Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attorney speaks out for Zimmerman (more info)
My Fox Tampa ^ | 23 March 2012 | My Fox Tampa

Posted on 03/24/2012 4:27:07 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi

ORLANDO - An attorney representing George Zimmerman is speaking out, saying his client is not a racist, and that he acted in self-defense the night Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.

Craig Sonner spoke with FOX 35 in Orlando. He said he did not know George Zimmerman's location. He said due to death threats, he has been advising Zimmerman to avoid going out in public.

He referred to a flier saying Zimmerman was "Wanted dead or alive."

"I have advised him to stay out the public eye as much as he can," Sonner said.

Sonner also gave more details about injuries Zimmerman sustained that night.

"He did suffer a broken nose, and he has an injury to the back of his head which should have required stitches. I think he was delayed in getting to the doctor and having stitches put in. But he did sustain injuries to his head," Sonner said.

Sonner said portrayals of his client as a racist are not accurate. As an example, he cited Zimmerman's participation in fundraisers for an African-American church in the Orlando area.

Sonner said Zimmerman was under "a lot of stress."

"He's very concerned about the grave situation he's in. There's a young man who is now deceased in this situation, he's very concerned about that," Sonner said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; martin; trayvonmartin; zimmerman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-138 next last
To: Truth29

Yeah I have a sick feeling the DOJ will investigate and Obama will use this to force more regulations and anti gun laws to take away the 2nd ammendment rights of citizens. This could be the start of it, all in the name of “solving racism”.


51 posted on 03/24/2012 5:35:40 AM PDT by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: calex59
-- You are saying that "no, a person doesn't have that right if they pissed the other person off". --

The analysis isn't whether or not the other person got angry, it's whether a reasonable person would perceive the exchange as instigating or asking for a fight. Some people use anything as an excuse to get angry, that is, they come to anger unreasonably.

From my impression of how the physical confrontation started, I don't think the "stand your ground" principle is in play, at all.

52 posted on 03/24/2012 5:36:59 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: cport; calex59
But according to what is in the police report (sorry,don’t have marktwain’s police report pdf thread handy) he did de-escalate by heading back to his truck

Right. I started by saying that a "he said...he said" case will be hard to resolve with one of the two dead.

calex59, it's NEVER been the law that you can use deadly force in a fight where you are a willing participant. J.... Ch...., how many manslaughter convictions have there been coming out of bar fights?

All I'm saying is that I DON'T KNOW if the Florida "stand your ground" law CHANGES THE COMMON LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE, and I asked if any knowledgable freepers could enlighten me.

Do you know if the Florida "stand your ground" law CREATES the right to use deadly force once you start losing a fight in which you are not the aggressor but which you could avoid by reasonable conduct?

I mean, you have the right to be in a given bar, and you have the right to fight back if attacked, but if you wade into a bar fight that you didn't start, punch a guy, and he falls, hits his head, and dies, that's manslaughter, right?

All I'm asking is, in Florida now, if under the same circumstances, he knocks you down and you shoot him, is that legal and proper use of "stand your ground"?

53 posted on 03/24/2012 5:38:24 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

The facts of this case are a nightmare for Obama. His DOJ may have to try a Catholic hispanic in Florida, who was getting the hell beat out of him by a black guy. Hispanics are not going to appreciate that Obama already noted his non existent son would “look like” the black guy.

Otoh, Obama so wants to rile up the black vote to encourage a huge turnout.

Meanwhile, imho, white voters hate it when Obama steps into racial controversies.

Turning this into any kind of general issue involving blacks is disgusting. You could as well say it proves blacks beat people up, as say “blacks are under attack.”


54 posted on 03/24/2012 5:39:06 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble; Nervous Tick
Pinging Nervous Tick to this thread. More info here for ya, Tick. Specifically that Zimmerman was beat up a bit more than previously thought. A broken nose is a pretty big deal.

To get to your question, Jim, I can speak to Florida's laws on this. I've had to use a firearm in self-defense twice in my life, and it was shortly after I turned 21. I was in college in Tallahassee, and this happened even before Stand Your Ground was law.

It removes the duty to retreat or de-escalate. It also allows any lawful gun owner to have their weapon with them in any place where they are legally allowed to be. So, for instance, they can have a pistol on their side in their home, on their property, in their vehicle, boat, etc. They can also have a firearm on them in a friend's home or vehicle, provided that owner is okay with it. Since you are required to carry concealed and Florida does not allow open carry (yet), you can't legally carry a firearm in a restaurant, grocery store, WalMart, etc. despite being legally permitted to be there.

Zimmerman was not on duty for the watch, but he was on a personal errand. From his home to his vehicle and on the road, he's legally allowed to have that firearm with him. As soon as he got out of that vehicle, he can't legally have his gun unless he has a CWP (did they mention yet if he's a holder?). This is where the story gets a little muddy. He went looking for Martin, but broke off the search. At some point back to his vehicle, he was attacked. At this point, Stand Your Ground permits him to defend himself regardless of the disposition of force. Florida law makes no accessions for equality of force.

Someone comes at you with a weapon, you only have to be in fear for your life to shoot. That's the key phrase, even I had to use it in my situation: "I was in fear for my life." Period, case over. Law enforcement cannot, under Florida law, arrest you for pulling the trigger. Maybe they come knocking on your door at a later date to follow up, but you walk away.

55 posted on 03/24/2012 5:39:39 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

If memory serves, the cops were acquitted of the charge of murder. Murder implies intent, premeditation. The cops in the Rodney King case were over-charged—probably in response to the mob-mentality resulting from the excerpted video being played over and over again.

Look, the idea of “what to think” is taught in the media, as well as in the public schools.


56 posted on 03/24/2012 5:40:27 AM PDT by MarDav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
saying his client is not a racist

How upside down is it that Al, Jesse, Farrakhan, The Black Panthers et al are prancing around and spouting BS and both this attorney and his dad feel compelled to say 'he is not racist'

1984 anyone?

57 posted on 03/24/2012 5:40:48 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

From the comments at that page, the photos are not of the deceased.


58 posted on 03/24/2012 5:41:23 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine's brother

Would that only be considered trespassing and not breaking and entering? It would be like the illegal aliens only being cited for trespassing when they cross the border illegally. Wouldn’t a gated community hold some kind of illegal entry violation to the perp?


59 posted on 03/24/2012 5:41:51 AM PDT by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sport

I was very young when Kent State happened; I don’t remember it at all. I’ve never met anyone who disagreed with the guardsmen’s actions, probably because people I know understand the difference between the National Guard and the Green Berets, and I don’t know anyone whose parents were on the left during Vietnam. Many of my friends had fathers who served in the war (and were proud of it) or who had served prior to the war.


60 posted on 03/24/2012 5:45:49 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

Thanks.


61 posted on 03/24/2012 5:48:20 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

I’m not surprised of the gang sing / thug pictures considering where this occured. Sanford isn’t some pristine upperclass suburban area on the outskirts of Disney World. It’s more like Compton, sketchy parts of LA and the inner city hell holes across the country.


62 posted on 03/24/2012 5:48:43 AM PDT by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
-- All I'm saying is that I DON'T KNOW if the Florida "stand your ground" law CHANGES THE COMMON LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE, and I asked if any knowledgable freepers could enlighten me. --

looking at Prosser, Wade and Schwartz's "Torts - Cases and Materials" 9th edition, on page 104 under the heading of "Self-Defense," point No 6 says (without giving any case cite):

Retreat. One basic disagreement in approach to the privilege of self-defense focuses on whether the defendant must retreat if he can do so without increasing his danger, rather than stand his ground and use force. It is settle that he may stand his ground and use any force short of that likely to cause serious injury. The common law was that, rather than kill his assailant or seriously wound him, defendant must "retreat to the wall." A minority of the American courts still apply this rule, and it is adopted by the Restatement (Second) of Torts Sec. 65. The majority, chiefly in the south and west, have insisted upon a higher important of the dignity and honor of the individual and have held that the defendant may stand his ground and use deadly force, and even kill his assailant. [Remark about retreating from a gun bearing assailant skipped]
and Section 65 of Restatement of Torts 2nd, says this ...
S: 65. Self-Defense By Force Threatening Death Or Serious Bodily Harm (1) Subject to the statement in Subsection (3), an actor is privileged to defend himself against another by force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm, when he reasonably believes that

(a) the other is about to inflict upon him an intentional contact or other bodily harm, and that

(b) he is thereby put in peril of death or serious bodily harm or ravishment, which can safely be prevented only by the immediate use of such force.

(2) The privilege stated in Subsection (1) exists although the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can safely avoid the necessity of so defending himself by

(a) retreating if he is attacked within his dwelling place, which is not also the dwelling place of the other, or

(b) permitting the other to intrude upon or dispossess him of his dwelling place, or

(c) abandoning an attempt to effect a lawful arrest.

(3) The privilege stated in Subsection (1) does not exist if the actor correctly or reasonably believes that he can with complete safety avoid the necessity of so defending himself by

(a) retreating if attacked in any place other than his dwelling place, or in a place which is also the dwelling of the other, or

(b) relinquishing the exercise of any right or privilege other than his privilege to prevent intrusion upon or dispossession of his dwelling place or to effect a lawful arrest.

The link has notes and example scenarios.
63 posted on 03/24/2012 5:53:12 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MarDav

Rodney King didn’t die; there were no murder charges.

The cops were accused for the beating, and cleared by a jury (who saw the WHOLE tape - it was evidence). The feds then got involved and brought them up ion charges in a second trial, for civil rights violations (the catch-all when the desired verdict isn’t reached); this second layer of protection is only available to ethnic minorities, women, homosexuals, basically anyone but a Christian male of European descent. In the second trial they got the desired verdict (and more whites fled CA).


64 posted on 03/24/2012 5:53:20 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Sanford is near the armpit of Florida known as Orlando. If it looked middle-class, it WAS upscale for that area.


65 posted on 03/24/2012 5:55:07 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

The NBP should be rounded up and placed in prison for being a domestic terrorist organization.


66 posted on 03/24/2012 5:56:43 AM PDT by No Surrender No Retreat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: devolve

Did Obama really say that? Wouldn’t that be offensive somehow if he had said that?


67 posted on 03/24/2012 5:57:48 AM PDT by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2
He might get a no-apology beer summit..

A teachable moment.

68 posted on 03/24/2012 6:00:16 AM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2; sport
I disagree with #3; this is not good for Obama. Many blacks were going to vote for him anyway, and few whites or Hispanics (in private) sympathize with the shooting “victim”.

This won't change anyone's opinion, true but it will fire up the base, black people who will vote for Obama come what may because he is black and leftist white people who would vote for Obama anyway because he is red.

69 posted on 03/24/2012 6:02:20 AM PDT by magslinger (If I wanted to vote for a Commie I would vote for Obammie. He has a chance of winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt; Jim Noble
From Florida statutes:

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.

—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

70 posted on 03/24/2012 6:02:35 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

Do we have a definitive source for them? With some of them it is hard to tell it was him.


71 posted on 03/24/2012 6:02:48 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
From my impression of how the physical confrontation started, I don't think the "stand your ground" principle is in play, at all.

I would agree with you there. If one were attacked from behind and knocked to the ground then pummeled by an assailant much larger than you, standing ones ground is no longer in the equation. It has now become a matter of survival........

"Stand your ground" presumes that you have an avenue of retreat. Mr. Zimmerman did not, he was on his back with his assailant on top of him......

72 posted on 03/24/2012 6:03:18 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (No matter what you post here, someone's going to get pissed off......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

I wish I lived there; I would get one of those flyers and reprint them with the leader of the Black Panthers face and name on it and redistribute it right back at them!


73 posted on 03/24/2012 6:05:52 AM PDT by CodeToad (I'm so right-wing if I lifted my left leg I'd go into a spin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

I don’t think many “leftist whites” will vote for Obama this time; their utopia hasn’t materialized, and they are struggling along with everyone else.

Despite what many think, OWS is not a bastion of support for Obama; they feel deceived by him, and many are still looking for their first jobs. They probably won’t support a Republican, but they won’t be fooled again by the Kenyan Pirate. I think the only “leftist whites” in his corner are homosexuals and public school teachers.

Even blacks have a lot less incentive to vote for him, and I’m sure they are a lower percentage of the electorate now than they were four years ago


74 posted on 03/24/2012 6:06:47 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Thanks. I DO understand that "stand your ground" eliminates the duty to retreat, what's at issue is whether it also is an affirmative defense to acting unreasonably.

Castle Doctrine laws clearly improve the situation of reasonable actors. I mean, it is prima facie reasonable to use deadly force against a stranger breaking in.

Stand Your Ground laws, OTOH, are unclear (to me) about whether or not, lacking a duty to retreat, now also void a duty to act reasonably. My example of joining a bar fight and shooting if things don't go your way is on point.

IF (and it's a big if) a jury finds that Zimmerman, in toto, acted unreasonably in confronting Martin, does the current Florida law protect him once he started getting his ass kicked?

That's the question I'm looking for an answer to.

75 posted on 03/24/2012 6:08:02 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateBlues

There was a somewhat similar case in Houston, 2-3 years ago. Mr. Joe Horn (white guy) was at home and observed a daytime burglary of his neighbor’s home. Horn confronted the two black, illegal aliens and killed them when they attacked him. The local rabble pimps demanded Horn’s head RIGHT NOW. Grand Jury refused to indict him and he was freed without charges AFTER all the facts were presented. The rabble pimps tried to protest at Horn’s home. Many Houstonians came to Horn’s assistance and literally CHASED the pimps out.


76 posted on 03/24/2012 6:08:15 AM PDT by Tahoe3002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Obama’s teachable moment in MA was the first time people realized he was a thinner Al Sharpton; he’s been bleeding “white” support ever since.


77 posted on 03/24/2012 6:08:31 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Want to prove your asserting about what the law says by giving us a legal citstion of the exact law that say it?


78 posted on 03/24/2012 6:11:20 AM PDT by CodeToad (I'm so right-wing if I lifted my left leg I'd go into a spin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

Being that I am surrounded by leftist whites much of the time, they will indeed be pulling the lever for Obama again. Anyway, fashionably liberal whites in NY and NJ are irrelevant as both states voting for Obama are foregone conclusions. What matters are swing voters in Ohio. Colorado and Virginia.


79 posted on 03/24/2012 6:12:31 AM PDT by Clemenza ("History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil governm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco
-- If one were attacked from behind and knocked to the ground then pummeled by an assailant much larger than you, standing ones ground is no longer in the equation. --

Yep. Once you're overwhelmed with physical force, the option of retreat ins't available. It would be asinine for the law to assign a duty to retreat, to a person who is overwhelmed with force.

80 posted on 03/24/2012 6:13:07 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
Want to prove your asserting about what the law says by giving us a legal citstion of the exact law that say it?

Don't understand the question. What am I asserting that you want a cite for?

81 posted on 03/24/2012 6:14:50 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: devolve


82 posted on 03/24/2012 6:15:09 AM PDT by Godebert (NO PERSON EXCEPT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: devolve
I recall seeing a picture of Zippo giving a gang sign to a gang member as if it was a joke.

Those hand signals are gang signs. People in the know can tell you which gang he is in.

Geraldo may be a nut in almost every way, but he was right about the hoodie. That is part of the gang uniform.

In the late 60’s and 70’s black would wear hoodies to show they were part of “The Black Klan”. It was the black version of the KKK.

83 posted on 03/24/2012 6:16:45 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

I guess not everyone is pleased with the Constitution or the Rule of Law.


84 posted on 03/24/2012 6:17:24 AM PDT by hal ogen (1st Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1
"zimmerman was on the ground with two head wounds yelling for help and then a shot was fired. may have been a tussle for the gun."

Bump.

85 posted on 03/24/2012 6:18:09 AM PDT by Miss Behave (All ways, always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
-- what's at issue is whether [stand your ground] also is an affirmative defense to acting unreasonably. --

It's not. A person standing ground and using force also has to be acting in reasonable apprehension.

-- IF (and it's a big if) a jury finds that Zimmerman, in toto, acted unreasonably in confronting Martin, does the current Florida law protect him once he started getting his ass kicked? --

The law is well aware of situations wehre the tables turn, and a person who "started it," then decides to retreat, is not held to be acting unreasonably if he later defends himself against an attack. The "it" in "who started it" doesn't necessarily refer to the entire sequence of events.

If Zimmerman had broken off his chase, and was returning to his truck, and Martin jumped him, then Martin started it. Martin is liable, and Zimmerman 1) isn't in a "stand your ground" situation at all; 2)Martin has a right to use force to defend himself. That section of Restatement does a good job of describing what is "reasonable" as far as apprehending a risk of serious injury; and reasonable apprehension of serious injury justifes the use of deadly force.

86 posted on 03/24/2012 6:22:53 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: BlueStateBlues
"Zimmerman might be owed lots of apologies by people all the way up to the White House."

He may be owed them, but you can bet that he will never get them.

87 posted on 03/24/2012 6:23:26 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

“both states voting for Obama are foregone conclusions.”

Both states are in horrible shape financially, and it has trickled to the bottom at this point; there is little reason for anyone of any color in NY or NJ to vote for Obama. Our unemployment is worse than many areas, our taxes are higher; what will Obama promise this time? The decline hasn’t been more noticeable anywhere, with the possible exception of California. Governor Christie won in NJ one year after the state voted for Obama; we’ve learned quickly. Obama will be forced to fight for all 50 states.


88 posted on 03/24/2012 6:24:57 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
-- Stand Your Ground laws, OTOH, are unclear (to me) about whether or not, lacking a duty to retreat, now also void a duty to act reasonably. My example of joining a bar fight and shooting if things don't go your way is on point. --

The situation of jumping in to a bar fight will be viewed with an eye to why the person entered the fray. If the reason is to break it up, and the person breaking it up becomes a target of force, then there is a right to use self-defense.

A police officer who is breaking up a fight can obtain a right to shoot, depending on the actions of the fighters.

But, if the person entering the fray is intending further escalation, he loses the right of self defense.

89 posted on 03/24/2012 6:29:28 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
and here is a little statistic for all of you, more people are beaten to death every year in the USofA than are shot to death.?

How can I prove that to liberal, near brain dead Obama voters?

90 posted on 03/24/2012 6:29:28 AM PDT by politicianslie (Obama: America's first Muslim POTUS, doing all he can to destroy America. HELLO, can anyone th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin

Trayvon Martin

Born Feb 5, 1995 (1995-02-05)

Died Feb 26, 2012 (2012-02-26)

aged 17
(not 11-14 as family photos and media have attempted to portray)

Sanford, Florida, USA

Cause of death homicide (alleged)

Nationality American

Other "names" Nicknames: Tray; Slimm

Ethnicity African American

Hometown Miami, Florida

Height 6'3" (another sources states 6'2")

Weight 140 lbs.
(I doubt he was only 140 lbs. at 6"3" - another source states he was 190 lbs.)

- do not presume you witnessed this -
- remember the Atlanta bomber media coverage -
- Lionel at WABC was sued and lost bigtime -



91 posted on 03/24/2012 6:30:55 AM PDT by devolve (- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - you can*t do that with a WebTV - - - - - - - - - - - -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

He who transits from speech to physical attack is in the wrong, no matter WHAT the speech is. Evidence is that Martin initiated the physicality. “Being pissed-off” is not grounds for assault.


92 posted on 03/24/2012 6:31:13 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: hal ogen

That is why the artist protrayed Obama burning it. The Constitution & Rule of Law became irrelevant when affirmative action became legal; they are selectively applied. In the end, the words have meaning to a steadily declining number of people anyway (and that was done deliberately in the education system).


93 posted on 03/24/2012 6:31:31 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

“it’s NEVER been the law that you can use deadly force in a fight where you are a willing participant

“Clearly, you can’t use deadly force in a fight you provoke and then plead self-defense. I think that’s true everywhere, whether or not there is a “stand your ground” law.”

“it’s NEVER been the law that you can use deadly force in a fight where you are a willing participant

“Clearly, you can’t use deadly force in a fight you provoke and then plead self-defense. I think that’s true everywhere, whether or not there is a “stand your ground” law.”

What are you talking about? Florida only has a law specifically stating about duties to not retreat because they were dumb enough to have one that said a person had a duty to retreat in the first place. Only to some dumb a dirt idiot politician would a person be required to flee a bad guy and not the other way around.


94 posted on 03/24/2012 6:34:08 AM PDT by CodeToad (I'm so right-wing if I lifted my left leg I'd go into a spin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Altura Ct.
1984 anyone?

We went past 1984 before 1984, you just don't know it.

95 posted on 03/24/2012 6:36:01 AM PDT by politicianslie (Obama: America's first Muslim POTUS, doing all he can to destroy America. HELLO, can anyone th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

I think I’m citing the common law as it pertains to homicide.

I agree about the idiot politicians and the need for some type of stand your ground protection. I just want to understand how far the Florida law goes to change the common law.


96 posted on 03/24/2012 6:43:16 AM PDT by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: kearnyirish2

Your points may have some validity. What they don’t have is anything to do with the Zimmerman shooting. Obammie may have trouble in this election (I profoundly hope so.) He will not have any more trouble because of the Zimmerman shooting and his stupid comments about it. I believe he will have less trouble.


97 posted on 03/24/2012 6:44:43 AM PDT by magslinger (If I wanted to vote for a Commie I would vote for Obammie. He has a chance of winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: magslinger

“What they don’t have is anything to do with the Zimmerman shooting.”

When whites see large numbers of black males milling about protesting without facts, it never bodes well for any Democrat; Obama wants this (at least the footage of “million hoodie marches” to go away. “White guilt” died in November 2008, and has been replaced by “white apathy” and “white rage”.


98 posted on 03/24/2012 6:51:22 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Florida doesn’t subscribe to common law. You have to research the appropriate statutes.


99 posted on 03/24/2012 6:51:36 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth

The article I read referred to Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic”.


100 posted on 03/24/2012 6:51:45 AM PDT by zeebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-138 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson