So how about that Zimmerman trial?

[Misto]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Figures, this is about gun sales to you. You could give a fuck less that someone was killed. You just want to be able to "protect" yourself from the big skeery black men.

And by the way, the 2nd Amendment was written to ensure an armed militia could be raised if the British, French, or Spanish invaded. Period. Not for armed rebellion, or shootin' ******s.

What the fucks your problem. The guy sells guns to people who want them. Which is legal.

Sounds like your problem is with the US Government. Not this guy.

[Bodeanicus]

Originally Posted by Misto [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What the fucks your problem. The guy sells guns to people who want them. Which is legal.

Sounds like your problem is with the US Government. Not this guy.

The fuck's my problem? Fat, narcissistic little pussy cop wannabe's shooting anybody they're afraid of, and having the possibility of walking because of a dumbass law, that's my fucking problem.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The fuck's my problem? Fat, narcissistic little pussy cop wannabe's shooting anybody they're afraid of, and having the possibility of walking because of a dumbass law, that's my fucking problem.

I suggest you acquaint yourself with the legal elements of SYG and the present trial. SYG is not, in any way, at issue.

[Bodeanicus]

Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I suggest you acquaint yourself with the legal elements of SYG and the present trial. SYG is not, in any way, at issue.

It's the whole point of the fucking case, you fucking idiot.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's the whole point of the fucking case, you fucking idiot.

lol.

you are totally ignorant re: the laws in play in this case. stand your ground has NOTHING to do with this case. it has not been mobilized by the defense and it needn't be. as both xasten and i have explained, zimmerman's claim that he was pinned to the ground has totally eliminated any relevance SYG might have had. the only unique aspect of SYG is the removal of an obligation to retreat. if you can't retreat because your attacker is pinning you down to the ground, that difference is irrelevant. this is pure self defense, not SYG

[Bodeanicus]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

lol.

you are totally ignorant re: the laws in play in this case. stand your ground has NOTHING to do with this case. it has not been mobilized by the defense and it needn't be. as both xasten and i have explained, zimmerman's claim that he was pinned to the ground has totally eliminated any relevance SYG might have had. the only unique aspect of SYG is the removal of an obligation to retreat. if you can't retreat because your attacker is pinning you down to the ground, that difference is irrelevant. this is pure self defense, not SYG

Zimmerman was aware of the SYG law, and I guarantee you it was in his mind when he got out of that car packing a gun. You're an idiot if you can't see that. There's no way he would have pursued Martin without the gun. Martin wasn't a female, after all, as Zimmerman soon found out.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Zimmerman was aware of the SYG law, and I guarantee you it was in his mind when he got out of that car packing a gun. You're an idiot if you can't see that. There's no way he would have pursued Martin without the gun. Martin wasn't a female, after all, as Zimmerman soon found out.

um, what?

you're now guaranteeing what was going through zimmerman's mind when he got out of his car? going to go ahead and just ignore that, so as not to wade through that depth of stupidity.

but you don't seem to understand that even if he DID know about SYG, and even if it was on his mind, it was totally irrelevant because the facts of this case have nothing to do with SYG. he didn't need SYG. this could have happened in a non-SYG state and nothing would be substantially different. based on your comments, i do not believe you know anything about SYG, the difference between murder 2 and manslaughter, this case, or even the law in general.

but naturally, you have an extremely strong opinion on the subject.

[Vaildez]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Zimmerman was aware of the SYG law, and I guarantee you it was in his mind when he got out of that car packing a gun. You're an idiot if you can't see that. There's no way he would have pursued Martin without the gun. Martin wasn't a female, after all, as Zimmerman soon found out.

LOL! If he was aware of the SYG he would have realized it did not apply to the situation he was in.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's the whole point of the fucking case, you fucking idiot.

No, it's not. You are only demonstrating willful ignorance when you make such statements. I don't expect you to have read all 30+ pages of the thread, but I do expect you to check your legal theories when you're presented with evidence that you're mistaken.

However, since you seem to know the relevant laws, I respectfully request that you explain how the elements of SYG apply here in the face of Zimmerman's defense that he was pinned and unable to safely withdraw.

I eagerly await your detailed analysis of the relevant state law.

[Frieza_Prexus]

Originally Posted by Bodeanicus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's the whole point of the fucking case, you fucking idiot.

I was going to wait a bit longer for you to respond, but I'm going to bed so I'll just leave this here.

776.012 of the Florida Criminal code is the relevant section on the justifiable use of force. In that section is where you'll find the SYG law which states that there is no duty to retreat in cases of self-defense.

However, should the SYG section be repealed Florida would use the "minority" rule which states that before using deadly force in self-defense "any opportunity to retreat MUST be taken before using deadly force ONLY if retreat is possible with COMPLETE SAFETY." Thus, Florida's use of SYG is irrelevant because Zimmerman's defense is that he used self-defense and was unable to retreat thereby nullifying any possible relevance of the SYG provision. That's it. In this particular case, it is an all or nothing situation. His account either works or it does not. At no point is SYG being asserted as part of his defense, and in no way is it relevant.

I understand that this case is important to you, and that you have very strong feelings over it. However, I respectfully suggest that your arguments would be more persuasive if you would take the time to properly educate yourself.

As before, I humbly invite rebuttal, and I look forward to your well-reasoned and legally supported arguments regarding the use of SYG in the present case.