Zimmerman 2.0?

[jgalt]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Irrelevant, legally speaking, if he initiated the physical confrontation...

[Heffay]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Irrelevant, legally speaking, if he initiated the physical confrontation...

Physical confrontation? So you don't have the right to defend yourself until you start getting beat? Fear of bodily harm no longer applies?


Try to maintain some logical consistency, please.

[jgalt]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Irrelevant, legally speaking, if he initiated the physical confrontation...

Physical confrontation? So you don't have the right to defend yourself until you start getting beat? Fear of bodily harm no longer applies?


Try to maintain some logical consistency, please.

I know you aren't too dumb to understand the argument, so I've gotta assume at this point that you are just having a laugh. Nicely done...

[MasonK]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Not in the legal sense as he was engaged in bashing Mr. Zimmerman's head into the ground and delivering blows to the head when it happened. I'm not certain why this not-so-irrelevant factoid seems to escape your critique of the event.

And before you try to conjure up the medical testimony that the wounds were superficial and non life-threatening, consider the potential implications of concussions, coup/contra coup, or other brain swelling which can be very life-threatening and are often not accompanied by bleeding from the scalp.

[jshuberg]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Physical confrontation? So you don't have the right to defend yourself until you start getting beat? Fear of bodily harm no longer applies?

Take a carry class and pay attention. You'll learn the answers to all your questions, and discover all the things you're currently wrong about.

[Heffay]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Take a carry class and pay attention. You'll learn the answers to all your questions, and discover all the things you're currently wrong about.

My carry class focused on getting out of these kinds of situations. I'll be sure to let my instructor know that he was wrong, and that the current MGT standard is to shoot your way out of a situation you get yourself into.

[jshuberg]

MN 624.714 states one of the requirements to obtain a carry permit is:

instruction in the fundamental legal aspects of pistol possession, carry, and use, including self-defense and the restrictions on the use of deadly force.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=624.714

You stated who your instructor was several months ago when I questioned you about it. I am absolutely confident that this material was covered in your class, in accordance with MN law. The fact that you don't poses any of this knowledge is not the fault of your instructor, it's your fault. The fact that you hold fast to your erroneous opinions in the face of conflicting statute and case law from the MN Supreme Court is evidence that you simply believe whatever you want to believe. I don't think you're trolling here, I believe that you've made up what you think the laws for use of force and self defense should be, and have genuinely deluded yourself into believing them to be true.

[grousemaster]

So, would Travyon been in fear of great bodily harm or death when Zimmerman held his gun up to his chest?

Take a carry class and pay attention. You'll learn the answers to all your questions, and discover all the things you're currently wrong about.

My carry class focused on getting out of these kinds of situations. I'll be sure to let my instructor know that he was wrong, and that the current MGT standard is to shoot your way out of a situation you get yourself into.

I'm not following you. Say If I'm walking out to my car from a sporting event, shopping, etc., and observe someone looking in car windows, in a lot that has had a history of break ins. Would I be "getting myself into it" If I verbally confronted the man or followed him while I called the cops, and he turned and attacked me? Carrying a gun doesn't mean you have to be a total pacifist.

[Heffay]

[quote="grousemaster"]

Yup. Call the cops, move on. If you have a gun, don't put yourself into a situation where you need it to get out of the situation you put yourself into.

Of course, in the wild wild west that you want to live in, he who draws first, gets out of jail free!

[tman]

Yup. Call the cops, move on. If you have a gun, don't put yourself into a situation where you need it to get out of the situation you put yourself into.

The fact that you don't approve does not make it wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using that app which shall not be named.

[copyguyadam]

The four critical points were mentioned earlier, but not listed. Here's what I have on a card in my gunsafe:
1. Unwilling participant
2. Fear of death or great bodily harm
3. No lesser force will do
4. No escape possible

I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror if I chased someone and ended up needing to shoot someone who took a dump on my property... heck, my dog craps on my lawn every day. If someone comes at me with a chain and a lock, that's another story. What is clear is that this guy was a willing participant when he chased after the poopetrator/bum and may have to face a jury. He defended himself, but didn't need to be in that situation. Also, what could have been a good "you wouldn't believe what happened to me" story, ended up getting him arrested.

Is it Zimmerman 2.0? Probably not since we don't know skin colors and the bum may survive.

[damian_mb]

Lets see, I'll come over, sleep in your yard, take a crap and then leave while you demand I clean up after myself. Then, when you follow me away from your yard (mad because I left a pile in your yard) I'll pull out a length of chain with a lock on the end and try to beat you with it! You, being you, will stand there and thank me for trespassing on your property, deface your property, and then try to bash in your skull for confronting me.

Sounds like I am within my rights to do whatever I choose, to whomever I choose to do it too, and you just have to take your beating and enjoy it!

Works for Me! How about the rest of you?

I agree. I guess a chained pad lock can't kill a person.

[Heffay]

Lets see, I'll come over, sleep in your yard, take a crap and then leave while you demand I clean up after myself. Then, when you follow me away from your yard (mad because I left a pile in your yard) I'll pull out a length of chain with a lock on the end and try to beat you with it! You, being you, will stand there and thank me for trespassing on your property, deface your property, and then try to bash in your skull for confronting me.

Sounds like I am within my rights to do whatever I choose, to whomever I choose to do it too, and you just have to take your beating and enjoy it!

Works for Me! How about the rest of you?

I agree. I guess a chained pad lock can't kill a person.

Good thing we have all these vigilantes around to make sure someone sleeping in your yard is brought to justice!

[damian_mb]

Good thing we have all these vigilantes around to make sure someone sleeping in your yard is brought to justice!

I wasn't talking about that. If that were me I wouldn't even pursue him. My point being if deadly force was used on me I would use mine as well. But it wouldn't even get to that point because I've leave him be. Next time I'll scoop his feces and slap it on him. I was refering to the chained pad lock, as a deadly weapon its self.

Stupid is stupid and obviously the guy was stupid enough to shoot someone over feces in his yard. Just clean it up and make sure to catch him before he wakes up if he does it again. Never said I agreed with his dumb decision.

Yup. Call the cops, move on. If you have a gun, don't put yourself into a situation where you need it to get out of the situation you put yourself into.

Of course, in the wild wild west that you want to live in, he who draws first, gets out of jail free!

Couldn't of said it better myself. 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.

[Deputyhiro]

Good thing we have all these vigilantes around to make sure someone sleeping in your yard is brought to justice!

I wasn't talking about that. If that were me I wouldn't even pursue him. My point being if deadly force was used on me I would use mine as well. But it wouldn't even get to that point because I've leave him be. Next time I'll scoop his feces and slap it on him. I was refering to the chained pad lock, as a deadly weapon its self.

Stupid is stupid and obviously the guy was stupid enough to shoot someone over feces in his yard. Just clean it up and make sure to catch him before he wakes up if he does it again. Never said I agreed with his dumb decision.

Yup. Call the cops, move on. If you have a gun, don't put yourself into a situation where you need it to get out of the situation you put yourself into.

Of course, in the wild wild west that you want to live in, he who draws first, gets out of jail free!

Couldn't of said it better myself. 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.

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?