Coke withdraws from group that backs Stand Your Ground law

[Rainsford]

But that is misleading because the number of homicides remained relatively flat.

I've seen many who believe the enactment of these laws has caused shootings/homicides to increase substantially, and that's incorrect.



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/nation...Sv3BgqfCO?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=National

Fern

Your link says justifiable homicides increased around 50% after the passage of the law. It's pretty hard to believe that the entirety, or even the majority, of the increase came from people defending themselves who would otherwise have been convicted of a homicide for their actions. That would certainly represent a major issue if true, but that doesn't seem very likely. I wonder what percentage of that increase really SHOULD be regular homicides?

 

[sao123]

Looks like its time to stop drinking coke and pepsi and find me a softdrink maker with some common sense.

 

[woodie1]

Looks like its time to stop drinking coke and pepsi and find me a softdrink maker with some common sense.

Good luck with that. LMK if you do find one.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

It's different, but not legally different in terms of justifying violence. Zimmerman had called police to investigate a 'suspicious character' who had run and Zimmerman was chasing to keep his whereabouts known for police to find him - still not grounds for violence. Martin was in his rights to say something nasty, to tell him he wanted him to back off, to call the police himself about the 'suspicious character' following him.

Seems to me the legally relevant point is when the violence started. And that's what we lack information about, after the verbal confrontation.

Martin asks why the guy is following, Zimmerman asks what he's doing... someone attacks.

With the SYG law I don't think there is a legal difference. As the law is written justification doesn't hinge on violence taking place, only fear of harm. Chasing someone is clearly an aggressive act. There's a reason it was tagged the shoot first law. Martin "standing his ground" and slugging someone chasing him is as much a valid claim to it as any Zimmerman has, with the added benefit of him not having initiated the confrontation.

 

[Icepick]

- Coca-Cola Co is dropping its membership in a conservative national advocacy group that supports "Stand Your Ground" laws such as the one being used as a defense in the Florida killing of an unarmed black teenager, Trayvon Martin.

Good for Coca Cola. I might have to start drinking it again.

 

[Icepick]

Looks like its time to stop drinking coke and pepsi and find me a softdrink maker with some common sense.

They both just got some common sense although Pepsi seems to have more common sense than Coke since they dropped Alec first.

 

[shortylickens]

Coke and Pepsi shouldnt be backing political groups anyway. I could understand it if they bribed politicians connected the FDA or department of Agriculture. That at least makes sense.

 

[blankslate]

Nothing wrong with SYG.

Bunch of knee jerk reactionary crap from emotionally distraught people without rational thought.

There is something wrong when a person can chase down a car radio burglar (yeah he's an asshole) then stab him do death in the view of a surveillance camera. Then have the Judge throw out the 2nd degree murder charge even though the stabber hid the knife and sold a couple of radios that the burglar had stolen that night before his death. Oh yeah the stabber also forgot to contact the police.

There is also something wrong when a deadbeat who is so behind on utility payments that the Florida power and light workers go to his property, walk up to his door then are threatened with a firearm and the person who waved the firearm at them is only charged with a felony.

 

[Craig234]

With the SYG law I don't think there is a legal difference. As the law is written justification doesn't hinge on violence taking place, only fear of harm. Chasing someone is clearly an aggressive act. There's a reason it was tagged the shoot first law. Martin "standing his ground" and slugging someone chasing him is as much a valid claim to it as any Zimmerman has, with the added benefit of him not having initiated the confrontation.

Well, sort of, but the 'justification' is getting confused with the action that results.

I'd need to review the SYG law again for what is justified before any violence. My comment was more aimed at the self-defense issue.

It's not clear that either of them had a 'reasonable' reason to fear they'd be killed at the point of the confrontation - but I agree, Martin seems to have a strong one between them.

My point was, nothing was 'illegal' at the point of confrontation it seems to me and a key is who initiates violence, which is hard to determine.

But the caveat above about the SYG might be a crazy justification, depending on the law.

 

[Craig234]

There is something wrong when a person can chase down a car radio burglar (yeah he's an asshole) then stab him do death in the view of a surveillance camera. Then have the Judge throw out the 2nd degree murder charge even though the stabber hid the knife and sold a couple of radios that the burglar had stolen that night before his death. Oh yeah the stabber also forgot to contact the police.

There is also something wrong when a deadbeat who is so behind on utility payments that the Florida power and light workers go to his property, walk up to his door then are threatened with a firearm and the person who waved the firearm at them is only charged with a felony.

Only charged with a felony?

Actually, it might not even be a crime depending - a person seems to have the right to be cautious about someone who comes to their door, at least to try to identify them.

On the first story - one set of values our society can have is to value human life and restrict taking it quite a bit, where property crime doesn't justify it.

Another is to not value it much - reminds me of old westerns, 'horse thieves get hung'.

That mentality has some followers and seem to be the types who support if not the laws, their lax enforcement, so that 'killing thieves is kind of understood to be ok'.