One question about the Martin shooting
5 Responses to “One question about the Martin shooting”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
March 28th, 2012 at 9:47 am
Mugger accosts me, when I’m alone and unarmed. I get the jump on them, and it turns out that I’m stronger/faster/a better fighter, so I’m winning the fight. But they are still armed and not incapacitated. By Joe’s logic the evidence of me winning a legal act of defense is all the evidence the mugger needs to lawfully shoot me.
I carry a gun specifically not to get into fistfights. If you have a gun, getting into fistfights is more dangerous for everyone concerned. Therefore what I want to know is, short of an unexpected sprint by Martin to contact distance, why was the guy with the gun ever close enough for it to turn into a fistfight?
Yeah, I know, I’m a horrible quisling who wants to incite a race war.
March 28th, 2012 at 10:16 am
Actually, this is something I’m trying to figure out how to word correctly since it could be easily misunderstood.
Forget morals, forget legality – it is instinctual for someone to defend their life. If you get the jump on someone and they realize they’re in for an asswhooping of biblical proportions, their instinct will be to defeat you any way possible, including your death.
Hence, I avoid all fights. At some point in a fight, it’s easy to see how a life is in danger, and at that point, all bets are off, morals and laws be damned.
March 28th, 2012 at 10:32 am
@junyo, In your example you postulate a “mugger” who you “got the jump on”. Until the “mugger” threatens you in a manner that “a reasonable person” would interpret as an immediate threat of serious bodily harm you have no legal basis to initiate force. Where is the evidence Zimmerman initiated force or was an immediate threat?
Whoever initiated force or expressed a serious threat of bodily harm bears the majority of the responsibility for the outcome.
March 28th, 2012 at 11:22 am
I like to mind my own business.
March 28th, 2012 at 11:29 am
I can easily see that both of these fellows thought the other was a threat, possibly with good reason. Remember, in a conflict, an armed man will kill an unarmed man with alarming regulartiy.
Both thought the other was up to no good. That is WHY it is a tragedy. Both may have been good and decent people, or even bad people who did not deserve the fate they have met.
Sometimes there is no one at fault, and people still die. Sometime there is friendly fire.
The only agenda should be to find the truth, but too many are looking for a narrative making the tragedy even larger.