Comments on: Stand Your Ground Law Clarification Needed

By: dan

dan — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 02:41:14 +0000

to derrick.lol.i hope all you have is a fuzzy dog when they kick your door in.ill be ready in my home.car or anywhere i am

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:04:19 +0000

REGARDING:
“The 911 operator had told him not to follow him. ”

Everything in the tape indicates he stopped as soon as told to do so. He continued the conversation for quite some time after agreeing, giving details and arranging where to meet with the police. No evidence pursuit was continued.

Taken from
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/326700/full-transcript-zimmerman.pdf

“Dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running?
Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood.
Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards?
Zimmerman: The back entrance…(profanity deleted dhg)
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don’t need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Ok
Dispatcher: Alright sir what is your name?
Zimmerman: George…He ran.
Dispatcher: Alright George what’s your last name?
Zimmerman: Zimmerman
Dispatcher: And George what’s the phone number you’re calling from?
Zimmerman: [redacted by Mother Jones, they provided the transcript dhg]
Dispatcher: Alright George we do have them on the way, do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?
Zimmerman: Alright, where you going to meet with them at?
Zimmerman: If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the club house, and uh, straight past the club house and make a left, and then they go past the mailboxes, that’s my truck…[unintelligible]
Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of?
Zimmerman: I don’t know, it’s a cut through so I don’t know the address.”

David for truth and justice
and cameras, lots of cameras

By: yep

yep — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:59:33 +0000

“The 911 operator had told him not to follow him. ”

You have no legal obligation to do what a 911 dispatcher says to do. While it would have been smart to listen to that advice, it wasn’t “legally” necessary.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 15:56:26 +0000

REGARDING:
“People need to learn to keep quiet until the investigation over, and then peacefully protest if they feel that the outcome was bogus.”

Actually, they did. Their problem lay in the fact that the local authorities said they had investigated and determined no cause to charge the killer. Many did not like that determination because they disagreed with it, so they protested, peacefully so far although Rosie O’Donnell and a few others gave a false address to any who wanted to kill Z. That way, if anybody decides to take justice in their own hands, they’ll just kill the old couple caught up in the mess by living at the wrong address.

David for acceptable results

By: rebear

rebear — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:13:14 +0000

There is nothing wrong with the stand your ground law. What is wrong is, a black kid was killed by a hispanic man. Before any information has come out from the investigation, people are racially profiling this man. Had it been a black man killing a white kid, the local news would have been as far as it went. People need to learn to keep quite until the investigation over, and then peacefully protest if they feel that the outcome was bogus.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:15:33 +0000

REGARDING:
“One problem in this case is what authority did Z have to stop or question the kid? ”

The problem with that question is the assumption that he ever DID stop or question the kid.

We know he was watching SOMEONE. We know he reported suspicious activity of someone standing in the rain and looking into houses he passed. (He may have lied, but that’s what he reported.) We know when the 911 operator told him they didn’t need him to follow the suspect/child that he said, “Okay.” We know both had a right to be there as long as neither was committing a crime.

What we don’t know, we can assume. We can just assume cold blooded murder on Z’s part and crucify accordingly.

David for wild assumptions

By: molino jim

molino jim — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 01:45:01 +0000

One problem in this case is what authority did Z have to stop or question the kid? The 911 operator had told him not to follow him. Only two people know what went on that night—-none of us were there. Granted the kid had a hood pulled up and was looking like a hood or punk. If i happen to be walking down the street and some one tries to detain me, I would be more than a little up set and might do something dumb. The boys family are going to go after Z and the home owners asst. that had formed the neighborhood watch group in civil court. One last thing— I wish the teachers who had all of the young blacks walk out of the class room to protest would have a pop test the next day. ( I know it will not happen) You have a choose– protest or get an education— not both.

By: Jane

Jane — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 22:36:15 +0000

This law seems pretty clear to me…break into my house and I can shoot you. Try to grab me while I am in my car at home and I can shoot you. The law doesn’t say we should be vigilanties or go around shooting people. It means protect yourself and your family, preferably at home. I would prefer not to shoot someone but I will protect myself.

By: George

George — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 20:09:55 +0000

WOW!

Anybody else catch this quote from the article:

“Lawmakers aren’t currently scheduled to return until next year and won’t file new legislation until after the November election.”

It’s JUST MARCH!! I know they are supposedly only “part-time” but still, it’s just March and they are not scheduled to return until next year? Is this right?

By: NotAgain

NotAgain — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:15:15 +0000

“Stand Your Ground Law Clarification Needed”

No clarification needed here. Seems pretty clear cut.