Is the court's interpretation of the Florida Stand Your Ground Law going too far?

[2DREZQ]

If Zimmerman had broken off following Martin (We will find out in court, I guess) and was then attacked as he "retreated", then his use of deadly force was justified. If he pursued, then he is in trouble.

However:

I must, at this point, put my 2 cents in because I have been in a similar situation, and can tell you a little of the state of mind and reactions of both men.

When someone who is not engaged in nefarious activity is just walking around, he is virtually always in 'condition white'. Essentially oblivious to the actions and courses of those around him. You can follow an innocent person around the mall all day long, and they will never know you are there. When a person is engaged in activity for which he might 'feel guilty', he is very aware of his surroundings. If you follow a person who is up to no good and they notice you (they will, unless you are damn careful) and they note that you are aware of their awareness, they will invariably become belligerent, confront you, demand to know what you are doing, and usually loudly proclaim that they were not doing whatever it is that they were indeed doing. I've seen it, I've had it happen to me. The only reason in my case that it went no further is that I was very calm, had lots of witnesses, it was broad daylight and there were security cameras everywhere. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that I "retreated" I was followed and verbally threatened repeatedly, even to the point that when I asked the 911 operator if she could hear his threats, she responded that she could and that units were on the way. I was armed, but never let the other party know that. All this for a misdemeanor that I had no intention of reporting (not enough proof) and I never looked at or spoke to the subject until he came after me. He just noticed that I was noticing him and demanded that I call the police to protect me from him.

Now, something about the mindset of those of us who carry all the time, everywhere we legally can. If you call me macho, or think I am looking for trouble, you can go screw a donut, as your little mind is already made up. I and everyone I know who carries are the antithesis of trouble-hunters. We avoid places and situations that increase the odds of trouble. We do not confront, ever. The very fact that we are armed and capable of using deadly force makes us aware of our surroundings and enforces a sense of calm and rationality when we do get caught by surprise. I have been there more than once, and can address this point with authority. If I confront, and the situation spins out of control and I use the gun, I may well be screwed. There are situations where it would be justified, but they are less common than the other type. Carrying a deadly weapon on your person isn't a sign of mental illness or sexual inadequacy or any of those other things, except in a tiny minority of people (most of whom would carry something without the permit anyway). It's a sign that we will not be a passive victim of predation. We will engage in violence against any person who would use violence against us. If you don't feel that way, fine. Darwin had something to say about that sort of creature. I represent the kind of individual you DO want armed. I am better and faster than most of the "professionals" at arms, and I know when and when not to act. I have thought through 1000's of "what-if's" and am aware of my surroundings when I go about with a gun. YOU are safer with my brethren and I out there, even if you don't want to acknowledge it.

[Maxor]

I'm mixed about this issue. I think in some cases the Stand your ground, and castle laws have been taken a bit to far, but I also saw some really dumb things happen due to the laws before then as well. As for the Martin/Zimmerman incident I really don't care much as it seems like both parties were partially in the wrong and that one side will have his life and finances ruined due to notoriety, and the other is dead so no one wins.

I pretty much feel that a person who is not looking for conflict should be allowed to use what ever means at their disposal, at home or in public, to defend themselves when reasonably threatened without fear of prosecution or liability as long as no bystanders are harmed.


2DREZQ as for your condition white statement, I claim bullshit, I am almost never "engaged in nefarious activity" and am rarely "Essentially oblivious to the actions and courses of those around him" I will however "invariably become belligerent, confront you, demand to know what you are doing," If I am being followed by someone I don't know. Especially if you appear to be a possible threat to me, which someone following and conducting surveillance on me obviously is.

[Monash]

You can follow an innocent person around the mall all day long, and they will never know you are there. When a person is engaged in activity for which he might 'feel guilty', he is very aware of his surroundings. If you follow a person who is up to no good and they notice you (they will, unless you are damn careful) and they note that you are aware of their awareness, they will invariably become belligerent, confront you, demand to know what you are doing, and usually loudly proclaim that they were not doing whatever it is that they were indeed doing. I've seen it, I've had it happen to me. The only reason in my case that it went no further is that I was very calm, had lots of witnesses, it was broad daylight and there were security cameras everywhere. Nevertheless, and despite the fact that I "retreated" I was followed and verbally threatened repeatedly, even to the point that when I asked the 911 operator if she could hear his threats, she responded that she could and that units were on the way. I was armed, but never let the other party know that. All this for a misdemeanor that I had no intention of reporting (not enough proof) and I never looked at or spoke to the subject until he came after me. He just noticed that I was noticing him and demanded that I call the police to protect me from him.

Err... do you do this a lot??? Cause (just as a "thought experiment" mind you) it would be interesting to see if what would happen if there were two of you and one started following the other about.

As for the rest of your post I am not in a position to judge the accuracy of your assessment of your own abilities, perhaps you when you say "I represent the kind of individual you DO want armed. I am better and faster than most of the "professionals" at arms, and I know when and when not to act. I have thought through 1000's of "what-if's" and am aware of my surroundings when I go about with a gun. YOU are safer with my brethren and I out there, even if you don't want to acknowledge it." you are correct, perhaps not. The big flaw in your argument from a "safety aspect" is that it only works if the other similarly armed individuals you meet are equally skilled when it comes to assessing tactical situations under stress, if they are equally level headed and if they do not possess an over inflated sence of their own abilities. A lot of "if's" there.

The issue as I see it is that in a community where everyone is free to carry firearms and "protected" by a stand your ground law you end up having to rely on the skills, level headedness and "reasonable" behaviour of everyone else. If everyone was as good as you claim to be (and they are not) no problem. It’s not the well trained "expert" who's going to get you or a bystander killed it’s the idiots with guns who think they know what they're doing and don't. Same thing with defensive driving, it’s not about pushing the vehicle you’re in to the limits permitted by your skill levels, it’s about making allowances for all the other bad drivers on the road with you. The best racing driver in the world can still be killed by the some hot headed drunken idiot behind the wheel.

For myself I am perfectly happy living in a community where the average citizen is not permitted to wear firearms in public and for that matter doesn't feel the need to. The US has adopted a different approach to personal firearms of course but I can't help thinking about all those people wondering around over there with an overinflated sense of their own abilities and a loaded gun.

Cheers

[2DREZQ]

2DREZQ as for your condition white statement, I claim bullshit, I am almost never "engaged in nefarious activity" and am rarely "Essentially oblivious to the actions and courses of those around him"

Then you are paying more attention to your surroundings than 90+% of the public. The fact that YOU are smart enough to be aware of your surroundings doesn't mean that everybody else is.

I will however "invariably become belligerent, confront you, demand to know what you are doing," If I am being followed by someone I don't know. Especially if you appear to be a possible threat to me, which someone following and conducting surveillance on me obviously is.

Perhaps, but again, most people wouldn't notice unless they have a reason to. Some confront, most avoid. Do you then immediately announce that you are not engaged in some specific illegal activity? That's the bell-ringer.

No, I haven't engaged in following people in the mall to see if they noticed since I had this discussion with a professor in college back in the late 70's. I was right then, and I doubt humans busily texting, tweeting, and "I=podding" have become MORE observant of the world around them since then.

I am well-trained. I went to a good school, and I practice regularly. I also watch the world around me for trouble and go the other direction when I don't like the look of anything.

[Maxor]

Then you are paying more attention to your surroundings than 90+% of the public. The fact that YOU are smart enough to be aware of your surroundings doesn't mean that everybody else is.



Perhaps, but again, most people wouldn't notice unless they have a reason to. Some confront, most avoid. Do you then immediately announce that you are not engaged in some specific illegal activity? That's the bell-ringer.

No, I haven't engaged in following people in the mall to see if they noticed since I had this discussion with a professor in college back in the late 70's. I was right then, and I doubt humans busily texting, tweeting, and "I=podding" have become MORE observant of the world around them since then.

I am well-trained. I went to a good school, and I practice regularly. I also watch the world around me for trouble and go the other direction when I don't like the look of anything.

If you are following people in a fairly affluent neighborhood around a commercial shopping center in broad daylight certainly. On the 90% thing. At night or in less affluent areas you are very wrong. Most US cities if you are following someone in the dark or dusk in an impoverished area you will be noticed, unless you are very good. Most residential areas you will be noticed as well. The reaction may not be confrontation, but you will be noticed. As for the claiming not doing a specific activity no, I confront with a why on earth are you following me, don' you know that is a good way to wind up in a bad position. Then again I also tend to make very sure someone is following me before confronting them. I also tend to like to do that sort of confrontation in a very public place with witnesses. It also doesn't happen often perhaps 5 times in 10 years. Maybe 7 if I count a couple when I was younger and looked more like a possible problem to people very low on the security ladder. (From 18 to 24 or so I got followed/confronted a lot due to age hair and style of dress I'm not sure of the exact dates of a few of those confrontations but for the number above I'm going to only count a couple of the 10 that happened.)