Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
S
Spartacus
Guest
hard boiled eggs with a minimum of sodium etc
damn let's get the deluxe taco salad
damn let's get the deluxe taco salad
Interesting facts (truth)coming out about Trayvon
- Thread starter JWBurns
- Start date
S
Spartacus
Guest
the kind of taco salad in which you can eat the bowl
mrplunkey
New member
Horse shit.
If you are involved in an altercation, your CCP status adds no legal obligations, limitations or duties.
If you're so certain of your opinion, then post-up a court finding, regulation or law to support your belief.
Again, you have no clue.
Stand Your Ground and the Castle Doctrine are a safe harbors. Even if you don't qualify under the SYG or CD conditions, you still have the right to defend yourself and use deadly force -- albeit subject to a court's review.
redsamurai
Banned
not if you provoked the altercation homie. If zimmerman can prove he retreated though his stand your ground rights are refreshed....if he did not retreat and was found to have antagonized Trayvon which he does not have the right to do, then he loses his stand your ground rights. As a neighborhood watchmen he does not have the right to confront and question somebody...only follow. If all he did was follow then Trayvon had no right to attack him. All of this remains to be seen. But if someone saw him run after and confront Trayvon in any kind of aggressive manner and nobody saw Trayvon do anything to prompt what basically amounts to a citizen intervention...than zimmerman is fucked. You have the legal right to walk through a neighborhood with a hoodie on and no, a citizen cannot stop you and question you like a LE can. If zimmerman did that then it will easy for prosecutors to contend that he harrassed Trayvon which if the right trigger words are spoken back and forth could lead to a fight...in which case zimmerman DOES NOT have the right to draw his weapon in an altercation that he unlawfully provoked. Read up on this dude. His stand your ground rights would only have been refreshed if he retreated from the altercation, which also means he didn't do something like yell ngr over his shoulder as he was retreating....that's further provocation and doesn't refresh his stand your ground rights. According to the law he has to make a solid reasonable effort to withdraw and then his SYG rights come back.
redsamurai
Banned
peruse your ark CCW permit, there's likely language in there that clarifies you have an enhanced duty to avoid confrontations while you're armed. Even in FL the SYG laws do not apply to altercations you provoked.
mrplunkey
New member
Horse shit
A CCW does not carry an additional duty to avoid altercation beyond a citizen's ordinary obligations.
redsamurai
Banned
it's grey area that's already playing out in other cases. But in cases where the armed person was found to provoke the altercation the sentencing guidelines are tougher in alot of states if the dude was armed at the time. There is language in the permits that speaks of provoking altercations...exactly how that is interpreted and applied is what's being tested in courts. That's why this case will be interesting if it comes out zimmerman did indeed try to act like a LEO.
redsamurai
Banned
Deadly For
Self-Defense
Depending on the specic facts of the situation, an accused person may claim that use of deadly force was justied to excuse his actions, which would otherwise be a crime. Self-defense or the defense of another is an afrmative defense that an accused may assert against a criminal charge for an assault or homicide offense.
The term “afrmative defense” means the accused, not the prosecutor,must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in self-defense or in defense of another. In other words, the defendant must provethat it is more probable than not that his use of deadly force was necessary due to the circumstances of the situation.
Whether this afrmative defense applies to the situation or whether it willlikely succeed against criminal charges depends heavily on the specic facts and circumstances of each situation. The Ohio Supreme Court hasexplained that a defendant must prove three conditions to establish that heacted in defense of himself or another.
Condition 1: Defendant Is Not At Fault
First, the defendant must prove that he was not at fault for creating the situation. The defendant cannot be the rst aggressor or initiator.
However, in proving the victim’s fault, a defendant cannot point to otherunrelated situations in which the victim was the aggressor. Remember, the focus is on the specic facts of the situation at hand.If you escalate a confrontation by throwing the rst punch, attacking, or drawing your handgun, you are the aggressor. Most likely in this situation,you cannot legitimately claim self-defense nor would you likely succeed in
proving your afrmative defense.
Condition 2: Reasonable and Honest Belief of Danger
Second, the defendant must prove that, at the time, he had a real belief that he was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm and thathis use of deadly force was the only way to escape that danger. Bear inmind that deadly force may only be used to protect against serious bodily harm or death.
The key word is “serious.”
In deciding whether the bodily harm was serious, the judge or jury canconsider how the victim attacked the defendant, any weapon the victimhad, and how he used it against the defendant. Minor bruises or bumps from a scufe probably do not meet the legal denition of “serious.” In court cases, rape has been determined to be serious bodily harm, as hasbeing attacked with scissors. Serious bodily harm also may result frombeing struck with an object that can cause damage, such as a baseball bator a wooden club. The defendant’s belief that he is in immediate serious danger isimportant. The defendant’s belief must be reasonable, not purely speculative. In deciding if the belief was reasonable and honest, the judgeor jury will envision themselves standing in the defendant’s shoes andconsider his physical characteristics, emotional state, mental status, andknowledge; the victim’s actions and words; and all other facts regarding the encounter. The victim must have acted in a threatening manner. Words alone, regardless of how abusive or provoking, or threats of future harm (“I’m going to kill you tomorrow”) do not justify the use of deadly force.
Condition 3: Duty to Retreat
A defendant must show that he did not have a duty to retreat or avoid thedanger. A person must retreat or avoid danger by leaving or voicing hisintention to leave and ending his participation in the confrontation.
If one person retreats and the other continues to ght, the person wholeft the confrontation may later be justied in using deadly force when he can prove all three conditions of self-defense existed. You should alwaystry to retreat from a confrontation before using deadly force if retreating does not endanger yourself or others.If the person can escape danger by means such as leaving or using less thandeadly force, he must use those means. If you have no means to escapethe other person’s attack and you reasonably, honestly believe that you areabout to be killed or receive serious bodily harm, you may be able to usedeadly force if that is the only way for you to escape that danger
Self-Defense
Depending on the specic facts of the situation, an accused person may claim that use of deadly force was justied to excuse his actions, which would otherwise be a crime. Self-defense or the defense of another is an afrmative defense that an accused may assert against a criminal charge for an assault or homicide offense.
The term “afrmative defense” means the accused, not the prosecutor,must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in self-defense or in defense of another. In other words, the defendant must provethat it is more probable than not that his use of deadly force was necessary due to the circumstances of the situation.
Whether this afrmative defense applies to the situation or whether it willlikely succeed against criminal charges depends heavily on the specic facts and circumstances of each situation. The Ohio Supreme Court hasexplained that a defendant must prove three conditions to establish that heacted in defense of himself or another.
Condition 1: Defendant Is Not At Fault
First, the defendant must prove that he was not at fault for creating the situation. The defendant cannot be the rst aggressor or initiator.
However, in proving the victim’s fault, a defendant cannot point to otherunrelated situations in which the victim was the aggressor. Remember, the focus is on the specic facts of the situation at hand.If you escalate a confrontation by throwing the rst punch, attacking, or drawing your handgun, you are the aggressor. Most likely in this situation,you cannot legitimately claim self-defense nor would you likely succeed in
proving your afrmative defense.
Condition 2: Reasonable and Honest Belief of Danger
Second, the defendant must prove that, at the time, he had a real belief that he was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm and thathis use of deadly force was the only way to escape that danger. Bear inmind that deadly force may only be used to protect against serious bodily harm or death.
The key word is “serious.”
In deciding whether the bodily harm was serious, the judge or jury canconsider how the victim attacked the defendant, any weapon the victimhad, and how he used it against the defendant. Minor bruises or bumps from a scufe probably do not meet the legal denition of “serious.” In court cases, rape has been determined to be serious bodily harm, as hasbeing attacked with scissors. Serious bodily harm also may result frombeing struck with an object that can cause damage, such as a baseball bator a wooden club. The defendant’s belief that he is in immediate serious danger isimportant. The defendant’s belief must be reasonable, not purely speculative. In deciding if the belief was reasonable and honest, the judgeor jury will envision themselves standing in the defendant’s shoes andconsider his physical characteristics, emotional state, mental status, andknowledge; the victim’s actions and words; and all other facts regarding the encounter. The victim must have acted in a threatening manner. Words alone, regardless of how abusive or provoking, or threats of future harm (“I’m going to kill you tomorrow”) do not justify the use of deadly force.
Condition 3: Duty to Retreat
A defendant must show that he did not have a duty to retreat or avoid thedanger. A person must retreat or avoid danger by leaving or voicing hisintention to leave and ending his participation in the confrontation.
If one person retreats and the other continues to ght, the person wholeft the confrontation may later be justied in using deadly force when he can prove all three conditions of self-defense existed. You should alwaystry to retreat from a confrontation before using deadly force if retreating does not endanger yourself or others.If the person can escape danger by means such as leaving or using less thandeadly force, he must use those means. If you have no means to escapethe other person’s attack and you reasonably, honestly believe that you areabout to be killed or receive serious bodily harm, you may be able to usedeadly force if that is the only way for you to escape that danger
redsamurai
Banned
so in my state a stand your ground defense only applies to situations in which you were cut of from retreating by some manner or retrating wouldn't save your life or someone else's. Castle Doctrine applies to your home and vehicle...you do not have a duty to retreat from either of those two.
"Forbidden Carry Zones
Licensed Class D liquor permit premises if you are consuming beer orintoxicating liquor or are under the inuence. If you are
not consuming, you may carry unless there is a conspicuoussign prohibiting carry."
so here they're saying you can walk into a liquor store that allows CW, but if you've had anything to drink you can't. Is that not imposing stricter regulations on people because they're packing?
"13
premises.
In any event, do not consume beer or intoxicatingliquor before carrying a concealed handgun into a licensed premises."
"Forbidden Carry Zones
Licensed Class D liquor permit premises if you are consuming beer orintoxicating liquor or are under the inuence. If you are
not consuming, you may carry unless there is a conspicuoussign prohibiting carry."
so here they're saying you can walk into a liquor store that allows CW, but if you've had anything to drink you can't. Is that not imposing stricter regulations on people because they're packing?
"13
premises.
In any event, do not consume beer or intoxicatingliquor before carrying a concealed handgun into a licensed premises."
Your state does not have SYG then. The whole point of SYG is that theres no duty to retreat
Similar threads
