• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

Do you agree with Florida Law on use of deadly force?

  • Agree

    Votes: 41 70.7%

  • Disagree

    Votes: 15 25.9%

  • I oppose the Second Amendment completely

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • There should be no rule of law

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • Total voters
    58
Jryan said:
And thanks to people like you, I agree with everything you said here. I just don't think that anyone who is emotionally involved in a case can be a jury membor, as you would like (presuming).

So you think all criminals should be shot then if the victim dictates it justifiable?

Wow... You really need to take a look at psychology and how the brain works. There is a science to this turtledude, which you are ignoring...

Just say "no" to science though I guess:

American Sociological Association: Study: Conservatives
Click to expand...

Hells Yea, coddle and pamper the criminal bastards into rehabilitation.

oh. wait........
 
Phoenix said:
Hells Yea, coddle and pamper the criminal bastards into rehabilitation.

oh. wait........
Click to expand...


Jryan probably hasn't been around long enough to have his car broken into, his house burglarized (or as in my case) have two mopes jump him in an alley and punch him in the face (which is why I shot one of them and stuck my Smith and Wesson in the mouth of another and said you are dead MF and drop the hammer on the gun (its how the safety works) causing the guy to soil his shorts
 
stonewall50 said:
Sorry I don't have time to fully respond...but Zimmerman had plea bargained charges on his records (things that should have been felonies but were reduced).
Click to expand...

You are wrong about the plea bargain. A plea bargain is when a person agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for no jury trial. Z has no convictions.
Justifiable use of Force is all covered in chapter 776 FL Statutes, whether it's in a home or anywhere and it provides that a person does not have a duty to retreat. Being a CCW holder doesn't change that.
 
Jryan said:
I'm glad you don't dictate our laws I guess. You really think someone who steals deserves the death penalty? So you ignore IQ tests, personality tests, statistics, data, and anything that proves that people are a product of society.
Click to expand...

A person can blame society for his own dysfuntions all he wants. He can try to rationalize and reason away why he's a POS, but until he decides he is the one who can control his impulses, and he is the one who is responsible for his ****-ups, he will never amount to anything more than a victim in his own mind, and he will remain powerless to change for the better.
 
joko104 said:
As an adult I've had guns and more often knives pulled on me. ...
Click to expand...
You've have had some very unfortunate experiences. There is nothing I can do to fix anything, sorry. I can say that I'd be fortunate if you were around if I screwed up with an aggressor. I bet you do some of the same things I do. When we stop at a fast food place I automatically pick the best available seat where I can see the main entrance, the counter, the door to the kitchen then the parking lot. I bet you do the same thing, probably better than me.
 
Jryan said:
Rape becomes a violent crime when someone says, "Hey! Stop raping that woman" and the person continues what he is doing.
Click to expand...

You have got to be freaking kidding. Jesus Christ. Rape is violent from the time the rape begins. I can't conceive that anyone doesn't understand that concept.
 
lizzie said:
You have got to be freaking kidding. Jesus Christ. Rape is violent from the time the rape begins. I can't conceive that anyone doesn't understand that concept.
Click to expand...

He obviously has never seen DELIVERANCE

squeal like a pig boy!!
 
Blackdog said:
I can address this directly because it happened to me. I was arrested for aggravated assault of a police officer. The fact of the matter was I was assaulted by the officer (for being the only black guy there no less) and was charged to cover his ass. It was pleaded down to misdemeanor assault, and I was given non reporting supervision for a year. If I could have afforded a real lawyer it would never have gotten that far. You see the judge, SA and officers all new it was a lie, but did not want me to sue the city and department. So you don't know the circumstance of the arrest or charges. This is why it must be a conviction.
Click to expand...

Do you think that was the case with this gentlman? I certainly must question his decision making process as stringently as I can. I am a concealed holder and I do NOT want the actions of one idiot to come to define the rest of us. If I were involved in a shooting I would be ok with having the proctoscope. It would take a lot to get me to pull. I certainly wouldn't be following a young male of African descent (because I wouldn't know his age and I am not a racist) down the street because he looked suspicious. Would you? The Stand Your Ground Law no longer applies in this situation if he pursued Treyvon (and he said he did).

I am actually listening to the audio as I write this. The dispatcher asks him if he is following him. He says yes. The Dispatcher says we don't need you to do that. At that point...Zimmerman is no longer defending himself. Treyvon clearly knew he was being watched. He "walked towards Zimmerman" with his "hands in his waistband." That is a universal threat sign. Given that Zimmerman didn't pull I must question why not? Distance? Was it obvious that Treyvon didn't have a gun? How many people who carry on routine would ignore that? I see that as a threat indicator and alarms go off in my head. But once Treyvon runs (and Zimmmerman states this on the audio)...and the dispatcher tells him not to pursue...why then did he pursue? Understand I am not trying to delve into the legality of the situation around the shooting itself. I am questioning the decision making process of Zimmerman as far as the 911 call of Zimmerman's goes.

Strictly putting myself into the shoes of Zimmerman...I could NOT reasonably pursue a young male who appeared suspicous or even ran away. That violates SEVERAL general rules of safety and more important...ignores the purpose behind stand your ground laws. If you want to go chasing criminals...get a badge and do it right.
 
Phoenix said:
You are wrong about the plea bargain. A plea bargain is when a person agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for no jury trial. Z has no convictions.
Justifiable use of Force is all covered in chapter 776 FL Statutes, whether it's in a home or anywhere and it provides that a person does not have a duty to retreat. Being a CCW holder doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't give you the right to pursue a suspect.
 
stonewall50 said:
Still doesn't give you the right to pursue a suspect.
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, whoa...it's not "pursuing". And it wasn't following. And it certainly wasn't chasing. Or trailing, going after, shadowing or chaperoning.

Know the rules, stonewall; you can call what Z did anything but what it was. Cuz that would make him look bad. And we don't want that. :wink:
 
Jryan said:
As a police officer, yes if the officer feels endangered (IE Sees a gun or sees him reaching for a weapon). A police officer would arrest if he just saw rape. I honestly don't think you are okay with civilians making law enforcement decisions Goshin. I think civilians should be able to detain (in non-violent acts, which rape is NOT violent unless the rapist takes it to another level).
Click to expand...

Rape is among the most violent and detestable acts that the distusting animal known as human has EVER conceived. It not only involves the violation of someone's body, but the mental violation of them. It takes rape victims somtimes YEARS to recover...and some NEVER do. I have friends who have been raped. I know women who STILL suffer from the effects of rape, and some who do NOT realize that they still do. It is as mentally violating as any brutal beating. It violates a sense of security, self confidence, and so much more. If you know someone who has been raped...then you might understand this. If not then I understand your lack of understanding.

Even Age of Consent rape victims can still suffer from awful PTSD. Now if the partner is "willing" and they are perhaps 16 or 17 that is one thing, but CHILDREN don't understand sex. Rape is the 2nd most detestable crime I can imagine. Murder being the first.
 
RadicalModerate said:
Whoa, whoa, whoa...it's not "pursuing". And it wasn't following. And it certainly wasn't chasing. Or trailing, going after, shadowing or chaperoning.

Know the rules, stonewall; you can call what Z did anything but what it was. Cuz that would make him look bad. And we don't want that. :wink:
Click to expand...

What? Perhaps I am missing the sarcasm notification here? I am ok with Zimmerman looking bad if he made stupid decisions and he is proven guilty in a court of law. I expect responsibility and nothing less from someone who carries into public.

Like I said in the closing of my other statement. If you want to pursue a criminal...get a badge and do it the right way.
 
stonewall50 said:
What? Perhaps I am missing the sarcasm notification here? I am ok with Zimmerman looking bad if he made stupid decisions and he is proven guilty in a court of law. I expect responsibility and nothing less from someone who carries into public.

Like I said in the closing of my other statement. If you want to pursue a criminal...get a badge and do it the right way.
Click to expand...

You might have missed the little **** show a few pages back where no verb used to describe Z's actions were of acceptable quality for some members here. We never found a term they found agreeable; the closest might have been "watching", lol.
 
In places such as North Dakota where there is a similar law, I can understand that. The ONE case I could find where that law came into play, the other man had a gun, they were fighting over property lines, and the man that killed the other went into a very lengthy trial before being acquitted.

In Florida, this law has no place. It is pure common sense. The fact that this gets debated is insane to me. Just totally insane. Anything else you people debate about I can see both sides, see where you are coming from. This, I just can't fathom how a normal human being thinks that you should be able to walk around in a school with a gun strapped to your side, and if one kid looks scary to you, you can shoot him in the face.

Even if the kid broke your nose, legs, etc with a bat what kind of man are you to puss out and use a gun? To me there is no politics to this issue, it is simply what everyone is feeling, and I feel it is a load of ****.
 
JohnWOlin said:
In.

In Florida, this law has no place. It is pure common sense. The fact that this gets debated is insane to me. Just totally insane. Anything else you people debate about I can see both sides, see where you are coming from. This, I just can't fathom how a normal human being thinks that you should be able to walk around in a school with a gun strapped to your side, and if one kid looks scary to you, you can shoot him in the face.
Click to expand...

I want to carry a gun on campus. That doesn't mean I wana shoot some kid in the face for looking at me funny. That is kind of a ridiculous statement that is ignorant of the facts man. Concealed Carry holders have demonstrated they are the most responsible citizens in the State of Florida. We have these statistics going back to 1987. Carrying on campus is for people 21 and up. Not kids. NOT kids. For ADULTS...21 and UP. Unless you consider people 21-25 kids...im which case you coddle them and make them children my treating them as such...but I do not. I want to carry for the fact that the area OFF campus that I have to go through is sketchy. I want to carry in case of a nut bag walks into my class. I want to carry...because I am a responsible citizen that the government is afraid of because I am armed and NOT a criminal...and I am educated.

Even if the kid broke your nose, legs, etc with a bat what kind of man are you to puss out and use a gun?
Click to expand...

The kind who knows you can be killed by a baseball bat. Where exactly did you grow up that people didn't stab, stick, bludgeon, and kill each other with whatever they had? This is NOTHING to do with feeling btw. This is experienced martial arts TELLING you that in the right hands a STICK can kill as easy as a blade or a gun.
 
stonewall50 said:
I want to carry a gun on campus. That doesn't mean I wana shoot some kid in the face for looking at me funny. That is kind of a ridiculous statement that is ignorant of the facts man. Concealed Carry holders have demonstrated they are the most responsible citizens in the State of Florida. We have these statistics going back to 1987. Carrying on campus is for people 21 and up. Not kids. NOT kids. For ADULTS...21 and UP. Unless you consider people 21-25 kids...im which case you coddle them and make them children my treating them as such...but I do not. I want to carry for the fact that the area OFF campus that I have to go through is sketchy. I want to carry in case of a nut bag walks into my class. I want to carry...because I am a responsible citizen that the government is afraid of because I am armed and NOT a criminal...and I am educated.



The kind who knows you can be killed by a baseball bat. Where exactly did you grow up that people didn't stab, stick, bludgeon, and kill each other with whatever they had? This is NOTHING to do with feeling btw. This is experienced martial arts TELLING you that in the right hands a STICK can kill as easy as a blade or a gun.
Click to expand...

So let me just see if I get you right, a 14 year old kid comes up to you while your at a school with a concealed weapon because I dunno...your awesome? The kid has a bat and instead of I dunno grabbing a chair or something and pushing him away or rushing him, you shoot him in the face because this kid -could- be a black belt.

Well sir I raise you that you -could- be insane if that is the kind of stuff running through your head.
 
stonewall50 said:
Do you think that was the case with this gentlman? I certainly must question his decision making process as stringently as I can. I am a concealed holder and I do NOT want the actions of one idiot to come to define the rest of us. If I were involved in a shooting I would be ok with having the proctoscope. It would take a lot to get me to pull. I certainly wouldn't be following a young male of African descent (because I wouldn't know his age and I am not a racist) down the street because he looked suspicious. Would you? The Stand Your Ground Law no longer applies in this situation if he pursued Treyvon (and he said he did).

I am actually listening to the audio as I write this. The dispatcher asks him if he is following him. He says yes. The Dispatcher says we don't need you to do that. At that point...Zimmerman is no longer defending himself. Treyvon clearly knew he was being watched. He "walked towards Zimmerman" with his "hands in his waistband." That is a universal threat sign. Given that Zimmerman didn't pull I must question why not? Distance? Was it obvious that Treyvon didn't have a gun? How many people who carry on routine would ignore that? I see that as a threat indicator and alarms go off in my head. But once Treyvon runs (and Zimmmerman states this on the audio)...and the dispatcher tells him not to pursue...why then did he pursue? Understand I am not trying to delve into the legality of the situation around the shooting itself. I am questioning the decision making process of Zimmerman as far as the 911 call of Zimmerman's goes.

Strictly putting myself into the shoes of Zimmerman...I could NOT reasonably pursue a young male who appeared suspicous or even ran away. That violates SEVERAL general rules of safety and more important...ignores the purpose behind stand your ground laws. If you want to go chasing criminals...get a badge and do it right.
Click to expand...

You don't even understand how the Castle law and the stand your ground laws work, let alone when they no longer apply.

Here let me refresh your memory since you forgot...

As a Resident of the State of Florida for my ENTIRE life, a Gun Owner, A Concealed Weapon Permit Owner, and as a Citizen of the United States I 100% agree with the Florida law.

I also live in Florida. I am a certified in the state of Florida as a Security officer and I have my CCW.

The Castle law removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked or someone enters your home, car, place of work or business criminally. Like breaking in through a window. The Stand Your Ground law covers everything else.The stand your ground law just like the castle law does not specify any need to retreat at all from a place you can legally be, period.

You can see the actual laws here:

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

The entire trayvon thing going on...was CLEARLY a violation of Florida law. There is a duty to retreat when that is an option, and standing your ground is only allowed when you cannot retreat (as in into your vehicle, your home). What happened to Trayvon was a disgrace because the man pursued Trayvon. Not to mention Zimmerman should not be allowed to have a gun because of his criminal record.

Anyway. The Florida law is GREAT.

If Zimmerman was indeed attacked while returning to his car, he is not guilty at all. He had just as much right to be there as Treyvon, and if Treyvon attacked him was under no obligation to retreat under the law. It is still not illegal to follow someone on the sidewalk as far as the law goes. So even if Zimmer was following Treyvon, he should not have been attacked.

As for his criminal record. Only 3 things can stop you from owning a gun in Florida. Being forcibly committed into a mental institution. Being convicted of a felony or crime of domestic violence even if a misdemeanor.

PS Zimmer does not appear to have anything on his record that would disqualify him from owning a firearm.

Have time to respond now?

Are going to sit here and tell me it no longer applies? Go read the law and answer my fist post. I mite at that point take you seriously. You obviously for all your bragging don't know anything about the law, situation or how it applies.

Here is the link to my post to you: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-11.html#post1060365123
 
Last edited:
stonewall50 said:
Rape is among the most violent and detestable acts that the distusting animal known as human has EVER conceived. It not only involves the violation of someone's body, but the mental violation of them. It takes rape victims somtimes YEARS to recover...and some NEVER do. I have friends who have been raped. I know women who STILL suffer from the effects of rape, and some who do NOT realize that they still do. It is as mentally violating as any brutal beating. It violates a sense of security, self confidence, and so much more. If you know someone who has been raped...then you might understand this. If not then I understand your lack of understanding.

Even Age of Consent rape victims can still suffer from awful PTSD. Now if the partner is "willing" and they are perhaps 16 or 17 that is one thing, but CHILDREN don't understand sex. Rape is the 2nd most detestable crime I can imagine. Murder being the first.
Click to expand...

As I have already apologized for my statements and retracted my statements on the subject, I will do so again. I'm sorry I said rape is not a violent crime.
 
TurtleDude said:
Jryan probably hasn't been around long enough to have his car broken into, his house burglarized (or as in my case) have two mopes jump him in an alley and punch him in the face (which is why I shot one of them and stuck my Smith and Wesson in the mouth of another and said you are dead MF and drop the hammer on the gun (its how the safety works) causing the guy to soil his shorts
Click to expand...

Wow, you just pointed out why I would be a credible person to test on the subject BECAUSE I AM NOT EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED....

While I don't think your actions are necessarily right, I don't think you should be charged with anything in your situation. They aren't right because you shouldn't of had to pull your gun out, but they you shouldn't be charged because you weren't the instigator.
 
lizzie said:
A person can blame society for his own dysfuntions all he wants. He can try to rationalize and reason away why he's a POS, but until he decides he is the one who can control his impulses, and he is the one who is responsible for his ****-ups, he will never amount to anything more than a victim in his own mind, and he will remain powerless to change for the better.
Click to expand...

This post is why our country is heading to the dark ages. This is such a primitive thought. Reacting with violence is what the bible teaches (and I mean the old testament). I hope you enjoyed the dark ages.
 
Jryan said:
Wow, you just pointed out why I would be a credible person to test on the subject BECAUSE I AM NOT EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED....

While I don't think your actions are necessarily right, I don't think you should be charged with anything in your situation. They aren't right because you shouldn't of had to pull your gun out, but they you shouldn't be charged because you weren't the instigator.
Click to expand...

What a bizarre concept you suggest... that the most qualified person is the person with zero experience. I doubt one person agrees with that concept.

So you think the right thing for him to do is to let them beat him to death with a hammer. Actually, he should have shot them both. That way neither would be capable of harming someone in the future.
 
stonewall50 said:
What? Perhaps I am missing the sarcasm notification here? I am ok with Zimmerman looking bad if he made stupid decisions and he is proven guilty in a court of law. I expect responsibility and nothing less from someone who carries into public.

Like I said in the closing of my other statement. If you want to pursue a criminal...get a badge and do it the right way.
Click to expand...

Where does the concept that we are all sheep and only the shepard-cops keep the wolves away come from; we expected to just act like sheep?
When it comes to looking out for our fellow humans, we all should see ourselves as cops.
But I do understand that being anything but sheep running away and hiding looking out only for yourself now is essentially required by law and doing otherwise is a criminal offense. Apathy towards harm to others is not only acceptable, it is required.
 
JohnWOlin said:
In places such as North Dakota where there is a similar law, I can understand that. The ONE case I could find where that law came into play, the other man had a gun, they were fighting over property lines, and the man that killed the other went into a very lengthy trial before being acquitted.

In Florida, this law has no place. It is pure common sense. The fact that this gets debated is insane to me. Just totally insane. Anything else you people debate about I can see both sides, see where you are coming from. This, I just can't fathom how a normal human being thinks that you should be able to walk around in a school with a gun strapped to your side, and if one kid looks scary to you, you can shoot him in the face.

Even if the kid broke your nose, legs, etc with a bat what kind of man are you to puss out and use a gun? To me there is no politics to this issue, it is simply what everyone is feeling, and I feel it is a load of ****.
Click to expand...

Some white sheltered mamma's boys/men are who come up with naive philosophies by which they claim other people should allow themselves to be beaten to death.

The reason is because they are totally apathetic towards anyone but him self and have a purely selfish perspective of life. The best thing to understand about such people is never have one for a friend. They have a philosophy only for themselves, would never back you up on anything, appreciate nothing anyone does for them, and would tend to motor-mouth zippy pinhead drivel at you as if they were a guru - when they know nothing but foolishness. They are takers only and given nothing. Cowards hiding behind the courage of other people, people they condemn.

People have freedom because of people not like them. There is any safety at all because of people exactly opposite like them. Fortunately, not all people are. Otherwise we'd all be slaves and peasants and the only justice system would still be the torture chambers and gallows of tryannts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom