So....whose hands IS the law in?

[stebo0728]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/polit ... cotus.html

Weve had the vigilantism discussion here before, its come up again in light of this tragedy in FL with the shooting of Trayvon Martin. First let me say, I believe Mr. Zimmerman was in NO WAY withing his legal parameter of self defense, in that he chased down Trayvon, despite being advised not to. I hope that he is charged at the least with manslaughter. I dont know if I quite buy the need for a murder charge, Im still undecided there, perhaps other evidence can point to that better. Why I decided to post this, is that knee jerk reactions always happen in charged situations like this. Suddenly more calls for stricter gun control start to creep in. Now the "stand your ground" laws are being called into question. Firstly, I dont believe this case truley qualifies under the "stand you ground" basis, as Zimmerman more than stood his ground, he chased down the other party. Had Trayvon become an assailant from the beginning, the tables would be much different, and the "stand your ground" would apply. Zimmerman is trying to claim the use of this clause, and that defense should be shut down pretty quickly, especially with the 911 call in evidence.

So on to the "stand your ground" laws, and really, gun control in general. The linked article is very important to this matter. This ruling from the Supreme Court very specifically finds that law enforcement is under NO, ZERO, NADA burden to protect us. The job of law enforcement is to arrest suspects, collect evidence, and help prosecution build a case against the suspects, insuring justice AFTER a crime is committed. Now I understand that most, almost ALL cops will go above and beyond whenever possible to protect people from crime and violence, but that is something we've come to expect, and in the heat of things, is something that we may not get. For instance, if you call in to 911 that you're being attacked, police are under no burden to rush to the scene, to ensure your safety. Therefore, the burden of protection, the actual responsibility for your own protection, falls into your own hands. This is why "stand your ground" laws, right to carry laws, they are all essential. Could such laws be tweaked? Sure, perhaps the law as it stands allows for some type of abuse, maybe it needs tweaking. Then again, maybe it doesnt, maybe the off chance of abuse does not outweigh the necessity of the law.

Thoughts?

[bigbadberry3]

Just a heads up

am-i-missing-something-shooting-of-17-y ... 54638.html

[stebo0728]

Ah that ones in GenChat so I missed it, thanks