Here is a quote from the story from a women name Lil Mama, she stated while holding a liquor bottle "If they let that guy who killed Trayvon Martin get off," he said, referring to the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager in Florida, "it could happen here again."
So Henry, Do you look to "Lil Mama for all your political advice? Are you really interested in her opinion?
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Lead prosecutor admits under oath that the state doesn't know who started the fight.The state will have an uphill battle proving 2nd degree murder.
The state could have opted for manslaughter, but chose 2nd degree murder. I assume they have a case.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
Suspect: I Beat Up White Man Because I Am Mad About Trayvon Martin Case
Maywood, Ill. - Alton L. Hayes III, a west suburban man charged with a hate crime, told police he was so upset about the Trayvon Martin case in Florida that he beat up a white man early Tuesday.
Hayes and a 15-year-old Chicago boy walked up behind the 19-year-old man victim and pinned his arms to his side, police said. Hayes, 18, then picked up a large tree branch, pointed it at the man and said, “Empty your pockets, white boy.”
The two allegedly rifled through the victim’s pockets, then threw him to the ground and punched him “numerous times” in the head and back before running away, police said. Hayes and the boy are black; the victim is white.
After being arrested, Hayes told police he was upset by the Trayvon Martin case and beat the man up because he was white, Cook County State’s Attorney’s office spokeswoman Tandra Simonton said, citing court records. Martin, 17, was fatally shot Feb. 26 in Sanford, Fla., by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, who was charged April 11 with second-degree murder. Zimmerman is Hispanic, while Martin was black.
Hayes, 18 of the 1200 block of North Woodbine Avenue in Oak Park, was charged with attempted robbery, aggravated battery and a hate crime, all felonies, Oak Park police Detective Cmdr. Ladon Reynolds said.
Hayes was ordered held on $80,000 bond and remained in the Cook County Jail on Friday. He will next appear in court May 11. The boy was referred to juvenile court.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
NYS Penal Law A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
(a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is using or about to use deadly physical force. Even in such case, however, the actor may not use deadly physical force if he or she knows that with complete personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is under no duty to retreat if he or she is: (i) in his dwelling and not the initial aggressor; or (ii) a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter`s direction, acting pursuant to section 35.30;
or
(b) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible criminal sexual act or robbery; or (c) He or she reasonably believes that such other person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary, and the circumstances are such that the use of deadly physical force is authorized by subdivision three of section 35.20. ============================================================================
Introduction to Use of Force
Critical decision You need to make a serious decision right now. And that is decide if you are willing to use lethal force to protect yourself -- because your life is on the line. Not threaten to use. Not "well it depends." Not "well if I have to". Nor is "can't I just scare him away by waving it around?" an acceptable answer.
Yes or no.
And if you choose yes, then you are accepting the responsibility that you will be acting with dedication and commitment to take another human life. If you ever do that, you will have to live with the repercussions and guilt for the rest of your life. And that is not easy. Therefore a 'yes' answer is not an act of bravado or macho, but a rational, calculated decision to take responsibility.
If you are not, that is an acceptable answer too. But recognize that it too has consequences.
However, it is important to realize that when it comes to robbery/ carjacking/ aggravated assault it can be, and often is, a life and death issue. You can either become a killer or be killed. And it can happen in a blink of an eye. If you have not made an informed decision before finding yourself in such a situation, then the odds are seriously against you being able to do it in the middle of a crisis. And by extension, the odds are against you being the one who will survive.
As the decision has been made in advance, so too has the research been done when you are legally allowed to use deadly force (i.e. defending yourself with a gun or defending yourself with a knife)
Self-defense plea: The pool has been peed in Recognize right up front, that no matter what his motivations really were when he pulled the trigger, when he is facing the police, every scum bucket has claimed it was "self-defense." In fact, there was one precedent setting case in California, were an armed robber claimed "it was self-defense" when the person he was attempting to rob pulled a gun to fight back and the robber shot him. Now maybe in whatever alternative reality he lives in stabbing someone fifteen time for insulting him is "self-defense" but that definition doesn't hold water with the police, much less the courts.
Unfortunately, both sides claiming it was self-defense make up about 99% of the cases the police see. And it isn't just one side lying, it's usually both. That old clich?about "taking two to fight" is true. Which means in that same 99% both sides were actively fighting and are now not only blaming the other, but protesting their 'innocence.'
Therefore, even in the most "clean shooting" it's going to be an uphill battle trying to prove to the police and the courts that your actions were justified. And that your claims of self-defense are not just another case of someone trying to wiggle out of the repercussions of committing a murder. This battle is going to be even harder if you were doing something stupid/illegal/ borderline illegal /inflammatory or participatory. In otherwords if you were part of the problem. A problem that resulted in a body hitting the floor.
This is why you had better do your homework and discover exactly how narrow of a spectrum it is that you are legally allowed to use deadly force. And then make sure that your actions fall within those boundaries. Return to top of page
Immediate, means "at this very second." There is literally nothing more dangerous to you and your family than *not* understanding what is meant by "immediate" or "imminent" (depending on which term your state uses). This idea cuts through *all* emotions, fears, thoughts and suspicions and defines when you are - in the eyes of the law - justified to use lethal force.
If he isn't trying to kill you right now, you aren't justified to use lethal force.
It doesn't matter if he is standing there screaming and threatening to kill you, or if has said that he is going to come back and get you or -- in many states -- has just pointed a gun at you, demanded your wallet and is now running away -- those are not considered "immediate threat of death or grave bodily injury." Because he isn't trying to kill you at that exact moment.
Not understanding the meaning of this term will put you in prison for murder. At the very least it will endanger everything you own to litigation....and, odds are, you will lose if you pulled the trigger at the wrong time.
In theory, someone standing across the room waving a knife threatening to kill you isn't offering you an immediate threat. Which means that you cannot legally shoot him. On the other hand, when he starts charging across the room, then you are in immediate and immanent danger of death or previous bodily harm. The reason being is that a knife is a close range weapon and by rushing at you, he is now capable of harming you. Now granted his brandishing the weapon in a threatening manner is in and of itself a crime, but not enough to warrant shooting him.
Now that is theory, in reality this is somewhat of a grey area. Not only does it depend on whose lawyer is better, but also the laws of the particular state (or country), what the legal precedents are there and what is the current local interpretation is. In one court you might be acquitted for shooting him while he is drawing the gun, whereas in others you will be convicted if you shoot before he has fired the first shot.
At the very best of times it is a very, very slippery slope.
Unfortunately, a situation that has spun so far out of control that deadly force was used, is very seldom the best of times. Return to top of page
Two citizens in dispute
You may look at a potential attacker and say "what a dirtbag." You may even go so far as to rationalize that "he deserves whatever he gets" for attacking you. Not to be the bearer of bad tidings, but according to the Constitution he's got the same rights as you do.
This brings us to the heart of the matter. It isn't you (a heroic and innocent taxpaying citizen) and a dirtbag (a lifelong criminal whose execution would benefit society). In the eyes of the law it is "two citizens in dispute."
And that is to say that nobody "deserves" anything without due process of the law.
People misbehave and do stupid and illegal things. That is an undisputable fact. Now the question before the court is which citizen was most out of line, you or him.?
Don't think that the fact that you are a clean cut civilian or a woman will automatically indicate your innocence. That public pool also needs serious chlorine treatment for urine. In otherwords police are accustomed to seeing nice, white middle class people trying to score drugs from street corner drug dealers. And such deals often go wrong -- as do any kind of drug deal.. Even if you are not familiar with the rising statistics of crimes (especially violent ones) committed by women, doesn't mean that the police aren't.
What all of this means is that if you find yourself in such a situation your actions will be seriously scrutinized for any misconduct or excess. And if there are any, then you will be treated like a criminal. More importantly, you will have broken the same laws and perpetrated on him the same wrongs he was trying to do to you.
Moreover, if you choose to carry a knife you need to know that such a weapon is considered a "thug's weapon" in most cultures. And if you do use a knife on someone then you had damn well make sure that the wound pattern matches your claim of "self-defense." Unfortunately, most training in stick and knife arts don't take either issue into consideration. They are in fact, training you to end up in prison for murder. Return to top of page
Lethal Force Items
The bottom line is that you cannot use a 'lethal force instrument' on another person unless you yourself are -- in essence -- in the same degree of danger.
Putting that in plain English, if he punches you, you can't pull a knife and carve him and claim it was 'self-defense.' You have not defended your body from the immediate threat of death or grave bodily injury, you've used a weapon to win a fight. You especially need to be careful about using a so-called 'tactical knife'. The reason for this is he was not offering you the same level of physical threat as you responded with. By pulling your weapon when there is no real danger to your person, you've escalated the situation. And that makes you the aggressor.
Judicious Use of Lethal Force As mentioned elsewhere we tend not to endorse specific products or services, which means when we do it is something that we strongly believe in. One of these is Massad Ayoob's Judicious use of lethal force seminar. We categorically recommend this program in either form. The first is a two day lecture on the legalities of using lethal force. The five day course is that as well as gun safety and shooting
It's kind of hard to run when someone is bouncing your head off the concrete. NYS law is written for those who break the law not for the victims.
The pertinent point of the post was the proper use of deadly force, may not be cut and dried.
1. If he bounced his head off the concrete because Zimmerman pulled a gun in a fist fight, then it is murder.
2. Pulling a gun in a fist fight makes you the new aggressor and justifies deadly force against you.
3. Having dents in your skull after you pulled a gun on someone should be expected.
4. We know Trayvon confronted him for following him at least 2 times. If Zimmerman pulled the gun to stop the confrontation, he became the deadly aggressor.
5. The only question to be answered is when was the gun pulled.
6. My gut feeling is it started as a verbal confrontation, escalated to a shoving match and Zimmerman pulled his gun, thereby causing Martin to defend himself.
7. Keep in mind that Trayvon committed no crime. An innocent person always has the right to defend himself.
The moral of the story is that the use of deadly force should only be used when there is imminent threat of personal safety, AND that you had no influence on the events that led up to the confrontation.
Zimmerman clearly initiated the entire chain of events by his actions. He has a tremendous uphill battle ahead of him.
I am licensed to carry in 32 states. I would never pull a gun in a fight except against another weapon.
Killing someone who shoves, punches or kicks you is not legal. Anywhere.
Pulling a gun for being kicked, punched or shoved, entitles the other person to kill you for initiating the use of imminent deadly force.
It's kind of hard to run when someone is bouncing your head off the concrete. NYS law is written for those who break the law not for the victims.
Amazing! Zimmerman, bigger and stronger of the two and armed with a pistol, follows Martin, against police instructions... shoots and kills Martin, and some are portraying the aggressor in this incident as the victim.
OJ followed Nicole and Ron to her home carrying a knife... OJ bigger, stronger and armed, kills Nicole and Ron... I guess we could say OJ in a similar case... was the victim.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
I am licensed to carry in 32 states. I would never pull a gun in a fight except against another weapon.
Killing someone who shoves, punches or kicks you is not legal. Anywhere.
Pulling a gun for being kicked, punched or shoved, entitles the other person to kill you for initiating the use of imminent deadly force.
By all means it should be a last resort but there are to many scenarios that can play out where using your gun could and should be used even if the attacker is unarmed. If someone attacks you even with his fist they have shown they intend harm on your body, there are to many cases where the victim becomes unconscious and then he is at the mercy of the attacker which then leads to the victims death. If you are outnumbered and have no fighting chance to defend yourself other than a gun the gun should be used. If someone kicks you in the head many areas now consider that attempted murder and you have the right to use lethal force in return. All I'm saying is that this is not black and white, there is gray areas, either way at the end of the day people should do whatever is necessary to make it home at the end of the day safe and alive.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Amazing! Zimmerman, bigger and stronger of the two and armed with a pistol, follows Martin, against police instructions... shoots and kills Martin, and some are portraying the aggressor in this incident as the victim.
How do you know Zimmerman was "bigger and stronger"? How do you know Zimmerman followed? And you talk about me being unqualified to comment on the military. What makes you feel qualified to spout you junior prosecutor BS? Must be you soldier traits shining through...Regurgitating whatever your superior tells you - WITHOUT QUESTION.
"If they let that guy who killed Trayvon Martin get off," he said, referring to the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager in Florida, "it could happen here again."
Logged
