So how about that Zimmerman trial?

[Samoht]

gz not even using SYG...

[moklianne]

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

gz not even using SYG...

The professor testified Wednesday that Zimmerman got an "A" in his criminal justice class -- a course in which self defense and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, now pivotal in Zimmerman's case -- were discussed.

from the first paragraph:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_1...y-expert-says/

[Samoht]

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

The professor testified Wednesday that Zimmerman got an "A" in his criminal justice class -- a course in which self defense and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, now pivotal in Zimmerman's case -- were discussed.

someone clearly doesn't understand SYG or self-defense

[moklianne]

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

someone clearly doesn't understand SYG or self-defense

Or lives in a state where SYG doesn't exist and self defense can't be so easily abused.

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

Or lives in a state where SYG doesn't exist and self defense can't be so easily abused.

I think you're not catching the thrust of the argument. SYG abuse is not in question here, at all. Sure, people are talking about it BECAUSE of the trial, but it is in NO WAY part of the actual proceedings. SYG was not used, much less abused, here.

Zimmerman's defense is as follows:

Self-defense because he was about to be murderized while pinned to the ground. That's it. He is NOT asserting SYG nor is it relevant to the case. SYG would ONLY be relevant if he had to opportunity to flee before using deadly force but chose not to flee. Even if Florida was NOT a SYG state, the concept would be irrelevant because of Zimmerman's defense. His story is that he was pinned. It is an integral part of his claims. Because his defense includes the inability to escape, SYG never enters the picture.

This is an all-or-nothing situation. He either proves that he defended himself from imminent harm while pinned, or he does not. There is no third theory where SYG comes into play.

[Daldolma]

honestly stand your ground is an overrated element of this case. it would be a very minor hurdle for gz to clear, given available evidence. all stand your ground states is that someone like gz has no obligation to retreat to safety before using deadly force in self defense, even if it would be possible. but as gz was pinned to the ground, the facts would support his inability to retreat anyway.

this is strictly a case of self defense. the reason it's garnering so much outrage, race aside, is that gz initiated the confrontation and there's no way to know who initiated physical violence. to some, it seems ridiculous that he can start a dispute, kill the other guy, and then we have to let him walk because we don't know who is responsible for violent escalation. but we don't, and assuming one reasonable explanation of events, gz merely questioned trayvon and then got pummeled and was forced to act in self defense. you can't convict someone of murder for that -- and since we can't disprove it, he walks

[moklianne]

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

this is strictly a case of self defense.

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

[Daldolma]

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

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

you can.

the only thing unique about stand your ground is that you have no obligation to retreat. hence, "stand your ground". and since gz was pinned to the ground, his obligation to retreat was nullified anyway.

you're not just supposed to let yourself get beaten to death in non-SYG states. deadly force is linked to seriousness of the threat, not obligation to retreat

[Frieza_Prexus]

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

I didn't think you could use deadly force on public grounds in terms of self defense, unless its a SYG state.

A minority of states that are NOT SYG use the following rule:

Originally Posted by Non-SYG Self-Defense Rule

1: General Rule: It is a defense that the defendant believed that:
a) he was in IMMINENT danger of being illegally physically harmed by another;
b) the force he used was NECESSARY to prevent the threatened harm; and
c) those beliefs were objectively REASONABLE

2: Deadly Force: same as above but the physical harm must be an imminent threat of DEATH or SERIOUS bodily harm, and the deadly force used was REASONABLY necessary to prevent that harm

CAVEAT: Any opportunity to retreat MUST be taken before using deadly force ONLY if retreat is possible with COMPLETE SAFETY.

[Barkingturtle]

Look, I'm trying to stay involved in the conversation but if you're going to require I stay up-to-date on what's actually going on I'm gonna have to opt out. I think I've made that pretty clear, cocksucker.