Democrats want to overturn self defense laws

[Immanuel]

Self defense is when you are running away from danger, stop, turn and face it.

Chasing someone down and shooting them in cold blood is murder. Defense isn't chasing someone down who is running away from you. How Republicans can twist this into that is a mystery. Shows they aren't very smart. Can't figure out the simplest things.

Well, when you can prove that is what George Zimmerman did, then you can prove that he committed murder. In the meantime, his legal defense is still that it was self defense.

God help us if liberals start demanding that in the face of violent attacks we are required by law to run first and failing the success of that, get down on our knees and plead for mercy from criminals.

Immie

I don't have to prove anything. GZ says, on tape, he chased down this kid who was running AWAY from him. He had to get out of his car and chased down the kid. Those are facts. They are ON TAPE. We even hear the car door shut. What else is there to say?

Then his legal defense stands at the killing was in self defense. I understand that for you, a devout fundalmentalist progressive Democrat, this means absolutely nothing to you. You have absolutely zero understanding, nor concerns, for our constitutional rights.

You see this killing as a means to the end of the second amendment and that is all that matters to you.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Libs are hypocrites Jennifer Granholm the worst governor we've had in my lifetime, she now lives in California. she was for "stand your ground" before she was against it

from under a hoodie, ex-Governor Jennifer Granholm has been outspoken on the need for "justice" in the Trayvon Martin killing, including attacking the NRA for pushing Florida's so-called "stand-your-ground" law that allegedly encourages folks like George Zimmerman to wield a gun when threatened.

Left unmentioned in Granholm's attack, however, is that she herself was an NRA-supported advocate for passing Michigan's own stand-your-ground law in 2006.

"Tonight on 'The War Room' we'll examine . . . the National Rifle Association's push for self-defense laws that have allowed Trayvon Martin's killer to go unpunished," previewed the March 29 website of her Current TV program, "The War Room."

In one of two segments on the stand-your-ground issue and gun rights run amok, Granholm guest, Joseph Marshall, an activist and radio host, exclaimed "that's a bad law."

"Of course," replied Granholm.

From The Detroit News: Payne: Granholm was for stand-your-ground before she was against it | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

Reading that, I see nothing wrong with her changing her position on a subject as long as she has truly changed her mind on the subject, or should I say not simply claims to have changed her mind, and she is not saying this in order to win political points.

Immie

 

[California Girl]

House to vote on Trayvon amendment - Washington Times

House Democrats said Tuesday they will offer an amendment to push to overturn stand-your-ground self-defense laws in states like Florida.

The life of ONE criminal is worth 100 law abiding citizens.

stand your ground laws are not "self-defense" laws. common law self defense has always existed. these laws were the "if you shoot first, you win" laws.

but you aren't that bright, so probably that's too complicated for you to follow.

Why is it the federal government's business to overturn state laws?

 

[RoadVirus]

Congress doesn't have the authority to do this.

The Dumbos seem to think so.

If Martin had been White and the rest of the variables were the same, this would be a non-issue.

 

[freedombecki]

Self defense is when you are running away from danger, stop, turn and face it.

Chasing someone down and shooting them in cold blood is murder. Defense isn't chasing someone down who is running away from you. How Republicans can twist this into that is a mystery. Shows they aren't very smart. Can't figure out the simplest things.

Well, when you can prove that is what George Zimmerman did, then you can prove that he committed murder. In the meantime, his legal defense is still that it was self defense.

God help us if liberals start demanding that in the face of violent attacks we are required by law to run first and failing the success of that, get down on our knees and plead for mercy from criminals.

Immie

Liberals: only get violent if the weak person can't slap back as in vitro.

 

[freedombecki]

House to vote on Trayvon amendment - Washington Times

House Democrats said Tuesday they will offer an amendment to push to overturn stand-your-ground self-defense laws in states like Florida.

The life of ONE criminal is worth 100 law abiding citizens.

stand your ground laws are not "self-defense" laws. common law self defense has always existed. these laws were the "if you shoot first, you win" laws.

but you aren't that bright, so probably that's too complicated for you to follow.

Why is it the federal government's business to overturn state laws?

Because ground under the One's whim must be kissed if nirvana is to be achieved.

 

[Katzndogz]

Democrats quickly realized the error of depriving victims of self defense laws in an election year and have withdrawn the bill.

It's one of those flexible things obama will take care of in his second term. If he gets one.

 

[Immanuel]

Democrats quickly realized the error of depriving victims of self defense laws in an election year and have withdrawn the bill.

It's one of those flexible things obama will take care of in his second term. If he gets one.

Don't forget, he is evolving on that issue as well.

Immie

 

[freedombecki]

Self defense is when you are running away from danger, stop, turn and face it.

Chasing someone down and shooting them in cold blood is murder. Defense isn't chasing someone down who is running away from you. How Republicans can twist this into that is a mystery. Shows they aren't very smart. Can't figure out the simplest things.

Tell me, rdean. If Republicans "can't figure out the simplest things," why can't President Obama come up with a budget?

I'll tell you why, rdean. He cannot negotiate with people he hates with religious zeal and damnation straight out of the pulpit he listened to for 20 straight years.

And because of it, he can't do what Republican presidents always do--make and stick to a simple budget.

Just show me his budget. Then I'll consider your case.

 

[Jroc]

Libs are hypocrites Jennifer Granholm the worst governor we've had in my lifetime, she now lives in California. she was for "stand your ground" before she was against it

from under a hoodie, ex-Governor Jennifer Granholm has been outspoken on the need for "justice" in the Trayvon Martin killing, including attacking the NRA for pushing Florida's so-called "stand-your-ground" law that allegedly encourages folks like George Zimmerman to wield a gun when threatened.

Left unmentioned in Granholm's attack, however, is that she herself was an NRA-supported advocate for passing Michigan's own stand-your-ground law in 2006.

"Tonight on 'The War Room' we'll examine . . . the National Rifle Association's push for self-defense laws that have allowed Trayvon Martin's killer to go unpunished," previewed the March 29 website of her Current TV program, "The War Room."

In one of two segments on the stand-your-ground issue and gun rights run amok, Granholm guest, Joseph Marshall, an activist and radio host, exclaimed "that's a bad law."

"Of course," replied Granholm.

From The Detroit News: Payne: Granholm was for stand-your-ground before she was against it | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

Reading that, I see nothing wrong with her changing her position on a subject as long as she has truly changed her mind on the subject, or should I say not simply claims to have changed her mind, and she is not saying this in order to win political points.
Immie

Umm.. i think she is. She's promoting her New liberal talk show.

'The War Room With Jennifer Granholm' Kicks Off Monday, January 30th at... -- SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 28, 2012 /PRNewswire/ --

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Self defense is when you are running away from danger, stop, turn and face it.

Chasing someone down and shooting them in cold blood is murder. Defense isn't chasing someone down who is running away from you. How Republicans can twist this into that is a mystery. Shows they aren't very smart. Can't figure out the simplest things.

Well, when you can prove that is what George Zimmerman did, then you can prove that he committed murder. In the meantime, his legal defense is still that it was self defense.

God help us if liberals start demanding that in the face of violent attacks we are required by law to run first and failing the success of that, get down on our knees and plead for mercy from criminals.

Immie

I don't have to prove anything. GZ says, on tape, he chased down this kid who was running AWAY from him. He had to get out of his car and chased down the kid. Those are facts. They are ON TAPE. We even hear the car door shut. What else is there to say?

You don't have to prove that Zimmerman initially got out and chased the kid, no. You also, however, mentioned that Zimmerman shot Martin in cold blood while he was running away. Trayvon wasn't, to my understanding, found face down, nor was the entrance wound in his back and the exit in front. There also exists the broken nose and head wounds. Regardless of how severe you feel these wounds were or were not, you have to admit that they suggest that a physical struggle was taking place between the two men which sorta smacks down your "cold blooded" sentiment.

When you responded about not having to prove anything, were you -intentionally- being selective about what part of your initial statement you were going to hold up as true, or do you honestly not see the inconsistencies between what's flying out of your mouth and the information we have (and don't have) regarding the incident?

 

[starcraftzzz]

Congress doesn't have the authority to do this. They are using money to accomplish their goal. From the article:

The amendment, which would withhold some grants from states that have such laws, will come as part of the House's debate on the Commerce Department spending bill

So according to you congress does not have the authority to direct federal money... How damn cluless can ypou be

 

[starcraftzzz]

Well, when you can prove that is what George Zimmerman did, then you can prove that he committed murder. In the meantime, his legal defense is still that it was self defense.

God help us if liberals start demanding that in the face of violent attacks we are required by law to run first and failing the success of that, get down on our knees and plead for mercy from criminals.

Immie

I don't have to prove anything. GZ says, on tape, he chased down this kid who was running AWAY from him. He had to get out of his car and chased down the kid. Those are facts. They are ON TAPE. We even hear the car door shut. What else is there to say?

Then his legal defense stands at the killing was in self defense. I understand that for you, a devout fundalmentalist progressive Democrat, this means absolutely nothing to you. You have absolutely zero understanding, nor concerns, for our constitutional rights.

You see this killing as a means to the end of the second amendment and that is all that matters to you.

Immie

Yes us progressive democrats have no concenr for your right "to kill people" because they look like gangsters

 

[Peach]

House to vote on Trayvon amendment - Washington Times

House Democrats said Tuesday they will offer an amendment to push to overturn stand-your-ground self-defense laws in states like Florida.

The life of ONE criminal is worth 100 law abiding citizens.

Self defense is a common law defense in Florida, and always has been, STAND YOUR GROUND is a variant.

 

[Immanuel]

I don't have to prove anything. GZ says, on tape, he chased down this kid who was running AWAY from him. He had to get out of his car and chased down the kid. Those are facts. They are ON TAPE. We even hear the car door shut. What else is there to say?

Then his legal defense stands at the killing was in self defense. I understand that for you, a devout fundalmentalist progressive Democrat, this means absolutely nothing to you. You have absolutely zero understanding, nor concerns, for our constitutional rights.

You see this killing as a means to the end of the second amendment and that is all that matters to you.

Immie

Yes us progressive democrats have no concenr for your right "to kill people" because they look like gangsters

What is obvious by your immature response is that you have no concern for Constitutional Rights.

What is also obvious is that you have not read anything I said about Mr. Zimmerman. I happen to consider him innocent until proven guilty. I have plenty of reservations about what exactly transpired on the night of February 26th, but until he has been given a fair trial, I am not going to convict the man unlike so many of you progressives who if the law had not constrained you, would have strung the man up long ago.

Seems to me that it is you that want the right to kill people. Not only in this case but in the case of abortion.

Don't be such a partisan idiot and join the real world. There are good people on both sides of the political aisle and then there are idiots like you who's big concern is to divide and conquer this nation.

Immie

 

[Katzndogz]

Whether Congress has the power to direct federal funds is not in dispute. What is in dispute is that Congress is politicizing the granting and withholding of federal funds to protect a brand new right given to criminals to commit crimes without threat.

 

[BuddyColt]

I'm not meaning to take sides, though I do have one, but here's my take:

Whether innocent or guilty, George Zimmerman will be looked at and his actions examined so as to find out whether it was self defense or not.

So, we could say that the law is adequate. IF Zimmerman did not act in self defense, he will be convicted and one could then argue that the laws as is are working.

What is at issue is whether or not we have a Right to Life. If we do have a Right to Life, we have the right and the responsibility to protect and defend that life. As long as the technology exists, I don't think I will ever voluntarily be a willing victim.

Even in a dumbed down society with so many people against your Right to protect yourself, if I have to make a choice, I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by 6.

 

[Ariux]

Whether Congress has the power to direct federal funds is not in dispute. What is in dispute is that Congress is politicizing the granting and withholding of federal funds to protect a brand new right given to criminals to commit crimes without threat.

I doubt Congress will ever pass a de facto ban on state laws that articulate the right to self-defense.

The only thing non-racist jurors care about is whether or not Zimmerman acted in self-defense. And, indeed, Zimmerman clearly did act in self-defense. The jurors will tell the media that they acquitted Zimmerman because it was self-defense. They won't say, "We wanted to convict him, but the Stand Your Ground law wouldn't let us."

 

[Harry Dresden]

Self defense is when you are running away from danger, stop, turn and face it.

Chasing someone down and shooting them in cold blood is murder. Defense isn't chasing someone down who is running away from you. How Republicans can twist this into that is a mystery. Shows they aren't very smart. Can't figure out the simplest things.

how you twist some of the shit you do is a mystery also.....

 

[Katzndogz]

Liberals want to remove the possibility of self defense here like they have done in Great Britian. To liberals there is no such thing as a criminal. It is a pathology, it is to be understood with compassion. It can be treated because ultimately all criminality is the fault of an uncaring and unjust society not the criminal.