Reply With Quote
Doesn't have to be life threatening.
Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.
How would someone following another be considered life threatening?
Doesn't have to be life threatening.
Go read the law. Quit arguing from ignorance.
LOL, "Stay down, buddy."
Where in here would shooting for being followed be justifiable?
le XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE View Entire Chapter
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or leholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
lol wrong section
Close though.
Mind posting it? These aren't the friendliest phone compatible sites I'm looking at.
You were one off.
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 cir stances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/.../0776.012.html
It's not, King. Dumper is never wrong. Ever.
You recommended he shoot him. He would need to reasonably believe he was preventing imminent death or great bodily harm. I fail to see how an unarmed (Trayvon doesn't know Zimmerman is armed since it is concealed) man following him causes this threat.
dumper stretching HARD. So someone following you makes you feel there's imminent bodily harm or death? A little different than actually being engaged in a face pummeling. Here's an idea for TrayTray that would've been asked, "considering you had plenty of time before the second confrontation, why didn't you call the police if you felt threatened?
because everyone is racist!!!! duh
Zimmerman needs to turn off his police scanner and sit his fat ass down somewhere.
I don't recommend anyone shoot anyone but it certainly could be argued in court. All one needs is a good lawyer.
It's not a strech. It's Florida.
So then what did you mean by this?
What part did you not understand?
Are you making the argument that he could have shot him, argued self defense, and got off or are you arguing he could have shot him, argued self defense and gone to jail? Be clear.
yo, i almost spit out my water laughing at this. if i was in an accident and that pedo came to assist, i'd turn him away and just wait for the professionals. outta here, doggie. make yaself useful and go get someone else to unbuckle me. i don't want that colored, pasty, portly, pedo, pervert, prick anywhere near me.
The former, though it would have been easier had he been a white woman.
& be eternally grateful he can still accomplish your dictate, Creep.
I implore you to remain on a keyboard and not interfere with the work of heroic citizens such as Zimmerman. It is better to contain prejudice and racial profiling (exhibited by you) to the Internet.
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 cir stances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
Where in this law would it be permissable to shoot and kill someone strictly for following you? The law would tell Trayvon to retreat.
okay and i implore you to chill on this alias account. i sincerely hope mrsmaalox, judyntx, cuckingfunt,etc. is the person behind the katherine robinson alias. you're either a fatherless male or under the age of 12. no way does a grown man raised with a father create and dedicate 400+ posts under a female account unless he got a lil sugar in his tank. you're at 404 posts right now, doggie. don't make it to 405, just let a woman take over the account or dead it altogether. just giving you some trill advice.
lol @ chumpdumper
You're getting your pushed in man, just stop.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
