Here's more on the story with a picture of the "innocent boy".
Looks more like a trouble making 'gangsta thug' to me.
Link Removed
And then you're Zimmerman. And how do you know he has a criminal record before you shoot him? Death is an inappropriate penalty for the crime of trespass. And since he wasn't caught burglarizing the home his past history of burglary is inadmissible.2am, jumped the fence into my yard, and have a criminal history? You better not make a move...only takes a second before you are the victim... Maybe young thugs will start thinking instead of acting up...put them on notice...
And then you're Zimmerman. And how do you know he has a criminal record before you shoot him? Death is an inappropriate penalty for the crime of trespass. And since he wasn't caught burglarizing the home his past history of burglary is inadmissible.
.
People... get a damn alarm system. It's cheaper than a lawyer.
And then you're Zimmerman. And how do you know he has a criminal record before you shoot him? Death is an inappropriate penalty for the crime of trespass. And since he wasn't caught burglarizing the home his past history of burglary is inadmissible.
.
People... get a damn alarm system. It's cheaper than a lawyer.
And then you're a potential 'Victim'.
And how would you know that the trespasser 'does not' have a criminal record?
How would you know that the trespasser 'is not' armed with some sort of a weapon in the dark?
Self-Defense 'is' an appropriate response to the 'criminal activity' of trespass/burglary... especially at night!
And since the 'offender' does indeed have a history of trespassing/stealing from people in his past, his criminal history 'should indeed' be admissible!
People/Parent's...Get a damn clue on how to properly raise these wanna-be-gangsta children...
It's far less dramatic than burying them or incarcerating them imvho.
Unfortunately this highlights the ambiguous nature of self-defense situations and the downside of being inherently reactive. This is not like Zimmerman at all in that this does smell a bit preemptive in nature.
I somewhat agree with you...but I must ask this question;
Are not LEO's 'inherently reactive' & more than just a 'bit pre-emptive' in their nature"?
Why are law abiding civilians always held to much higher standard's and 'microscopic-scrutiny' whenever it comes to self-defense scenarios but LEO's are seemingly not held to these same standard's? Where's the 'fairness' in all of this?
LEOs receive training that would counter being 'reactionary'. But alas as humans are, when put in a perceived deadly encounter, you're gonna do whatever is necessary. Whether you or I would deem it reactionary or not.
Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
The evidence suggests that nearly all LEO's are reactionary!
LEOs receive training that would counter being 'reactionary'. But alas as humans are, when put in a perceived deadly encounter, you're gonna do whatever is necessary. Whether you or I would deem it reactionary or not.
Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
Well their elite 'training' does not seem to be working out very well.....
Case in point;
LAPD?s indefensible Dorner pursuit - Salon.com
Seems to me that these so-called 'elite cops' were being over 'reactionary' wouldn't you agree?
Oh...you're bringing up old news. You act like you know for a fact that its a chronic problem in modern day law enforcement. Which apparently you don't...as I suspected.
Sent from my NSA screened Smartphone
Oh?
So you need something a little more 'current' eh?
How about this one that occurred recently on May 28th 2013;
http://now.msn.com/jerry-waller-texas-man-shot-and-killed-by-police-who-blame-poor-lighting
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?