Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Gun related post here, feel free to avoid the territory [View all]gejohnston
(17,502 posts)157. there is an objective standard for reasonableness
The principle of Reasonableness is really an umbrella principle that applies to each of the previous four. The issue here is whether your perceptions and conduct in self-defense were those of a reasonable and prudent person under the same or similar circumstances, and possessing the same specialized skills and knowledge (if any). If your actions were not reasonable by this standard, any claim to self-defense fails.
So, if you believed the other person was an aggressor, but a reasonable person would not have believed this, you did not act in lawful self-defense. Similarly if you believed that the threat was imminent but a reasonable person would not have, or that the force you used was proportional to the threat but a reasonable person would not have, or that you could not have avoided the threat but a reasonable person would have . . . in each case the claim to self defense fails.
It is within the contours of the principle of Reasonableness that the attackers prior acts and/or reputation might be made relevant at trial, even if they were unknown to you at the time. The reasonableness of your perception that the attackers behavior was threatening would be strengthened if your attacker had a reputation in the community for behaving in threatening manner. Similarly, the reasonableness of your perception that the attacker was acting in an irrational and frightening manner would be buttressed if your attacker habitually used intoxicants, and was in fact intoxicated at the time of the attack.
So, if you believed the other person was an aggressor, but a reasonable person would not have believed this, you did not act in lawful self-defense. Similarly if you believed that the threat was imminent but a reasonable person would not have, or that the force you used was proportional to the threat but a reasonable person would not have, or that you could not have avoided the threat but a reasonable person would have . . . in each case the claim to self defense fails.
It is within the contours of the principle of Reasonableness that the attackers prior acts and/or reputation might be made relevant at trial, even if they were unknown to you at the time. The reasonableness of your perception that the attackers behavior was threatening would be strengthened if your attacker had a reputation in the community for behaving in threatening manner. Similarly, the reasonableness of your perception that the attacker was acting in an irrational and frightening manner would be buttressed if your attacker habitually used intoxicants, and was in fact intoxicated at the time of the attack.
http://lawofselfdefense.com/the-five-principles-of-the-law-of-self-defense-in-a-nutshell/
In this case, Martin moved from behind the bushes in front of Jayne Surdyka's house and attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman yelled for help for almost a minute while Martin sat on him and pounded his head in the sidewalk. That is according to forensics and two eye witnesses. That fits the definition of reasonableness as defined above.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
157 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
How many other people given a fair trial and found not guilty do you want incarcerated?
Lurks Often
May 2016
#121
Bingo.......and this is why I believe that Florida passed new legislation post Z
pablo_marmol
Mar 2015
#19
Zimmerman was the first aggressor, plain and simple. He was armed, playing self appointed
Ghost in the Machine
Mar 2015
#22
"He was not told to stay in the car". When it first happened, that's what I read somewhere...
Ghost in the Machine
Mar 2015
#57
He was told that officers were already on the way, then Zimmerman said "he's running away now"
Ghost in the Machine
Mar 2015
#71
All you have to do is look at what Martin was doing when he was shot and what was happening
braddy
May 2016
#126
You strongly implied, suggested, or inferred it, obviously, gejohn....Maybe an edit or an apology?
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#35
So if was not a personal attack it was just an ad hominem attack on mathematicians? Still not cool.
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#56
Could be a strawman attack then? Imputing general incompetency from one dubious example?
Fred Sanders
Mar 2015
#63
What do my calculus classes have to do with Goerge Zimmerman's Gunstalking?
stone space
Mar 2015
#40
If George Zimmerman shows up in my calculus class armed, he's going to jail.
stone space
Mar 2015
#42
Zimmerman is a racist cold blooded murderer, and his DU supporters are trolls.
stone space
May 2016
#100
More personals attacks from you, just shows that you don't understand criminal law
Lurks Often
May 2016
#101
How is that a personal attack? Folks who support cold-blooded murder are trolls.
stone space
May 2016
#104
Quick! You need to alert Skinner in ATA to all the Trolls on his website you've found!
DonP
May 2016
#107
How many other people given a fair trial and found not guilty do you want jailed?
Lurks Often
May 2016
#120
I voted "other." Zimmerman broke no current laws, and I'm not sure if the laws need...
Eleanors38
Mar 2015
#43
It is not against the law for a white man to stalk and murder a black teenager wearing a hoodie
Agnosticsherbet
Mar 2015
#51
I've been watching the courts for years, and in most cases such murders are unpunished.
Agnosticsherbet
Mar 2015
#53
The races aren't going to be reversed. We are discussing reality not a fantasy novel.
Agnosticsherbet
Mar 2015
#69
In what other DU group would 62% of respondents say Zman acted reasonably?
stone space
May 2016
#133
How many other people given a fair trial and found not guilty do you want incarcerated?
Lurks Often
May 2016
#140
The jury disagreed with you, as do most people who understand criminal law
Lurks Often
May 2016
#156
Time to resave the list. I see that it is changing from last time I copied it.
stone space
May 2016
#79
I voted "other." He broke no laws, but he blurred the line twixt neighborhood patrol...
Eleanors38
May 2016
#84
I would contend that the only reason why this poll scores majority support for Zimmerman...
stone space
May 2016
#93