document), of the "ORDER ON MOTION FOR STATUTORY IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION" granting immunity in the case of Saavedra, quote:

"All of his actions were made made in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. By applying the statutory and case law to the specific facts of this case, the Court finds that the Defendant has met his burden of establishing his immunity from criminal prosecution pursuant to Florida Statute § 776.032."

http://media.naplesnews.com/media/stati ... 150108.pdf

Of the many other cases including such grant of immunity, "reasonable fear" is often included under a substantial part, and often by the "fear" itself only, of statutorily satisfying, the required & met degree of "reasonable belief," but most cases have official documents that are more difficult to locate.

It seems almost as if the "No Rationality Allowed" (N.R.A.) movement is attempting to shield the movement's coddled nonsense, given one of their favorite slogans of "Stand Your Ground", with a shield of word-games, prevarications, and immense propaganda campaigns.

What is, and what is not, "reasonable" about an individual's "fear", is very controversial, and often intensely biased by factors well removed from direct and immediate actions & physics of events.

Tadzio

This makes no sense.

Making a post on a website is normally a crime in certain circumstances, such as when what you post is the entirety of a copyrighted work. So should we throw Oodain in prison until his trial for copyright infringement? After all, if it turns out that what he did wasn't copyright infringement because of the circumstances, we can belay the rest of his just punishment.


No.

At least favored SYG killers avoid the travails of arrest, while a person with an incorrect traffic warrant record doesn't:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-945.pdf
Oh NO!! ! IT IS THE CARD AGAIN......! !! !! ! Well, just one out of every 24 people per year in USA, (still stacked deck, though). Something too close, too far, from some curb.

I would further elaborate that if you have that great of a control problem, the police are a much bigger worry than armed civilians. I can think of dozens of cases where the police killed or seriously injured mentally ill people under questionable circumstances without consequences off the top of my head, while I've yet to hear of anything similar happening with legal gun carriers.

Unfortunately, there will always be some who believe we're a public menace regardless of our personal character or ability to exercize good judgment in the use of lethal force.

Individuals with autism are 50 times more likely to be shot by a private citizen than shot by a police officer.

When a "legal gun carrier" uses the gun in the commission of a crime, the "gun carrier" has just lost the rubric of "legal gun carrier", so a deceptive polemic is stating that no "legal gun carrier" has committed any criminal gun act.

Evidence please?

(not holding breath)

Interestingly, this kind of police brutality is pretty much nonexistent in civilized countries where the general public is not armed and potentially dangerous. Probably because the job of a police officer is a lot less risky, which makes this line of work attractive for more level-headed and peaceful people who want to protect and serve the public instead of beating them into submission.

In these largely gun-free countries, it is also possible for all citizens, no matter which skin color they might have or which type of clothing they wear, to freely move around in all places and neighborhoods at all times without being stopped by the police or being bothered by vigilantes (not to mention being shot by crazy people). There are no fenced compounds of the rich and famous, schools don't look like prisons, and no neighborhood is off-limits to minorities. It seems that if people are extremely unlikely to be armed, there is a much more relaxed attitude and a lot less xenophobia, paranoia and hostility.

Facts are in the records of Federal and State governments. Gun Toting individuals with excessive zeal practice "No Rationality Allowed" (N.R.A.), and this makes particular element acknowledgments from references fruitless, as I experienced in citing the chart http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offens ... le_15.html on another thread of "justifiable homicides by private citizens" being outnumbered by "non-justifiable homicides by private citizens" by ratio of one justifiable homicides for many hundreds of non-justifiable homicides, with more references to many other validated charts.

At least absurd pro-gun slogans are now failing to deceive as many people:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html

http://www.tauntongazette.com/news/x144 ... ill?zc_p=1

And while pro-gun slogans like "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" might have had an influence, with the newer "pro-SYG with guns" slogans like "There are no bad 'Stand Your Ground' Laws, there are just bad people", too many people remember plenty of bad laws. People with memories will question the statement of Ms. Hammer: "Laws don’t do bad things. People do bad things."

The polemical paradox of "legal illegality" giving a zero count as acceptable evidence minimizing legal gun crime numbers, is much the same as the paradox inherent in "One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, who said, 'Cretans are always liars,...', then himself asserting it as the truth." (Titus 1:12).

Good thing I didn't hold that breath...

Simple question: Where did the "50 times more likely" figure come from?

That's an interesting, if simplistic theory; have anything besides anecdotes to support it? Statistically, cops are far, far more likely to be killed in car crashes than in shootouts; should we restrict cars to just them to make them safer?

Now personally, my theory is that you could arm every adult in Germany (or Japan for that matter) and not see any huge jump in crime as the culture is just different, but like your theory I can't prove it either way.

I think the drug war is the real culprit behind our unfortunate police culture, and the "war on terror" mentality has not helped either. It's the police mentality of viewing people as "cops or suspects" that causes the problems; if they viewed themselves as public servants and not as an occupying army the problems would go away.

I think people outside the US have a somewhat insulting stereotypical view. The US is a big place and the culture varies greatly. The vast majority of people do not carry a gun everywhere they go. Most own a gun purely for hunting or recreational purposes. I also think the level of overt racism is not as high in the US as it is in some areas of Europe. Most of the racism we do have comes down to political BS, not normal everyday interactions.

Come to think of it, it seems to me that it's wise for people with AS to carry guns for self-defense. Especially if they live in areas where there are a lot of gun owners(rural areas most of all)!

I agree with Stand Your Ground laws. It's about time somebody recognized that people should not be punished for defending themselves and fighting back. If someone comes up to you and wants to beat the crap out of you, you can fight back and not have to go to jail. Sounds like an awesome law to me. It protects the vulnerable and maybe bullies will think twice about coming up with their fists if they know such a law exists and they can get seriously injured or killed and the person defending themself will not face any penalties. It should be like that in schools, too. The person who tries to avoid the fight at all costs should never face punishment for simply standing their ground when under a threat.

Hi ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo,

Under the law before the new 2005 "Stand Your Ground" Law, any "person who tries to avoid the fight at all costs" would have already been protected from facing punishment. The 2005 "Stand Your Ground Law" removed ANY AND ALL duty to "try to avoid the fight". For instance, in the 2011 SAAVEDRA case, the judge noted (page 8 ): "Under current Florida law, the Defendant had no duty to retreat, but, even so, the evidence clearly shows that the Defendant did, in fact, retreat in several ways and was legally entitled to meet force with force, even deadly force."
http://media.naplesnews.com/media/stati ... 150108.pdf

Individuals with autism are 50 times more likely to be shot by a private citizen than shot by a police officer.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths ... elease.pdf
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offens ... le_15.html
Calling such homicides by private citizens as "Stand Your Ground" Self-Defense shootings with complete Immunity is outrageous.

When a "legal gun carrier" uses the gun in the commission of a crime, the "gun carrier" has just lost the rubric of "legal gun carrier", so a deceptive polemic is stating that no "legal gun carrier" has committed any criminal gun act.

Some "pseudo" would-be SYG'ers go as far as to make claims like:

"I can change reality with my words; it's called persuasion, lobbying and activism",

as during when they try every tool of verbal prevarication they think will might work in twisting the truth to fit to their point of view. When I noted in one response that the manipulation of words had tended to result in incorrect facts, to absurdities, I received the response:

"As a rule I don't like to club baby seals, it's unseemly and tiring on the wrists, but if you insist on nipping at my heels all the time I might just indulge you,"
Mod. edit to correct misquote and restore omitted text: "In plain English: Keep insulting me personally and I will return the favor."

and, a majority of people at a local university I asked about the intensity of the remark, took it as a threat of deadly violence.

No SYG from wrists concerns then, but any SYG with free speech & right to political opinions, etc., leads to third-party involvement desired suddenly by the bully with the tendency to indulge in clubbing baby seals.

Tadzio