Zimmerman 2.0?

[Heffay]

You would give him a good fight.... Suprise! He pulls out a knife, and comes at you. Do you use your gun now???? BOOM! Now you just used your gun to protect property, right?

He sees you reaching for your gun, so drops his knife and outdraws you. BOOM!

Good shoot, eh? Draw, partner!

[jshuberg]

My instructor said you cannot legally protect property ownership with a firearm, this includes a vehicle. If smoeone broke in, took your TV with his back towards you, legally you cannot shot the person, but I'd probably give him a good fight and make sure my TV stays.

If this is what your instructor taught you, he was wrong.

There are 2 scenarios when lethal force can be used:

1) Defense of self or other.
2) Defense of dwelling.

I don't have all the case law where I'm at, but the requirements for defense of dwelling are:

1) The prevention of a felony crime in a persons place of abode.
2) Be a reluctant participant to the crime.
3) No lesser force will do.

There is no duty to retreat from a persons place of abode, under either self defense or defense of dwelling. Also, if a person enters a dwelling without consent, and commits any crime while in the dwelling, and at any point someone else is also in the dwelling who is not an accomplice of the crime, the crime is escalated to a felony. In other words, if someone breaks into your house while you are home, and commits any crime - steals a stick of gum - it is a felony. It's MN's way of handling home invasions in the law.

If someone has their back to you and is walking out your door with a TV, and you never invited them into your home, and you have no other means of stopping them other than shooting them, you are legally allowed to shoot them to prevent the commission of the felony. However, it's a *really* bad idea to do this. The court costs will easily exceed your renters or home owners insurance to replace the item. You will have the psychological scars for having shot or killed someone, you will lose friends, possibly your job, your spouse, you may be in jail for quite awhile, and juries do not always rule correctly, or in accordance with the law.

I view defense of dwelling as an additional tool your lawyer can use if you shot someone in self defense in your home. It eliminates the defense from having to prove that you were reasonably in fear of great bodily harm or death, just that a crime was being committed by an intruder. Consider it a best practice only to use lethal force in defense of self or another, although it is technically legal to use lethal force in defense of dwelling to prevent a property crime from occurring.

Shooting someone for a property crime is such a bad idea that I suspect many instructors may teach their students that it's illegal, when in fact it is legal in a defense of dwelling situation.

[grousemaster]

Heffay doesn't care about case law or actual law, he's just trying to push his morals and beliefs on us. Moral Majority 2.1

[jshuberg]

He sounds almost like the anti-gun liberals that are always screaming "oh my god, there will be blood in the streets!!!", when in reality there never is. The only difference is that he likes guns, and likes other gun people as long as they behave within the limits of what he finds acceptable. As soon as someone strays, they're a "f'ing moron", a trigger happy cowboy, or they'll be blood in the streets. It's both predictable and pathetic.

Hey Heffay, the laws have been what they've been for quite a long time. There's no blood in the streets. People aren't shooting each other en' mass every time someone starts to lose a fight. I wonder how this could possibly be???

[Heffay]

He sounds almost like the anti-gun liberals that are always screaming "oh my god, there will be blood in the streets!!!", when in reality there never is. The only difference is that he likes guns, and likes other gun people as long as they behave within the limits of what he finds acceptable. As soon as someone strays, they're a "f'ing moron", a trigger happy cowboy, or they'll be blood in the streets. It's both predictable and pathetic.

Hey Heffay, the laws have been what they've been for quite a long time. There's no blood in the streets. People aren't shooting each other en' mass every time someone starts to lose a fight. I wonder how this could possibly be???

I don't ever recall making a "blood in the streets" argument. My position has always been and remains if you're carrying a gun, get the hell out of dodge. You are not there to be the judge, jury, and executioner every time someone poops on your lawn.

What this guy did was vigilante justice. There should be jail time for crap like that. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[jshuberg]

What this guy did was vigilante justice. There should be jail time for crap like that.

I realize that is what you think, but you are wrong. Fortunately for us, you're opinion means pretty much nothing. It is however highly annoying to hear you constantly and repeatedly make assertions of fact concerning the law, be shown that you are wrong, and have you continue to do it. At some point you need to learn to accept that what you believe is in fact wrong. That doesn't mean you have to agree with it, but there is a difference between disagreeing with something, and believing that your contrary viewpoint is actually correct. The first is having a difference of opinion. The second is just deluding yourself.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

With this I agree.

[Deputyhiro]

My position has always been and remains if you're carrying a gun, get the hell out of dodge.

Great. I carry a gun, so I should just stay home and hide in my basement.

So if one has a gun, just run away. From everything. No need to even have the gun. Right? Forget about pooping in the yard.

If I knew where you lived Heffay, I would poop in your yard.

[Heffay]

My position has always been and remains if you're carrying a gun, get the hell out of dodge.

Great. I carry a gun, so I should just stay home and hide in my basement.

So if one has a gun, just run away. From everything. No need to even have the gun. Right? Forget about pooping in the yard.

If I knew where you lived Heffay, I would poop in your yard.

You run away until you can no longer run away. THAT is when you need your gun.

Goalie said it best. Here are his rules for gunfighting:

1. Walk away
2. If you can't walk away, run away.
3. If you can't run away, you didn't walk away soon enough.
4. If you have to shoot, shoot till the threat stops, THEN run away.
5. You can afford to have a temper or carry a gun. Nobody on the planet can afford both.

There is nothing in there that says you have to lock yourself in your basement. This guy violated every single rule. So did Zimmerman, for that matter.

People seem to forget what self-DEFENSE means.

[Deputyhiro]

By the time George Zimmerman knew that there was a threat, he couldnt run away (supposedly). Going up to the kid to see what he was doing in the neighborhood violates no such rules.

[Heffay]

By the time George Zimmerman knew that there was a threat, he couldnt run away (supposedly). Going up to the kid to see what he was doing in the neighborhood violates no such rules.

Well, considering he had a gun and was RUNNING after Martin... yeah. Still a failure in the rules.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[jgalt]

By the time George Zimmerman knew that there was a threat, he couldnt run away (supposedly). Going up to the kid to see what he was doing in the neighborhood violates no such rules.

Well, considering he had a gun and was RUNNING after Martin... yeah. Still a failure in the rules.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Did Martin know, when Zimmerman was allegedly running after him, that Zimmerman had a gun? I.e. did he reasonably feel Zimmerman was an immediate threat of great bodily harm or death?

If yes, then he'd be justified in defending himself against that threat, including throwing punches & beating his head on the concrete until the threat was over.

There's no evidence to support that theory, but it is a valid one for the prosecutor to bring up. Who knows - maybe there will be a hung jury and he'll get another chance to do so, since he didn't this time around. Call him up & suggest it - maybe you can get a fee as a consultant?

[Deputyhiro]

By the time George Zimmerman knew that there was a threat, he couldnt run away (supposedly). Going up to the kid to see what he was doing in the neighborhood violates no such rules.

Well, considering he had a gun and was RUNNING after Martin... yeah. Still a failure in the rules.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

If houses were getting vandalized / broke into in the area, yes, I can see why he went running up to him. Did he go running up to him with the intent of killing him? Gun drawn? If Treyvon would have turned around and tried to talk to him, rather than be the aggressor, then this all should have turned out differently. I cant grasp your train of thought. Gun toting liberal?

[Heffay]

Well, he started off doing the right thing by calling the police. And when they said he should stop following Martim, what did he end up doing?

Unwilling participant my ass. He only became an unwilling participant when he started getting his fat ass beat.

[Heffay]

If houses were getting vandalized / broke into in the area, yes, I can see why he went running up to him.

Oh, and that comment is just priceless.

"Homes in the area are getting broken into, so I'm going to chase after this black guy walking down the street. He can't be here for any good reason, like visiting his dad who lives around the corner."

Profile much? Zimmerman was quite the little vigilante, wasn't he? Going to save his neighborhood, chasing down people who look like criminals with his trusty gat strapped to his side!

So in other words, the system works. He makes questionable decisions, and a jury of his peers gets to determine exactly what level of stupid prize he gets to claim: lawyer bills, or jail time.

[Erud]

Well, he started off doing the right thing by calling the police. And when they said he should stop following Martim, what did he end up doing?

Unwilling participant my ass. He only became an unwilling participant when he started getting his fat ass beat.

What's the deal with you and fat people?