Teenager shot/killed while Tweek's hero gets off free

[chazzyphizzle]

There is none, the guy is trolling is troll balls off.

[Tyche]

I'm standing my ground...by following someone around.

[Sera]

I'm standing my ground...by hunting someone down like an animal.

ftfy

also p sure trolling isn't allowed in this forum

[Chun Liroy]

Where's that Kuya quote, then? Something like Stupid People or trolls, if you argue with either of them you are the dumb one.

This applies here, I think.

[Sera]

Where's that Kuya quote, then? Something like Stupid People or trolls, if you argue with either of them you are the dumb one.

This applies here, I think.

I didn't argue. I asked for evidence of his claim. Big difference. The "flying fist attack" part smacks of trolling. That's why I didn't bother arguing & instead just asked for proof.

[Thunder]

Not following this very closely, but isn't that the official story? That's why Zimmerman wasn't arrested that day, I thought. Otherwise the whole incident looks retarded and zimmerman should have been charged with manslaughter/murder/whatever day1

By "that" the official story, I mean that he was attacked while retreating back into his SUV. Only person who knows whether or not that happened is zimmerman and that's his story so..

[Sera]

Not following this very closely, but isn't that the official story? That's why Zimmerman wasn't arrested that day, I thought. Otherwise the whole incident looks retarded and zimmerman should have been charged with manslaughter/murder/whatever day1

By "that" the official story, I mean that he was attacked while retreating back into his SUV. Only person who knows whether or not that happened is zimmerman and that's his story so..

That might be his account but it doesn't align with what was heard by witnesses

I'm sure Zimmy's telling the truth though, who would LIE to get out of a murder/ hate crime charge? That's like unheard of right?

[Chun Liroy]

Are we equating him to dimmy because he is also a fat mexican?

[Sera]

Are we equating him to dimmy because he is also a fat mexican?

hah, not intentionally, I just got tired of spelling out his entire last name.

[vagus]

Good dispatchers can get the same training as officers, minus the firearm or self defense training. In large towns, some dispatchers receive the same exacst law training as a officer would. It helps weed out the calls that are civil matters, and officers can do anything about.

Ah ok. Do dispatchers & security guards all carry guns, since it's there right to carry one? Or do there employers not allow it without proper training?

[Sera]

Ah ok. Do dispatchers & security guards all carry guns, since it's there right to carry one? Or do there employers not allow it without proper training?

Dispatchers are in a central location and they answer 911 calls. They communicate with officers via radio to tell them where they should go. They're not really law enforcement where I am from. They're communications officers.

[Sera]

Also found this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/24/op...zLgK0G39NmgQsQ

THE very public controversy surrounding the killing on Feb. 26 of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old, by a crime watch volunteer, George Zimmerman, was predictable.

In fact, I, along with other Florida chiefs of police, said so in a letter to the Legislature in 2005 when we opposed the passage of a law that not only enshrined the doctrine of “your home is your castle” but took this doctrine into the public square and added a new concept called “stand your ground.”

Use-of-force issues arose often during my 41-year policing career. In fact, officer-involved shootings were the No. 1 problem when I became Miami’s police chief in January 2003. But after we put in place new policies and training, officers went 20 months without discharging a single bullet at a person, while arrests increased over 30 percent.

Trying to control shootings by members of a well-trained and disciplined police department is a daunting enough task. Laws like “stand your ground” give citizens unfettered power and discretion with no accountability. It is a recipe for disaster.

At the time the Florida law was working its way through the Legislature, proponents argued that a homeowner should have the absolute right to defend himself and his home against an intruder and should not have to worry about the legal consequences if he killed someone. Proponents also maintained that there should be no judicial review of such a shooting.

But I pointed out at the time that even a police officer is held to account for every single bullet he or she discharges, so why should a private citizen be given more rights when it came to using deadly physical force? I also asked the bill’s sponsor, State Representative Dennis K. Baxley, to point to any case in Florida where a homeowner had been indicted or arrested as a result of “defending his castle.” He could not come up with a single one.

The only thing that is worse than a bad law is an unnecessary law. Clearly, this was the case here.

The second part of the law — “stand your ground” — is the most problematic. Until 2005, in all 50 states, the law on the use of force for civilians was pretty simple. If you found yourself in a situation where you felt threatened but could safely retreat, you had the duty to do so. (A police officer does not have the duty to retreat; that is the distinction between a sworn police officer and the average citizen regarding use of force.)

Police officers are trained to de-escalate highly charged encounters with aggressive people, using deadly force as a last resort. Citizens, on the other hand, may act from emotion and perceived threats. But “stand your ground” gives citizens the right to use force in public if they feel threatened. As the law emphatically states, a citizen has “no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground.”

During one debate, one of the law’s proponents suggested that if a citizen felt threatened in a public space, he should not have to retreat and should be able to meet force with force. I pointed out that citizens feel threatened all the time, whether it’s from the approach of an aggressive panhandler or squeegee pest or even just walking down a poorly lighted street at night. In tightly congested urban areas, public encounters can be threatening; a look, a physical bump, a leer, someone you think may be following you. This is part of urban life. You learn to navigate threatening settings without resorting to force. Retreating is always the best option.

As Florida police chiefs predicted in 2005, the law has been used to justify killings ranging from drug dealers’ turf battles to road rage incidents. Homicides categorized as justifiable have nearly tripled since the law went into effect.

Back in 2005, the National Rifle Association identified about two dozen states as fertile ground for the passage of laws just like this one. Florida was the first state to pass such a law. Today, at least 20 other states have followed suit.

Gov. Rick Scott of Florida can make all Floridians proud by being the first governor to reject and repeal such misguided laws.

John F. Timoney is a former Miami police chief, Philadelphia police commissioner and deputy police commissioner in New York. He is now senior police adviser to the Bahrain Minister of the Interior.

I actually don't mind Castle laws. If someone comes into your house uninvited and they're a threat to you, pop 'em. But chasing a man down, starting a confrontation and then claiming "stand your ground"? Fuck that. That's bitch made bullshit.

[archibaldcrane]

Also found this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/24/op...zLgK0G39NmgQsQ



I actually don't mind Castle laws. If someone comes into your house uninvited and they're a threat to you, pop 'em. But chasing a man down, starting a confrontation and then claiming "stand your ground"? Fuck that. That's bitch made bullshit.

Agreed.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S 4G using Tapatalk

[Greatguardian]

Ah ok. Do dispatchers & security guards all carry guns, since it's there right to carry one? Or do there employers not allow it without proper training?

Dispatchers shouldn't need guns since they're at the call centers when they're on the clock.

Dispatchers dispatch the cops. Thus the name. They are never on the scene. They're just the person you talk to when you call 911 who dispatches whatever EMS you need to your location.

[Thunder]

I'm sure Zimmy's telling the truth though, who would LIE to get out of a murder/ hate crime charge? That's like unheard of right?

Sarcasm's not very witty. You're a little too heated over this whole thing, I think. I obviously wasn't defending the man..

I'm expecting the worse from the actual case(even though I think the phone call implies zimmerman followed him closely enough for one to push the other - who cares if he retreated to his SUV after that fact even if it's the truth), but I'm hoping the SYG law gets more attention than treyvon or that treyvon's side puts more attention to it instead of weeping for vengeance. Self-defense shouldn't be so arbitrarily defined - just who is ok with someone having the right to kill someone, "if they feel threatened"

[jmc]

Ah ok. Do dispatchers & security guards all carry guns, since it's there right to carry one? Or do there employers not allow it without proper training?

Dispatchers and call takers are desk jockeys, they do not carry any police gear.

Someone calls the emergency line (911) and a call taker answers the call, tries to gain the information needed for police officers to safely respond and if necessary they try to de-escalate the situation. The call is then sent over to the dispatcher, who then tells the officers where to go and what is going on.

[zoobernut]

yeah except for the part that he didn't initiate the confrontation, he was walking back to his car when flying fist attack occurred from behind. after which he was miraculously and thankfully able to draw and end the encounter trayvon initiated. following someone doesn't constitute fear of death or serious injury, trayvon wasn't under SYG, zimmerman was. how many times is this going to have to be posted before you get it?

This is the herpiest derpiest post I have seen in a long time. You are either a terribly stupid person or just a terrible troll.

[Sera]

Sarcasm's not very witty. You're a little too heated over this whole thing, I think. I obviously wasn't defending the man..

I'm expecting the worse from the actual case(even though I think the phone call implies zimmerman followed him closely enough for one to push the other - who cares if he retreated to his SUV after that fact even if it's the truth), but I'm hoping the SYG law gets more attention than treyvon or that treyvon's side puts more attention to it instead of weeping for vengeance. Self-defense shouldn't be so arbitrarily defined - just who is ok with someone having the right to kill someone, "if they feel threatened"

the article i just posted addressed why that is a bad thing

[Thunder]

the article i just posted addressed why that is a bad thing

Why what is a bad thing? The stand your ground law? Yeah, I know, I read the quote you posted and even supported it

but I can't help but feel like you're telling me the SYG law getting more attention than treyvon/zimmer is a bad thing

[Aksannyi]

I don't entirely disagree with the law in and of itself, but it needs to be a lot tighter and have a lot fewer loopholes for people like Zimmerman to exploit. Regardless of any SYG law or otherwise, there should be a hell of a lot more investigation when any murder takes place. People who carry guns need to be more accountable for their actions, whether carrying legally or not (though if not, you're damn right they should get that one tacked on, regardless of self defense), and every time a bullet is fired at or into someone, there needs to be a hell of a lot more investigation going on.

There needs to be much stronger definitions for when deadly force is acceptable. I'm not sure how they'd even fix it. But I can't be against laws like these, when I'm a person who works nights and comes home to the not-safest-ever neighborhood anywhere from 2300hours until 0600hours any given night, and if you think I won't be meeting any kind of attacker with deadly force, you might wanna rethink that. And why should I have to worry when I'm about to be raped, stabbed, kidnapped, or whatever the fuck else, whether my actions will be putting me in a position to go to jail? I should be protected from the vagrants of society. I shouldn't be expected to lie down and let it happen if I have the means to defend myself, for fear of prison time, should I? For this type of reason, I can't see why anyone would be against such a law. However, again, I think situations like this need to be examined a lot more closely than they are. So what if it requires more man-hours. Don't lawmakers have the duty to bring justice to those who deserve it?

Bleh, rambling and a bit rantish. Gonna stop it right here before I go off.