In the history of American self-defense law, there's a large number of restrictions, but one stands out: lethal force has never been legal against a person who is retreating. Put another way, there are no circumstances in which you can lawfully pursue someone and still call it self defense. It doesn't matter even if they just committed a crime, or a dozen: they could have robbed a bank, raped your mother, and murdered your father, but pursuing them is still unlawful under all circumstances and in all states.

It is not lawful to pursue when your life is not endangered.

This isn't extenuating circumstances (like they raped your mother or murdered your father) at all, either.

This is a clear cut case of vigilante justice, which is illegal. Let's call it what it is.

And at least in my state, there's no way that a CHL instructor would ever say what Zimmerman did was cool.

This isn't covered under our laws, but we are rather antiquated. Still you can't pursue someone and shoot them. If you start to pursue, you are an aggressor as far as law here is concerned.

Is Florida law different?

It flew out the window when he tried to detain him unlawfully because he wasn't authorized to do so under any circumstances.

This doesn't look like imminent harm, and as far as I know, did he even have a nose bleed for getting hit in the face? If I sock you in the face, and don't even cause a nosebleed, uh, that's hardly life threatening.

Just my two cents.

According to the initial, partial police report, SFRescue treated him on scene for the bloody nose / head..

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin%20Lakes%20Shooting%20Initial%20Report.pdf

But it apparently wasn't bad enough to get a trip to the ER, since he went from the scene to the PD for interrogation.

The story that Zimmerman's attorney (or proxies via the PD to the media) is telling is designed to counter just what you were asking.

In Zimmerman's tale, he chased Martin (can't deny it, it's on tape, and not illegal per se.) He even yelled at him, asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood (we hear that from Martin's girlfriend, again not illegal.)

Zimmerman then claims that he lost sight of Martin, which serves to distance him from the 'following' / 'chasing'.

It's important for Zimmerman's tale to include that portion, so that..

.. he can then claim that Martin came back and assaulted him.

It's patently bullshit- why would Martin come back and take a swing at someone he was running from moments before, but it gives a tissue then layer of credibility (if you believe it) to his self-defense claim. It's really the only story that he can tell that matches what he thinks others know that doesn't get him immediately arrested.

At least that's my take on it.

It wouldn't matter if he took a swing, because the man was brandishing a pistol at him. If you brandish a pistol, that's direct intent to harm, and you have the right to defend yourself.

I'm not sure why this would be different under FL law, since it isn't really written differently than MS law. I can't see a situation in a MS court where this would be ruled as "self-defense". Zimmerman had intent, means, and Martin was unarmed. I can't see a MS court letting him off for this.

I didn't see that in any of the witness accounts.

When Zimmerman gets out of his car, you can hear him fumble the phone- you can hear the 'ding ding ding' of the door open alert, and we hear him shut the door. So I don't know if I'd believe he had the gun out at that time.

If he had his gun out, that would be instant felony, and game over.

Game over.

I don't know if he was brandishing. More questions. Good question, Digger.

the sheriff's officer made it abundantly clear that the law here is that you're allowed to meet force with equal force. The force with which you defend yourself (and you have to prove it was defense) cannot exceed the force being used against you.

You can't even display a weapon if, for instance, someone took a swing at you. You can't use any more than a fist (preferably flight). If someone pulls a knife, you still cannot even display. Making a threatening gesture with a weapon can bring a charge against you ranging from "brandishing to the terror of the people" (which is in itself an interesting turn of phrase, n'est-ce pas?) to assault.

I don't know about FL law, but in NC the same rule applies to peckers and guns: keep em in your pants.

Displaying a weapon under circumstances where you're not authorized to use it is considered brandishing in, as far as I'm aware, every state.

"Brandishing" it. If you start waving a 9mm, people are going to assume you are about to use it, and act accordingly under the law of my state. I would assume every state would think so, too.

I have to note this comment "Keep em in your pants".

I have no idea why I nearly fell out laughing, but that was hysterical .

You can come down to MS any day cher.

I would love to meet, chere. You're welcome here as the sunshine. I'll even make you a sammidge (served with copious swaytay, of course!).

PS: I serve one helluva nannerpuddin. I make it with a goodly amount of sherry. Make ya tongue fly out and slap your eyelids shut it's so good.

I'm a fairly nice person, but I don't know what a nannerpuddin is. It sounds rather obscene, and I don't know what the hell that is, but I'm not your type cher, even though I'd probably love you as a friend. I'm a woman that likes women and I am straightforward about it.

says my nannerpuddin' is the best in the world. (A southern staple, the symbol of hospitality, banana pudding.)

I suppose we're all the wingnuts' worst nightmare: gays with guns (educated, we practice and dead-accurate).

But I believe CCW doesnt allow you to carry in a car. The gun cant even be on the seat or floor. Has to be secured in a locked compartment... glovebox, trunk, or storage case. This, if Zimmerman was legally transporting his gun in the car, it took a deliberate and concious act to retrieve his gun when exiting the car... IOW, an act of premeditation. If the gun was holstered while he was in the car, then hes not carrying legally, it is my understanding.

Yes, you can carry in a car, loaded, etc.

This isn't the north. That doesn't mean you can shoot on sight though, and that is what everyone is trying to determine. We have very lax gun laws in the South for a reason. In Florida, for example, there might be a six foot alligator in front of your work place. It happened to me. That's why we have gun laws the way that we do down here.

I was confronted by a wild pig that was humongous. What would you choose for me to do? There is wildlife here that is NOT friendly to human beings.

The population is hardly under control. A wild pig is not Green Acres' "Wilbur". They will tear your azz up. They can kill a dog.

Not something to piss off or tangle with.

My main line of defense against them is a 50-mile charger on a hot-ass fence surrounding three acres. Trust, they back off of that. Inside the fence I'm much more worried about rabid raccoons or skunks. Smaller critters can still hop through the wires.

except in narrowly-defined situations: any state-owned property (state parks, buildings, etc), any gathering or event, and all school properties whether state or private. You are perfectly within your right to ride down the road with a loaded weapon on the seat beside you UNLESS it is "concealed" however slightly (say, a piece of paper slides over and covers a part of the grip or barrel). Then it's considered "concealed" and "within convenient reach" and for that you must have a valid permit.

It's perfectly legal to carry weapons in the vehicle here, but they must be out of "convenient reach" (at the most liberal interpretation). In the trunk, unloaded, and with a solid trigger lock together exceeds "convenient reach", thus you may transport that way. (That's how I take my pistols to the range.)

There is also a firm protocol LEOs follow here. If you are stopped and they run your tag, it comes up on the computer that you have a CCH. There is a reciprocal protocol for the CCH holder to follow when detained, say, for speeding or whatever. You must hand over your CCH permit along with your license when the officer requests your license. You must state whether or not you are actually carrying at the moment.

Zimmerman is a friggin' cowboy wannabe. If he were worth a damn, he'd have gone to the academy and become an LEO for real. I have a suspicion he couldn't make it, couldn't get in, or something. It's for sure he ain't right.

If he were worth a damn, he'd have gone to the academy and become an LEO for real. I have a suspicion he couldn't make it, couldn't get in, or something. It's for sure he ain't right.

This has less to do with the ability of people to protect themselves, than a raging vigilante gone nuts.

are they police there? even if they are are you legally required to follow their instructions?

Are you suggesting that it is advisable to do so?

"We don't need you to do that"... which is different the saying stop following him and wait in the car... I think the case would could be better made if that is what they said...

but again... does the operator have any authority to tell you what to do??? are they law enforcement??

You know it, I know it. You can play pretend the idea that it wasn't an order, but it certainly wasn't sanctioned that he followed the kid, and he was advised NOT to follow the kid.

total idiocy... should have stayed in the car... but I bet that wording comes back to bit this case in the backside...

He got out of his car, pursued a person he wasn't authorized to pursue?

but like I said an operator advising you "We don't need you to do that" is not the same telling him to not to... I think it will be more of an issue then we think...

In some states they have no legal authority, in others you can be considered at least in misdemeanor violation if you're considered to be interfering with emergency services. I don't know what the case is in Florida.

If you somehow get the idea that a concealed weapon permit empowers you to enforce the law, you'll flunk the written test.

plus there's an almighty background check. If you've had any bump any where any time, they're likely to deny you. That goes right down to long-unpaid bills, judgments, liens, etc. They will talk with your character references.

Is this different in FL?

I'm only going by the CCW class in MS. I'd hope for someone to speak up about the CCW class in FL.

nearing upon derision in the CCH course I took. At the time, in FL you only had to fire one shot. We had to shoot 50 rounds in NC from varying ranges, plus a series of close-range quick fires. The man who gave the course in this county is the sheriff's office armorer, so you know he was watching technique. It was pass/fail on the aggregate, not each component. It behooves to have a range membership and use it before going to class. (I did.)

You must have training and be able to shoot from several positions and you must be able to detect targets.

To chime in replying to my own reply.

I went shooting with a NV certified CCW instructor once. He told me he makes his students shoot from awkward positions, with low light and distractions.

And I'm glad to hear that. I was wondering about other states though. Sounds like NV at least make sure you know what the hell you are doing.

Mississippi requires that, too. I'm kind of stunned by these states that allow people to have CCW and not know what the hell they are doing.

I haven't noticed Nevada in the news for having people shot down nor has it happened in MS because they were untrained in CCW permits.

you don't hear of people getting gunned down.

If Zimmerman had pulled that stunt in NC, they'd be throwing away the key. Even LEOs aren't allowed to fire at a retreating suspect. A good part of that reasoning goes to collateral damage -- strictly not allowed.

Same goes if you're in your home. If someone tries to break in and then chicken out, you can't fire. Period. Unless you want to care to take a "vacation" in medium- to maximum security. What's odd about the NC law is if someone is breaking your door down at 2 in the morning, as our instructor said, th'ain't coming over to borrow a cup of sugar. You are within the law to blast shit out of them through the door. The rules change once they're inside, becoming a lot more strict. "Force equalling force" comes into play. If they stick a knife out at you, you can't shoot. (But if they bring a knife to a gunfight, th'ain't bright and anything could go wrong from there.)

I forgot to mention above that we were also taught how to carry a flashlight with the weapon in our course here. (Not under the "cup and saucer" like you see on TV.) Our course centered on how NOT to be a target and how NOT to escalate.

Seems to be missing in Florida's CCW permit class.

I am completely content with defending myself. But people that escalate the situation, and create a situation that they shoot someone? It is their responsibility. Responsibility is the key word when dealing with firearms, safety and judicious use in self-defense.

I hope the state of Florida rethinks their classes of allowing folks to have CCW's, and is more responsible.

our system requires a permit to touch a handgun... so no permit no training with one... as soon as you get the permit you can go pick out your gun... then the first time you touch your gun you can carry concealed...

But I'm from the South, and have a different view of the necessity for gun.

I think its about as short sighted as you can get... not everyone wants to own a gun to go shooting... but in NY to legally shoot a handgun you have to have a permit... to have a permit you need to put a gun on it...

and heck you might go through the whole process, which can take a year or more, spend you time and money on buying a gun and find out you hate it...

NY law is totally fubared in this respect...

In NC you can just go to Gander Mountain and buy any long gun you want. I have several utility weapons. As I posted below, I live in the country and have gentle rescue dogs. It's my responsibility to keep them safe from wild creatures around here who would look upon them as snacks.

Guns of any kind are not cheap to start with. The buy-permits for handguns come at a price. If you want to carry, that gets more expensive yet.

Here, you to need a "buy permit" to purchase a handgun. Those are available upon request to the local sheriff's office. If they approve your application, you may buy and transport within the law (unloaded, trigger-locked, and locked in the trunk) or completely open beside you. You may not conceal (and there's a VERY broad interpretation of what "concealed" may be) in any way shape or form. Unless you have a CCH permit, any weapon you transport must be well outside convenient reach. A detaining officer may interpret that however s/he may feel like, so best not to test the limits of the law.

If I transport my handguns, I make sure there's a trigger lock locked on the weapon, the weapon is locked in its carrying case, and the carrying case is locked in the back (tout of convenient reach).

It does amaze me that there are yay-hoos out there who will feed a whole family one can of beans so they can scrape together the bucks to buy some pretty impressive penis-extensions. I make decent money but we're still paycheck-to-paycheck. There's no room in the budget for adding to my collection just to add to it. Each of the few I keep is selected for a specific purpose, none of which is self-defense. We have a fine sheriff's office here; I'm just as satisfied that they're out there keeping me safe from two-legged predators. I'll worry about the four-legged ones.

and don't collect high-powered outrageous weapons to go deer or wild hog hunting. (Wild hogs are a definitely a nuisance here.)

I keep guns for one reason and one reason only. I live out in the middle of nowhere and a gentle pack of rescue dogs. All of them are very socialized, gentle herding dogs. They're pretty much defenseless against some of the critters around here that could really harm or do them in. I've had to dispatch a couple of troublesome marauders, but they were four-legged.

It's a hard, hard thing to take the life of a critter. I couldn't imagine the pain of taking a human life. It's a huge responsibility to know when to fire and upon what -- and what the consequences will most certainly be.

four-legged critters that can take your life, and it pains you. This isn't about being a cowboy or cowgirl, it's about being responsible.

Nothing I've seen from this mess in Florida is responsible, and it cost a young man his life, and another young man his own life. It's sad from every perspective.

the law and abide within it look bad. We get painted with the same brush as the yay-hoos all-too often. We've worked on our skills and think hard about whether or not to grab a gun. 99% of the time, the answer is "not".

There is such a thing as "appropriate use of force". Zimmerman was nowhere in it. You can reason with most human beings. A critter bent on eating your dogs is something entirely different. Even then, it's an awful thing to take any life.

My partner and I ache for Treyvon's family. There is nothing in the world that can make up for the kind of grief and pain they're going through. The local LEOs covering for him is even worse.

I'm pretty sure (99-44/100s%) that kind of vigilante crap wouldn't fly here.

and your partner and this situation when people die, and it isn't your responsibility. You are awesome people, and than you for being so.

I feel terrible for being a Southerner. I'll get over it, and I will be a better person for it, and I will help be a better Southerner for it. We can confront racism, we can confront gay and lesbian bias, we can stand against it.

Because we know love in our hearts.

I learned two things in the Army: (1) Lead by example and (2) Every situation is a vehicle for training.

The second prepared me for training service dogs. The first is simply a way of life for a liberal southerner.

Most of all, love is the strongest force in the universe. Its effect is slow but inevitable.

That Zimmerman is being covered for. Make no mistake, he messed up his own life, and I mourn that for him, but he to another person's life and I am so sad for that, too.

I have a hard time all the way around with this story.

The "Sullivan Act" in NY, passed way back in 1911, was designed to allow the government to forbid ownership of guns for certain "undesirable" types such as ethnic minorities, mostly Italian immigrants. That's why it's so nonsensical--it's not designed to make sure that someone is competent with a weapon before carrying one, it's designed to insure that no one can even own a weapon without being approved by the local "man in charge."

when I was living with a signifigant other last year he obtained his CCW. Not only did he need to take a gun safety course, but the rest of the household took the same course voluntarily. If there was ever going to be a weapon in the house we thought it best that everyone understand the rules and safety measures involved.

Here in Mass the rules are, I believe, alot tougher then in other places. After all the paperwork the town police chief had final say on whether or not he could get a license.

I think if there's any kind of weapon in the house everyone in that household needs to know the rules.

In addition to carry rules, the storage rules in NC are pretty darn strict. Every once in a while you hear of a child shooting him/herself or a friend because the "adults" didn't store properly. Guess what: those parents are taking a "vacation" at the Iron Bar Hotel.

EVERYONE learned the training because she would and is growing into a beautiful but extremely powerful animal who could easily be as deadly as a gun.

Wow, I would have assumed NC would have pretty lienent rules. I'm glad to know they don't. I would like to see uniform rules across the country. The one thing that really bothered me in the class was how different every state is in regard to gun laws.

in CCH permitting. A CCH permit issued in NC is recognized in nearly all southern states, even though the specifics of the law vary greatly. Best to leave the toys at home if you travel.

The 'purchase permit' was so that the local sheriff could check the color of your skin.

but nowadays they check the quality of your record. Five bucks for a buy-permit isn't hard for most anyone to come up with. Passing the background check plus Brady is a bit more difficult.

'declared emergency' -- in response to the civil rights actions in the 60's.

Many states in the south had those at one time, thankfully they're almost all gone.

together and learn together.

We aren't irresponsible in the South here, either, in MS we take courses. Who would have thought that MS needed to be more responsible than FL? The idea of taking a life is appalling for anyone. When you are presented with the idea that you can take a life, responsible people educate themselves so that they never have to do so.

I don't think you're allowed to pursue in ANY state of the union.
If they kick in your door, and turn and run when they see your weapon, gunfight's over. You can't "go after" them.
First, it's illegal, and second, the Prosecutor will have you for lunch with his "vigilante" line of attack.

If there was anybody "standing their ground" that night, it sure as fuck wasn't George Zimmerman.

Getting out of his damn truck and running him down, doesn't strike me as self defense.

No matter how I attempt to process it.

Does it strike you as self defense?

He wasn't defending himself, he was on the attack.

Anybody who's actually taken the TIME to read the Law instead of taking what Cenk, Big Eddie or whoever has to say about it will come to the same conclusion.

Zimmerman wasn't standing his ground, he was attacking Trayvon.

I couldn't go on any "patrol" outside of my home, seeking either bad areas or starting confrontations. I couldn't take it to a bar or any other place where alcohol was served. No government buildings, schools, etc.

I was taught that carrying my gun meant that I don't start confrontations and then pull it out. If I felt myself getting into a confrontation with someone I was taught to leave. And I was also taught that while you don't give up any rights, your right is to only use that thing in some sort of emergency that you didn't cause and will very likely kill you. Zimmerman clearly caused a lot of fear and menacing in Trayvon which made him leave and seemingly duck the pursuer, and then the pursuer took another overt act of getting out and walking the area - almost unarguably causing Trayvon to think he was being hunted. This is Zimmerman's fault. Period.