Trayvon Martin's Killing Is Now A Murder Case. Should "Stand Your Ground" Laws Be Repealed ?
|
|
|||||
|
49 votes
|
|
74% | ||
|
17 votes
|
|
26% | ||
Trayvon Martin's Killing Is Now A Murder Case. Should The "Stand Your Ground" Law Be Repealed ?
Stand Your Ground laws should be repealed because:
1. They require “law enforcement officials to prove that a suspect did not act in self-defense. [NYT] ” This burden of proof is a bridge too far on the presumption of innocence continuum. You cannot prove motive with confidence on the basis of circumstantial evidence when the other guy happens to be dead.
2. They protect shooters from civil suits, where the burden of proof for a civil judgement is lower. This means that when the state doesn’t charge no civil options remain to the victim’s family.
3. Many of the victims have been unarmed (12 of 13 studied in a recent Orlando Sentinel investigation).
4. Police chiefs do not understand the laws, and thus abrogate their duty to investigate fully in the first crucial hours following an incident, allowing vital forensic evidence to be destroyed.
5. Clueless gun owners, like George Zimmerman, who are inclined to ignore or misunderstand policies and regulations regarding use of a firearm, will falsely believe they have rights that they do not, in reality, possess.
6. They encourage vigilantism by codifying a set of assumptions that magnifies the real degree of threat posed by “suspicious” persons possessed of unknown intent. This effect is exacerbated by racial profiling, as well as outright racism, and further fueled by the now well-known “hoodie effect.”
7. They represent an attempt to “normalize” the use of firearms in situations where the standard of proof is that of “feeling threatened,” a standard that is not codified with objective criteria under the laws.
8. People under investigation for having committed a crime involving the use of a firearm already possess a presumption of innocence.
9. They serve to reinforce the brutality of American society, driven by a paranoid sense of threat experienced by some armed civilians.
10. They represent a license to kill. And, as I have said before, it’s not gun nuts who bother me, it’s nuts with guns. I agree with Chattanooga, Tennessee gun enthusiast Sally Peterson who told WRCB TV,"You can't approach a person and draw your gun. I just think there are too many wannabe cops.”
Read More: http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_klingaman/2012/04...
Top Opinion
-
aneed2know 2012/04/12 05:38:39
Good day to you too, my friend.
- Click on the Image you want and it will go to it's webpage
- Right click and scroll down to properties and click
- Copy the Address (URL) from the popup box then close the popup
- Return to SodaHead comment and click on "Add Photo & Videos"
- Click Add By Image URL
- Paste the copied URL into Image URL box & hit "Preview"
- If image comes up Select "Add Image"
- - if not go back and recopy the URL from image and repeat steps
We get the idea Perry is trying to run up his body count. He is already way ahead of Bush, but there must be a record he is trying for.
I am not against the death penalty.
In cases where someone has killed multiple people or committed brutal and inhumane crimes; such as those 2 that raped and murdered an 82 year old woman, and beat her husband nearly to death. Let em fry.
Many death row inmates are freed each year in Texas due to DNA testing and diligence of people like Barry Scheck. Many others slip through the cracks of the legal system. We have a governor who is proud of having killed 234 human beings.
It is why I have come to oppose the death penalty. It doesn't do any good to exonerate a corpse.
Race of Victims in death penalty cases:
% of persons who favor vs oppose death penalty:
As you can see the majority of defendants in death penalty cases are actually white. The percentage of victims in death penalty cases are white by a vast majority.
So saying the death penalty mostly affects black people is hogwash.
Also since blacks comprise 35% of the defendants but only 15% of the victims that would mean they are killing more whites than blacks.
60% of Americans support the death penalty.
With these laws the numbers of justifiable homicides have increased in the states that have these laws.
Some think these laws were put in by NRA and ALEC because the whites are afraid the blacks will soon take over as the majority in America, and they needed some kind of law that would allow for "legalized lynchings" to control their population. When we consider that all these cases ended up with African Americans as the victims, it seems that that could be quite possible.
BTW there were over 9000 firearm Homicides in the U.S. last year.
Of those, only 212 were Justifiable Homicides (there's your double since 2005).
(and no they were not all Black as the findtheLight would have it)
"Vigilante justice" leads to 30 year jail sentence for Memphis man
http://www.wmctv.com/global/s...
Border Vigilante Shawna Forde Sentenced to Death for Home Invasion
http://abcnews.go.com/US/minu...
Just a couple off the first page. However, if you think Stand Your Ground is a Vigilante Law then maybe you are the one on one of those substantances.
I never said I hate you. Just trying to educate.
Nomad58
FL's SYG is statue 776. Refer to 776.012, 776.013, and 776.041(below). The Law 776.041 specifically forbids pursuit. That is why the writer of the law stated the if Zimmerman was actually in pursuit at the time of the shoooting the SYG Law did not apply.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/st...
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
. . . .
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.