Because of Civil Rights Activists and leaders in the Democrat party the wrong argument was made that could have sent Zimmerman to jail for the rest of his life. I teach the Permit to Carry Gun class in Minnesota. Our team has taken over others areas including Wisconsin, Kansas and Illinois teaching instructors to teach permit to carry and use of a weapon in self-defense in the home and/or in public. This being said, the reader needs to listen to another perspective on this issue that led into Mr. Zimmerman being set free.
I was interviewed on local and national FOXnews regarding what I termed as a willful, intentional and unlawful shooting of two teens recently, in Minnesota. I predicted the outcome and the specific charges when others disagreed.
Giving myself some credibility let me make my argument. One has four tactical options when confronted with a threat. Do nothing, leave, less than lethal force and lethal force. The prosecution should have argued that Trayvon was under threat (being followed by Zimmerman) and his first option was doing nothing and leaving the situation.
However, despite not being against the law, Zimmerman continued to follow placing fear in Trayvon. This is the basic element of the Stand Your Ground law that would have favored Trayvon if used. The element of use of deadly force is trying to avoid a conflict, which Trayvon appeared to have been attempting to do.
All 50 States allow for the use of reasonable force to defend one self when threatened. The prosecution should have argued the law (that Democrats oppose) in defense of Trayvon. Trayvon was a reluctant participant. He felt in immediate fear of death, or great bodily harm, and based on the Stand Your Ground law, retreat was not an option.
Trayvon had every right to use the Stand Your Ground law being he did not have to retreat and once defending against and getting the best of the confrontation was shot and killed by Zimmerman. The prosecution should have argued that under Florida’s law for Trayvon self defense is an “affirmative” defense and under the law Trayvon did not have to retreat and followed the element of the law in defending his person against as unknown threat.
However, Democrats dislike for the law would make them hypocritical to use the law in favor of Trayvon that Democrats and civil rights leaders oppose. While the Stand Your Ground law would have worked for Trayvon, to use it would have made the civil rights folks look double minded.
Hear me out. The prosecutor raising the elements of the Florida law in favor of Trayvon:
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, a person here, Mr. Martin, is presumed to have held reasonable fear if imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm. We, the state, hold that under the law of this state, Mr. Martin was being followed. Mr. Martin was in fear. Mr. Martin under the law did lawfully stand his ground against that fear, that fear being Mr. Zimmerman.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, under the law Mr. Martin did not have to retreat. Under the law Mr. Martin confronted his threat, got the best of his threat and when doing so, that threat, being Mr. Zimmerman shot and killed Mr. Martin. We know the dispatcher told Mr. Zimmerman to discontinue following Mr. Martin. We know there is no law against following Mr. Martin, but we do have a Stand Your Ground law that favored Mr. Martin’s actions. Therefore, Mr. Zimmerman must be found guilty of manslaughter.
Now, the argument above would have been a lot better leading to a more appropriate charge and outcome. However, Democrats and others being against the Stand Your Ground and legal-carry-a-weapon laws, caused their own blindness in favor of Trayvon and against Zimmerman.
Trayvon was a reluctant participant. He did nothing to provoke an attack and it was Zimmerman that was the initial threat, giving Trayvon every right to protect himself under the Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.
Listen folks, there was a reason for Zimmerman’s defense using self defense without the Stand Your Ground law. Because if they had introduced the elements of the law (as I have done) the prosecution would have raised the same issues in defense of Trayvon.
I hold that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and others with loud voices opposing the Stand Your Ground law, prevented the use of the law in Trayvon’s favor that would have led to a conviction. For more information on the use of deadly force in your home and/or in public contact me at 651-917-1720. I have been teaching the use of deadly force for over 10 years.
Lucky Rosenbloom welcomes reader responses to 651-917-1720, or email him at email@example.com.