UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (34) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: ModernViking Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1933252  
Subject: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 8:35 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 44
I might be cruising a neighborhood, looking for an address. Or I might be coasing along looking for a decent pizza joint in unfamiliar territory.

If someone approaches me and asks me "what I'm doing around here", unless they're in full uniform and driving a marked police cruiser, I'm just going to draw and shoot.

I'm not going be a victim of another Zimmerman. Thank god for concealed carry
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762011 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 8:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
If someone approaches me and asks me "what I'm doing around here", unless they're in full uniform and driving a marked police cruiser, I'm just going to draw and shoot.

And you'll go to prison, congrats.

Really, the concept of what constitutes an assault capable of causing great bodily harm/injury and what doesn't is so easy even a liberal should be able to figure it out, but you guys can't so here's a primer:

Following someone = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Asking someone what they're doing there = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Punching someone in the face = assault = right to self-defense

Is it really that hard to figure out? Really? If so I'm going to have to ask you to turn in your driver's license, voter's registration card and deeds to any property you own for being TOO STUPID TO LIVE!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762019 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 9:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Thank god for concealed carry

Only if you are a State of Florida resident (Or an Air Marshal who can carry nationally)


Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ModernViking Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762060 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:55 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
If someone approaches me and asks me "what I'm doing around here", unless they're in full uniform and driving a marked police cruiser, I'm just going to draw and shoot.

And you'll go to prison, congrats.


I'm being facetious. Possibly engaging in sophistry. But I'm raising an example that *will* be prologue for events in the near future.



Really, the concept of what constitutes an assault capable of causing great bodily harm/injury and what doesn't is so easy even a liberal should be able to figure it out, but you guys can't so here's a primer:

Following someone = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Asking someone what they're doing there = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Punching someone in the face = assault = right to self-defense


Rest assured that there are many, many people who are not going to make that distinction in the heat of the moment. They're going to get frightened by some dude who may be approaching them to ask directions, or may just happen to be walking in the same direction. And if they're one of those nervous nellies who bought a piece for personal protection, they're going to react exactly as I described. Out of raw, irrational fear.

This is your world, Col. You've been a staunch advocate for this as long as I've known you on these boards. Enjoy, you win.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762061 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
And if they're one of those nervous nellies who bought a piece for personal protection, they're going to react exactly as I described. Out of raw, irrational fear.

If that's the case the law, whatever it may be, doesn't really enter into it. If you are going to be able to kill someone in reaction to raw irrational fear, then you would do it with stand your ground laws or without them.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ModernViking Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762067 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
If that's the case the law, whatever it may be, doesn't really enter into it. If you are going to be able to kill someone in reaction to raw irrational fear, then you would do it with stand your ground laws or without them.

No, SYG and unchecked concealed carry allow people to rationalize walking around packing as a matter of "personal safety". As a result they feel empowered to put themselves in situations that their own common sense tells them to avoid.

Having the gun doesn't make them any more capable at dealing with the fear-induced stress that comes with having a skittish personality in sketchy situations. They still see boogeymen in every shadow, a thug looking to do them harm under every hoodie.

What this means is that while you, me or Colovion might have the composure to exercise some restraint before jumping straight to the deadly force option, Nervous Nellie isn't going to see it that way. Faced with the binary decisionmaking that occurs during an adrenaline-fueled fight-or-flight response (being a result of any threat, real or imagined), they are more prone to react in the manner that is quickest and offers the most certain conclusion.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762074 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
<No, SYG and unchecked concealed carry allow people to rationalize walking around packing as a matter of "personal safety". As a result they feel empowered to put themselves in situations that their own common sense tells them to avoid.

That's ridiculous. First off, most casual citizens aren't aware of the letter of every law. Secondly, normal people, and 99.9% of gun owners, don't go looking around for reasons to shoot people.

So if we're talking about 0.1% (or less) of citizens, we're talking about the fringe elements who are going to do what they're going to do regardless. Your solution is to punish everyone else.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762076 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The "Stand your ground" law has been invoked 130 times statewide since 2005.

Not exactly an epidemic


Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: SaintPatrick1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762077 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
No, SYG and unchecked concealed carry allow people to rationalize walking around packing as a matter of "personal safety".

But we were talking about an irrational person who would shoot someone without being faced with a deadly threat, so SYG makes no difference to the irrational person, IMHO.

What this means is that while you, me or Colovion might have the composure to exercise some restraint before jumping straight to the deadly force option

I'll tell you the truth. I have been punched in the face before in a situation that I hated the person punching me. I was hurt badly enough that I couldn't defend or fight back and got hit even harder ... further disorienting me. If I had a gun ... I am glad I didn't have a gun.

I have taken Krav Maga lessons since then, and THINK that if I was attacked that I could avoid getting hit again, not only wouldn't I want a gun but I feel I could take the attackers gun away if he had one and continue to defend myself and put the attacker down.

I agree that Zimmerman should not have had a gun while out on his little stupid patrol. If Andy Taylor was head of Zimmerman's Crime Watch club he might have let him have an empty gun with a bullet in his shirt pocket.

But people who are crazy, stupid or criminally inclined are going to have a gun whether SYG laws or gun laws are passed or revoked...imho.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762088 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Following someone = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Unless the person being followed feels threatened--as does happen. Ask many women about men following them....

Asking someone what they're doing there = not an assault = no right to self-defense

Asking is not the problem--it is HOW the question is asked, and when. Zimmerman was *already* actingly suspiciously AND inappropriately--as documented by his 911 calls.

Punching someone in the face = assault = right to self-defense

Florida SYG law allows ANY defense when you perceive you might be threatened. Zimmerman was the aggressor--which is not disputed. Thus, Zimmerman does not have a valid self-defense or SYG claim to make (and he and his attorney know it). Only the person being attacked has those options *because* they are DEFENSIVE/protective claims.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762147 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 1:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
This is your world, Col. You've been a staunch advocate for this as long as I've known you on these boards. Enjoy, you win.

Such is the price to pay for allowing the estimated 2,000,000 defensive gun uses to occur in this country each year. I'd say it's more than a fair trade-off, keeping in mind that nothing is perfect. I'm all for empowering would-be victims to defend themselves.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762150 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 1:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
What this means is that while you, me or Colovion might have the composure to exercise some restraint before jumping straight to the deadly force option, Nervous Nellie isn't going to see it that way. Faced with the binary decisionmaking that occurs during an adrenaline-fueled fight-or-flight response (being a result of any threat, real or imagined), they are more prone to react in the manner that is quickest and offers the most certain conclusion.

Possibly, but the alternative is disarming would-be victims and giving the bad guys free reign over them ala pre-SCOTUS cases (Heller and McDonald) Washington D.C. and Chicago. Pick your poison, a few nervous nellies or a crime wave from undeterred thugs. I'd rather inconvenience the latter.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762160 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 1:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
So if we're talking about 0.1% (or less) of citizens, we're talking about the fringe elements who are going to do what they're going to do regardless. Your solution is to punish everyone else.

He's holding pro-gun results up to some perfect world, ignoring that in the real world a lot of people are killed when they're disarmed. As the saying goes God made men, Col. Colt made men equal. How else can an elderly, disabled woman fend off even one young thug intent on doing her harm?

That isn't hyperbole. Just look up the Strait case in Tulsa recently. A 90-year-old WWII 101st Airborn vet and his 85-year-old wife were attacked by a couple thugs in their own home. The only one with a gun was one of the thugs, a BB gun. The result? The husband shot in the face and clinging to life, the wife raped and beaten to death. Is that the kind of "perfection" we want in an disarmed world?!? I hope not, and that's why I continue to support concealed carry, eliminating firearms registration, Castle Doctrine and/or Stand Your Ground, all of it.

I live in the real world, not on paper.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762169 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 1:42 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Zimmerman was the aggressor--which is not disputed.

It very much is disputed. If it wasn't there wouldn't be a dispute in the first place since that's the crux of the matter.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: InconclusiveFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762376 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Thank god for concealed carry"

That sounds like a fine solution to the gun problem in our country.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: InconclusiveFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762381 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"and 99.9% of gun owners, don't go looking around for reasons to shoot people."

I can see it now - the guy at the deli counter doesn't like the way they sliced his swiss cheese and he pulls his concealed gun out and starts waving it around. That's what scares me. Lunatics who carry concealed weapons everywhere and pull them out for no reason.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762386 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That sounds like a fine solution to the gun problem in our country.</I€

What gun problem?!? My only gun problem is finding time to get to the range. And not having enough guns or ammo.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: 99lashes Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762387 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 10:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I might be cruising a neighborhood, looking for an address. Or I might be coasing along looking for a decent pizza joint in unfamiliar territory.

If someone approaches me and asks me "what I'm doing around here", unless they're in full uniform and driving a marked police cruiser, I'm just going to draw and shoot.

I'm not going be a victim of another Zimmerman. Thank god for concealed carry


Just don't be packing skittles AND an attitude, not mention jewelery, burgerly tools, dope, school suspension notice and such. Otherwise we will see you at the beach.

99

Print the post Back To Top
Author: InconclusiveFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762393 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"What gun problem?!?"

Giving a gun license to wackos like this guy who killed an unarmed kid.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762396 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Zimmerman was the aggressor--which is not disputed.

It very much is disputed. If it wasn't there wouldn't be a dispute in the first place since that's the crux of the matter.


Nonsense.

If you walk past someone and continue walking away, you are not the aggressor.

If the person you walk past chooses to follow you, they have made a conscious choice to do so--and their action is aggressive in intent (they do not intend to "leave you alone"). They might not be *actively* aggressive in the sense they are physically attacking you. But they are aggressive because they are knowing choosing to watch and follow you--and perhaps planning more than that.

Hence, Trayvon was exercising his "stand your ground" rights against Zimmerman because Zimmerman was a perceived ACTIVE threat to him.

Noted you do not mention the fact Zimmerman was not publicly identifiable as a Neighbor Watch individual--which means he is not known to the general public. He is/was self-appointed to his role (what was it? Nobody will say). In other words, Zimmerman was just another idiot trying to interfere with someone else's legal activities in public that did not involve or concern him.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762400 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/26/2012 11:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Giving a gun license to wackos like this guy who killed an unarmed kid.

Nice to see you waited for all the evidence to convict him, lol!

Ladies and gentlemen, the voice of reason! Or, you know, a lynch mob mentality. One or the other.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762402 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 12:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If the person you walk past chooses to follow you, they have made a conscious choice to do so--and their action is aggressive in intent (they do not intend to "leave you alone"). They might not be *actively* aggressive in the sense they are physically attacking you. But they are aggressive because they are knowing choosing to watch and follow you--and perhaps planning more than that.

Hence, Trayvon was exercising his "stand your ground" rights against Zimmerman because Zimmerman was a perceived ACTIVE threat to him.


Sorry, no law in any state allows you to physically attack someone for following you. That is an illegal assault anywhere. In every state you are allowed to defend yourself against an illegal assault. Case dismissed.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: InconclusiveFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762430 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 7:50 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Nice to see you waited for all the evidence to convict him, lol!"

One guy had a gun and the other guy is dead. That's pretty damning evidence. Or will the defense suggest the Mr. Mxyzptlk came down from space and shot the guy?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762457 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 10:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
One guy had a gun and the other guy is dead.

Right... ignore all the self-defense evidence and concluding it's murder is easy. Of course the legal system can't ignore self-defense, nor should anyone want them to (unless you plan on never defending yourself against anything, YMMV).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762475 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 10:35 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
Sorry, no law in any state allows you to physically attack someone for following you.

LOL !!

No law in any state allows you to follow someone without their permission. That *crime* is called *stalking*. And, by law, you ARE allowed to SYG and defend yourself against such a criminal ANYWHERE.

As you have acknowledged Zimmerman made a conscious choice to follow Trayvon when it was not necessary (and he was aware of that fact per the 911 recording), that makes Zimmerman the person responsible for initiating the attack that resulted in Trayvon's death. No way out.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762540 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
No law in any state allows you to follow someone without their permission. That *crime* is called *stalking*.

I work with MCL and UCR crime definitions every day. That is not the definition of stalking. Not even remotely close. As usual you have no idea what you're talking about, but on and on you go.


Here's the definition of "stalking":

“Stalking” means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Repeated or continuing. That's the key. If Zimmerman followed him on a repeated basis or tracked him for an extended period of time without legitimate reason. Also, it has to be asserted then violated first:

(4) In a prosecution for a violation of this section, evidence that the defendant continued to engage in a course of conduct involving repeated unconsented contact with the victim after having been requested by the victim to discontinue the same or a different form of unconsented contact, and to refrain from any further unconsented contact with the victim, gives rise to a rebuttable presumption that the continuation of the course of conduct caused the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Zimmerman following behind Martin while on the phone with 911 doesn't fit this definition. At all. And even if it did the proper way to request they stop is to, I don't know, ask him to stop, not pound his face and bash his skull into the ground. We live in a civilized society. We don't solve our problems with our fists first, if we do then it's game on.

Had the cops responded would they have arrested Zimmerman for stalking? Hell no! It doesn't fit the criteria! So you sure as hell can't use that as justification for self-defense on Trayvon's part! If it isn't a crime it isn't a defensible position!

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762589 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 12:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
“Stalking” means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed, or molested.

Thank you for proving my point beyond a shadow of a doubt. Trayvon said (to his girlfriend on the cell phone) he was being followed--so we have irrefutable proof he felt intimidated and/or threatened by Zimmerman. That "being followed" phrase is the *definition* of "repeated and continuing"--otherwise you are NOT "being followed". We have Zimmerman acknowledging he WAS following Trayvon--so Trayvon's claim was NOT his imagination nor was it made up. Thus, under Florid's SYG law, Trayvon could do ANYTHING to stop Zimmerman. If Trayvon had a gun, he had the legal authority to shoot and kill Zimmerman--but he did NOT have a gun. He did not have anything to defend himself--but he did have the right to "stand his ground", which he did do. And Zimmerman shot him because he was losing the fight he provoked.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: InconclusiveFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762591 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 12:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"ignore all the self-defense evidence and concluding it's murder is easy."

I didn't say murder first of all. But second, let me make sure I understand what you are saying. The guy with the gun feels so threatened by the guy without a gun that he shoots to kill, and does. Are you saying that if you feel threatened by a guy who has no gun, you are justified in killing him? If that's what the Florida self-defense law says, you can bet I'd never set foot in Florida again.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: solesister Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762633 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 1:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Zimmerman, by all reports, is a cop wannabe - a self-styled "community watch" officer who was not affiliated with any formal neighborhood watch organization. If a policeman had shot an unarmed civilian, he would have been relieved of his gun pending an investigation, but Zimmerman is still walking around loose with his pistol and his right-to-carry permit.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: eatenbybears Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762648 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 2:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Zimmerman is still walking around loose with his pistol and his right-to-carry permit.



That was a lie by The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

Cops took his gun at the time of the shooting

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/26/gun-control-group-falsely-...


Bears

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762661 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 2:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Are you saying that if you feel threatened by a guy who has no gun, you are justified in killing him?

Whether or not the threat is armed is irrelevant. If they pose a threat they pose a threat, armed or not.

In Michigan anyone who breaks into your home is legally considered a threat. ANYONE. Armed or not. Castle doctrine (which also covers carjackings).

Note none of the self-defense statutes say anything about requiring the attacker to be armed. They can't. You can choke someone to death, no? You don't need to be armed to rape someone, no? All you need is at least one fist and the ability to swing it. Period. That's true in EVERY state, by the way. You may have to find a country more lenient to thugs if you don't want to have any pesky right to defend yourself from them. Though, to be honest, that might be a bit difficult too.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762739 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Zimmerman, by all reports, is a cop wannabe - a self-styled "community watch" officer who was not affiliated with any formal neighborhood watch organization. If a policeman had shot an unarmed civilian, he would have been relieved of his gun pending an investigation, but Zimmerman is still walking around loose with his pistol and his right-to-carry permit.< /I>

He stole his pistol out of the Sanford police evidence room?!? He is a monster! And a ninja. Maybe a pirate.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: Colovion Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1762758 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/27/2012 4:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That was a lie by The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

The Brady Buffoons didn't start that myth. They didn't bother checking the public ally available portion of the police report to see if it was true before spreading it (shocking!) but they still didn't start it. That doesn't excuse this however:

From eatenbybears's link:

UPDATE: The Brady Campaign sent this statement to TheDC Monday evening: “It has now been reported that the Sanford Police Department is in possession of the gun that George Zimmerman used to shoot Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman, however, still has his concealed carry license and he still has the ability to buy a gun and carry it into public spaces.”

--------

Huh, funny, I thought we had to, you know, adjudicate the matter first in this country before we strip people of their rights. The Brady Buffoons are just fine with yanking away freedoms based on a mere charge? How unprecedented! Except when they called for anyone on the Terror Watch List (which includes thousands of names belonging to "people of interest" who aren't suspected of any terrorist activity, and an untold number of errors) to be disarmed too.

They're for "responsible" gun ownership, it's just that none of us mere mortals are responsible enough.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: solesister Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1763343 of 1933252
Subject: Re: Next time I'm in Florida... Date: 3/28/2012 8:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Nice to see you waited for all the evidence to convict him"

maybe if somebody had explained that to Zimmerman, Trayvon would still be alive

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (34) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement