opether wrote: Sad part, the "jury of his peers", was 6 women? REALLY?
The Jury of Peers is not American law. It's the phrase in the Magna Carta, which is British law, from 1225. The Magna Carta meant that if you were a Lord / Knight / Duke that your jury would be similar, or if you were a peasant, your jury would be too. The US was intended to have less of those class boundaries (though obviously some still existed).
US Constitutional law (6th Amendment, Bill of Rights) says " the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
You could argue that the authors of the Constitution assumed a jury of peers, but it doesn't quite match the earlier intention of 1225.
mamberg wrote:But in most states, if someone starts to kick your ass, and you are in fear for your life (or can convince a jury that you were), you can definitely shoot someone.
Here's a question for ya - do you think Trayvon would have been killed, if he knew Zimmerman had a gun from the beginning?
No. I think Martin's primary mistake was that instead of a simple medium ass-whooping (a few punches then break it off), he instead went rage-mode and started into a maximum ass whooping. This terrified Zimmerman. I think Martin wouldn't have fought at all, or would have only delivered a few punches, realizing he can't push his luck with a gun in the situation.
Sometimes when we are young we do stupid things. Occasionally, those stupid things get someone killed. This was one of those things.
at that tweet. 
