The Trayvon Trial

I think everyone here agrees that SYG is a stupid law.

Vaclav_sl said:

NW protocol absolutely states a GUN SHOULD NOT BE CARRIED.

Click to expand...

Sorry but just because NW protocol says you should be disarmed, doesn't mean you should be. Also, it had no effect on it. We have zero evidence that he brandished the gun at all. The ONLY THING THE GUN DID was make Trayvon die for assaulting zimmerman, rather than Zimmerman dying.

edit: Nice find Gavinrad. So NW protocol just makes it clear it gives you no special power to carry.

Burnesto_sl said:

I think everyone here agrees that SYG is a stupid law.

Click to expand...

You would be wrong about that.

hootie_sl said:

You folks are letting some strange law in florida get the best of you.

Click to expand...

Zimmerman waived his right to a "Stand Your Ground" Defense. It is a simple Self Defense case.

I'm fine with the theory of Stand Your Ground, I just don't approve of the way it's applied in Florida. If I'm in a life and death situation, I'm not turning around and running, I'm using lethal force on anyone who is threatening myself or people I'm responsible for protecting, which means I'm going to jail if it happens here in Illinois.

Last I checked Zimmerman wasn't even using SYG as a defense.

I'm more or less 100% on board with the law regardless. You shouldn't be forced to continually retreat, especially in your own home, from an aggressor. Bunch of hippy bull shit there.

The burden shouldn't be on the person being attacked. What kind of fucked up world is that?

Caliel_sl said:

You would be wrong about that.

Click to expand...

I do but that's only because I have a duty to flee here in Wisconsin and I think everyone should be as unable to defend yourself as I am. If right now a chainsaw wielding maniac buzz sawed his way through my front door and I shot him dead I'd be going up the river for murder in the second degree because I could of just ran out the back door. Why didn't you run when you heard the chainsaw? You had plenty of time to run! YOU HAD PLENTY OF TIME TO RUN!!!

Then bam, prison rape city.

I mean their part of SYG where there doesn't even need to be actual aggression. Just if you think they might attack, you can shoot. Isn't that how Florida's works?

I realize it has no bearing on the case at hand anyway.

khalid_sl said:

Sorry but just because NW protocol says you should be disarmed, doesn't mean you should be. Also, it had no effect on it. We have zero evidence that he brandished the gun at all. The ONLY THING THE GUN DID was make Trayvon die for assaulting zimmerman, rather than Zimmerman dying.

edit: Nice find Gavinrad. So NW protocol just makes it clear it gives you no special power to carry.

Click to expand...

You're clearly trying to read it as something that it doesn't say. It says don't confront and don't carry. It doesn't say some random "we suggest you don't" horseshit you're trying to pretend it says. It says "SHALL NOT CARRY" not we'd suggest against, not feel free to but we're not giving you carte blanche or whatever the hell you're trying to imply it says.

If you tell someone YOU SHALL NOT DO SOMETHING - and you don't put a "....but in this case you can" type clause it's retarded to assume otherwise. Protocol was don't carry, nothing disputes this.

So fucking what if he violated the protocol? Violating it probably saved his life. It certainly didn't cause the initial confrontation if he didn't brandish it.

Vaclav_sl said:

You're clearly trying to read it as something that it doesn't say. It says don't confront and don't carry. It doesn't say some random "we suggest you don't" horseshit you're trying to pretend it says. It says "SHALL NOT CARRY" not we'd suggest against, not feel free to but we're not giving you carte blanche or whatever the hell you're trying to imply it says.

If you tell someone YOU SHALL NOT DO SOMETHING - and you don't put a "....but in this case you can" type clause it's retarded to assume otherwise. Protocol was don't carry, nothing disputes this.

Click to expand...

For starters, it doesn't say don't confront anyone, it says 'should never confront a suspicious individual who could be armed and dangerous'. It's also funny that you would throw around the word retarded, when someone who isn't retarded can understand how important context is to a statement.

Butthurt_sl said:

Public Policy Disputes that. The laws and statutes of a state override all other considerations, including private policies. Thus, a private citizen legally authorized to carry a firearm may do so, unless the area in which he carried the arm is a no-gun area as defined by the law.

Click to expand...

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

Butthurt_sl said:

Public Policy Disputes that. The laws and statutes of a state override all other considerations, including private policies. Thus, a private citizen legally authorized to carry a firearm may do so, unless the area in which he carried the arm is a no-gun area as defined by the law.

Click to expand...

Legally permitted is not the same as following protocol - I was stating he wasn't following protocol not breaking the law. You're legally permitted to cuss when I'm employing you, it doesn't mean I won't fire your ass for cussing in an environment that would reflect poorly on the company since it's against protocol though. (Well, technically go through the steps towards...)

Protocol was to not carry - he was LEGALLY permitted to - but he was breaking protocol in doing so.

Khalid: Possibly true - but as you yourself stated "if he didn't brandish it"... if he did he probably started the altercation when "fight or flight" went to the fight needle in Trayvon's head.

I HIGHLY doubt he showed T that he had a gun. Seriously, you are going to stalk and attack someone in hand to hand that already showed you he is packing?

Seriously? No way that happened.

Moral of the story, don't attack people. They might be armed and kill you.

Vaclav also has no fucking clue what the fight or flight instinct is. Most people don't run OR attack when confronted with a gun, they freeze.