If ever a law was being misused in this country it has to be "stand your ground". Three cases in Florida are prime examples of it's being used where many alternatives were available. In one the killer, a wannabe cop, approached and engaged a boy who had broken no laws and eventually killed him. In that case the courts sided with the shooter though clearly he was in the wrong. In the next instead of telling someone in another car to turn down his radio and when talked back to fires 10 rounds into the car killing a young man. He did get convicted but received a lighter sentence than probably was appropriate. Then there was the retired cop in the movie theater who told someone to turn off his phone and when the argument got heated and the victim threw popcorn on the shooter, he shot and killed him. All were the aggressor and all called their actions "self defense". I believe the law was originally intended to allow one to defend himself when no other option was available. Now, here's a new one to think about.

*not_secure_link*www.myfoxphoenix.com/video?clipId=9851872&autoStart=true

 

That law should be more for your home where someone comes on your property after you or family.

 

Don't know about the first two but the last one I think they should not go to court.
The man asked another to turn off his phone so they could watch the movie. He then asked others to tell the man to turn off his phone. The larger younger man with the phone approached the older man, took his popcorn, and threw it in his face.
I would have done the same thing if I was the older man.

 

So, let me be sure about this. If you are brutally attacked by a popcorn wielding adversary your only available means to respond is to shoot and kill the "attacker"? Asinine....

 

Well thank you for the film clip, but it didn't show much or report much, I agree the man who pulled the trigger, is probably in the wrong. TBS perhaps the man who was shot and killed was just as wrong as the gun man.
I do know that if one is wearing a gun or other deadly weapon , you have a responsibility to not use it anytime someone else threatens you, The wearing of a gun does not absolve one of responsibility for shooting someone and in fact should actually reduce the chances of you shooting someone, just because they act in a threatening manner.
But some people who in their ignorance and desires think that because I am wearing a gun, "You had better watch out, 'cause I'm wearing a gun and I can shoot and kill you" that is not the point of being armed, the point of carrying concealed or not is to PROTECT yourself and your family, loved ones etc. Not to go strutting around acting like you're GOD's gift to the world, just because you carry a gun.
Which I feel the shooter in this case, who should stand trial for his actions, acted as though he was as stated above.

 

In the case of the video murder the shooters reason for shooting and killing the victim was in his own words because "I was losing the fight", exactly why Zimmerman killed Martin in Florida. What ever happened to going home with a bloody nose, black eye and memories of someone kicking your ass?? As a young man I was on both sides of that scenario.

 

If I am attacked by anyone with anything my response would be to protect myself in any way I could. Especially if the person attacking is younger and larger and more aggressive. Since I always carry a gun, yes that means I would shoot and hope to kill the attacker.
In my state that is why the law was enacted.

 

What state is that? I want to read your law.

 

That was years ago. Back in those days people did that.
Now days, many times, you do not have that option.

 

Mississippi

 

Thanks.

 

One thing.
I would use deadly force to protect myself no matter what the law said.

 

Also Rick, this is not a case wherein the person who is the shooter was getting his head pounded into the concrete sidewalk and truly in fear of loosing his life and defended himself.
Travon Martin was not at 17 the little cutie that the newsmedia printed and showed us, Nossir, TM was a High School football player, weighing in at maybe 230 lbs, adn I see it out-wheighed, Simmerman by at least 60 lbs. He had also been placed on suspension for having house breaking tools in his locker at school. One more thing there had been a number of home breakins around this time, and personally I feel that this cute little black kid was involved in more than one of them. George Z. was doing his job, which was keeping an eye ot for suspicious looking individuals. such as seeing someone peeking in windows where George had been told they were on vacation. He stopped his driving around and called the cops who in their infinite wisdom the dispatcher said, "OK we acknowledge your call, we'll come out in a bit."
Then George probably say TM looking in another window in the same house and decide to see if he could defuse a situation from becoming another break-in, When he said something to TM, TM turned on him and attacked putting Mr. Z in fear for his life.
And that's how I see THAT situation.

 

I just read up on the Mississippi law. It is the old castle law. It says if you are in your own home, car, or business and it is "forcefully" entered by someone and you have no other option you may use deadly force but it also requires evidence of the need to use such force. Castle laws exist in almost if not all states. It is a very old set of laws.

*not_secure_link*wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_there_a_self_defense_law_in_Mississippi?#slide=1

 

The two other situations you are speaking of, are egregious uses of deadly force, in situations that never should have happened that way, Remember I said, that those that wear a gun also have a responsibility to NOT use the gun if another means of settling the argument is available. In other wordS, WALK AWAY, DUMMY.

 

Zimmerman weighed 200 and Martin 140. *not_secure_link*vveasey.hubpages.com/hub/Why-Was-Trayvon-Martin-Shot-And-Killed-By-George-Zimmerman

If you don't like this source go anywhere you will find the data is correct.

 

it was a man whos "job" is to observe and report, not go up to a kid, harrass him, not able to show a badge and kill him. if a man ever comes to me in the dark and questions me and hes not the law id get violent. poor treyvon.

 

Correct. Zimmerman was a member of the neighborhood watch. They are trained to not act as police officers but rather to notify police and "observe and report" the "suspicious" activity. In this case there was only one thing that made him suspicious, he was black. Also, as you say, he approached, questioned, and eventually got into a fight and when the kid was holding his own with him, shot him. Miscarriage of justice of the first order.

 

Sure glad the people and the law of Ms. disagrees with you.
Around here the shooter like the one in the movie theatre would not have been charged.

 

The people maybe but not the law.