Good news - Task force backs Florida's 'stand your ground' law

[usmarine0352_2005]

.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nd-is-good-law/?test=latestnews#ixzz2LlgwBG8o

.
Task force backs Florida's 'stand your ground' law



Published February 23, 2013

Associated Press


ALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Florida's "stand your ground" law works and should not be overturned, but the standards for neighborhood watch groups should be looked at by the Legislature, a state task force concluded Friday.

The 44-page report released by Republican Gov. Rick Scott's office said people have a right to feel safe and secure in Florida and have a fundamental right to stand their ground and defend themselves from attack. Most of the recommendations had already been made public.

The report, however, recommended that legislators look at neighborhood watch groups. The parents of Trayvon Martin, a teenager killed a year ago by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, had asked the task force to change the 2005 law.

Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton asked the task force last June to support a "Trayvon Martin amendment" to the law, which would make it harder for someone who starts a fight to use a self-defense argument under the law.

"Just review and amend it," Fulton said then. "I had to bury my son at 17. He was committing no crime. He was doing no wrong."
.

.

 

[locnload]

Wow, I didn't know that beating a guys brains out on the sidewalk was not a crime. Just a little juvenile mischif I guess. :banghead:

 

[Akita1]

usmarine - you beat me to it (was overseas traveling so just saw this). Excellent news!!! Adios criminales…

A clarification on Fulton's comment: it appears that Martin was putting a serious beat down on on Zimmerman which, in part, is the intent of the law (re: locnload's comment above).

Yes, PLENTY of what ifs here (these are only a few): what if Martin had called the cops to say he was being followed? What if Martin had explained to Zimmerman who he was/who he was visiting? What if Zimmerman had not confronted him after the cops told him to back off? What if Zimmerman hadn't played "protector of the realm?" What if Martin was defending himself because he feared great bodily harm (then he could have invoked the law)? Jury's call here obviously but as many of the mods often advise us (and if you have the time to do so), use brains first and firearms second. IMHO, this kid would be alive and back in Miami if either of these clowns had acted responsibly.

At any rate, glad the law will be kept in place as is (for now anyway).

 

[Meta]

Beating the dead horse here. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a lawful right to be where he was? Yes. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a lawful right to do what he was doing before he was assaulted? Yes. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a right to stand his ground? Yes.
Whether or not Zimmerman acted with perfect judgement in following Martin for some distance is not relevant. He was breaking no laws. He did, however, have reason to believe that Martin was worthy of suspicion, but that's not relevant. Zimmerman had a right to do what he was doing. Martin had a right to confront Zimmerman and inquire or even to tell Zimmerman to leave him alone. Martin did not, under any circumstances relating to any set of fact that's understood in this circumstance have the right to be bashing Zimmerman's head on the ground. Doing so, unless Martin had reason to believe that Zimmerman presented an immediate and possibly deadly threat, was not justifiable. The facts and good reason do not support this theory. Sorry, I'm going with the theory, supported by facts, that a thug who didn't like being followed, doubled back on Zimmerman and jumped him and beat his head on the concrete until Zimmerman shot and killed him. I'd say the odds are good I'm right and anything beyond that is a witch hunt inspired by race baiters and politicians.

 

[SoCalNoMore]

Beating the dead horse here. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a lawful right to be where he was? Yes. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a lawful right to do what he was doing before he was assaulted? Yes. As a matter of law, did Zimmerman have a right to stand his ground? Yes.
Whether or not Zimmerman acted with perfect judgement in following Martin for some distance is not relevant. He was breaking no laws. He did, however, have reason to believe that Martin was worthy of suspicion, but that's not relevant. Zimmerman had a right to do what he was doing. Martin had a right to confront Zimmerman and inquire or even to tell Zimmerman to leave him alone. Martin did not, under any circumstances relating to any set of fact that's understood in this circumstance have the right to be bashing Zimmerman's head on the ground. Doing so, unless Martin had reason to believe that Zimmerman presented an immediate and possibly deadly threat, was not justifiable. The facts and good reason do not support this theory. Sorry, I'm going with the theory, supported by facts, that a thug who didn't like being followed, doubled back on Zimmerman and jumped him and beat his head on the concrete until Zimmerman shot and killed him. I'd say the odds are good I'm right and anything beyond that is a witch hunt inspired by race baiters and politicians.

From what I have seen/read etc I agree with you. The fact that someone is following you in and of its self does not give you the right to assault that person.

Very happy about this report, lets hope the law stands. Am I correct that the personal domain distance in FL is 3 feet and in TX its 12 feet?

 

[the_skunk]

Zimmerman had been charged 3 times by police, and had restraining orders on him. He was also on Adderal (speed). Who knows the real truth.