Politics & Current Events
Publius
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Florida's Stand Your Ground law
Something has been bothering me about this for a couple weeks, but the Internet isn't being helpful with finding the actual contents of the law so I thought I'd ask here to see if anyone knows. does the law do away with all of the old rules surrounding self defense? I understand that it takes away the duty to retreat from a public place, but does it also do away with the duty not to escalate the violence? I'm trying to understand why, "stand your ground law, the end" is keeping someone from being arrested who, under his own version of events, brought a gun to a fist fight.
Re: Florida's Stand Your Ground law
I've been interested in this lately. I haven't been able to find anything, either. I'm almost tempted to look at the legislative history.
I did read something about a case where the person who claimed the stand your ground defense was in a car and the victim had gotten into an argument with the other dude earlier in the day. So my gut instinct is that it likely does, but I can't be sure.
My Cooking Blog
Here's what the law says.
"A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other?s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to (the section dealing with Home Protection)"
Tthere is an exception to the "no duty to retreat" language for anyone who instigates an altercation.
"776.041 Use of force by aggressor.?The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such 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 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 of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force."
But what does the "unless" description in 2a mean? Does that give Zimmerman permission to escalate to deadly force if Trayvon's force was so great he feared great bodily harm or death? Honestly, I don't understand 2a since it seems to go full circle back to deadly force being ok to protect yourself, whether or not you are the instigator!
But never mind all that, here's the main reason Zimmernan wasn't arrested
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in (self-defense, home protection or defense of others) is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force . . . . As used in this subsection, the term ?criminal prosecution? includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
That's why the police said the law prevents them from arresting anyone and they open themselves up to being sued if they arrested Zimmerman. Evidently this paragraph has the police afraid to arrest anyone who claims self defense - because the law guarantees them immuniy from even being detained!
SANFORD, FL?Amidst the controversy surrounding the recent shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, the Sanford Police Department cautioned Florida residents Tuesday against taking the law into their own hands, except when following the state statute that explicitly authorizes people to do so. "Let me be clear: We do not want citizens resorting to deadly force when they believe they're being threatened?unless, of course, they are following the letter of the law, which says they can resort to deadly force when they believe they're being threatened,"?said interim Sanford police chief Darren Scott, referring to the state's?"Stand Your Ground"?rule.?"Law enforcement should be left to the police. However, it can also be left to common citizens, since pursuing vigilante justice is perfectly within their legal rights. Have I made myself clear?"?After being bombarded with questions about the confusing nature of the law, a flustered Scott said,?"Just don't be racist and kill people, okay?"
Say what?