Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I don't know what the NRA is doing or not.Not meaning to get into a gun rights argument, but what gave him the right to carry a gun is the Second Amendment and his conceal carry permit.
And, if one looks at fatal shootings in the USA, the majority of them are done with illegal guns.
Maybe if we enforced illegal gun law, there might be less fatal shootings.
That's part of the problem. The NRA are working overtime to get rid of laws that prohibit the curtailing of guns getting in the "wrong" hands or introducing crazy new ones that encourage the kind of situation that happened here.
I do know that we have the Second Amendment.
I do know that there are many folks who want even stricter gun laws.
And, I do know that most folks (civilians) who are in legal possession of a firearm are not the majority of folks killing others with guns.
Ummmmm, "lunatics, criminals, and terrorists" can't purchase firearms, legally, that is. And states that grant conceal carry permits obviously have different views than you. The states can do that, too, so says the another part of the Constitution.I don't know what the NRA is doing or not.That's part of the problem. The NRA are working overtime to get rid of laws that prohibit the curtailing of guns getting in the "wrong" hands or introducing crazy new ones that encourage the kind of situation that happened here.
I do know that we have the Second Amendment.
I do know that there are many folks who want even stricter gun laws.
And, I do know that most folks (civilians) who are in legal possession of a firearm are not the majority of folks killing others with guns.
Well first off..I don't believe the second amendment says what the NRA and some crazy conservatives thinks it says.
And I don't think the average citizen should be carrying a concealed weapon in a densely populated area. I also don't think Lunatics, Criminals and Terrorists should be able to purchase firearms.
I don't think Zimmerman was happy about it, nor is he the 'happy' shooter that some of his detractors would make him out to be.
The crux of the matter is this (IMO). Why did he keep on following the guy?
Because he was trying to see where the kid was fleeing to. They had had a rash of robbies and break-ins and Zimmerman and a few others in that neighborhood were trying to help authorities catch the perps. Martin was not a perp, but Zimmerman couldnt know that.
Zimmerman has every right to fllow anyone he damned well pleases.
What gives him the right to walk around the street armed and looking for trouble? Is he a security guard? No. A cop? No. He was a self-appointed neighbourhood watch dude.
That is an attitude that simply amazes me. The history of being allowed to carry a weapon is similar in at least one respect; the only peeople not allowed to carry weapons were peasants, slaves and serfs who were generally considered to be some form of property.
Only free people could carry weapons, and in most places up until World War 1 most people could carry some kind of weapon. It was considered the right of all free people to be able to defend themselves from violence. Were it not for Zimmerman being armed, he could very likely be dead today due to internal injuries from being repeatedly in the abdomen.
Why do you think a person that is not a cop or a security guard does NOT have the right to protect their own life? Because a mistake might be made?
From the outside looking in (and when I mean outside, I mean outside the US), this is why the country's guns laws are fucked. This is why the second amendment fundametally sux...
No, the second amendment is why Zimmerman and millions of other people in this country are able to prevent criminals from making them into victims each year.
And in my judgement this is a good thing.
Why do you think people should be made into helpless little bunnies who can only try to flee the wolf?
Ummmmm, "lunatics, criminals, and terrorists" can't purchase firearms, legally, that is. And states that grant conceal carry permits obviously have different views than you. The states can do that, too, so says the another part of the Constitution.I don't know what the NRA is doing or not.
I do know that we have the Second Amendment.
I do know that there are many folks who want even stricter gun laws.
And, I do know that most folks (civilians) who are in legal possession of a firearm are not the majority of folks killing others with guns.
Well first off..I don't believe the second amendment says what the NRA and some crazy conservatives thinks it says.
And I don't think the average citizen should be carrying a concealed weapon in a densely populated area. I also don't think Lunatics, Criminals and Terrorists should be able to purchase firearms.
The people are the militia. And the supreme court has ruled that the only firearms protected by the second amendment are those of military grade and are to be bought by the individualUmmmmm, "lunatics, criminals, and terrorists" can't purchase firearms, legally, that is. And states that grant conceal carry permits obviously have different views than you. The states can do that, too, so says the another part of the Constitution.Well first off..I don't believe the second amendment says what the NRA and some crazy conservatives thinks it says.
And I don't think the average citizen should be carrying a concealed weapon in a densely populated area. I also don't think Lunatics, Criminals and Terrorists should be able to purchase firearms.
Why Jared Loughner was allowed to buy a gun - CSMonitor.com
Virginia Tech Shooter Used Legally Bought Gun
Columbine dad touts gun law in Maine - The Denver Post
The second amendment includes a militia clause which is all but ignored by the anywhere anytime crowd.
And the first amendment makes almost the same anywhere anytime clause that the second makes..yet OWS were cleared out of parks.
Quite a quandry.
See, I agree with a lot of what you said. But, then I look at the law in Florida, and it doesn't say anything about who started it. It says one can stand their ground if they are afraid for their life, afraid of great bodily harm, or afraid that a felony is about to happen, as long as they are legally allowed to be where they used that deadly force.Zimmerman is probably a nice guy.
But he looked at himself as a self appointed protector of the neighborhood. You stepped on his turf and you were a suspect....especially if you were a black teen
Nothing wrong with that either, as long as he called the police and reported it. Where he crossed the line is when he left his truck with a pistol. At that point, he became a vigilante. He never should have gotten within a hundred feet of the kid.
At that point, it is Martin who has the right to stand his ground, it is Martin who has the right to be left alone and it is Martin who has the right to defend himself
Gee, look at that. All your links show exactly what I said - one cannot purchase a firearm if they are a "lunatic, criminal, or terrorist".Ummmmm, "lunatics, criminals, and terrorists" can't purchase firearms, legally, that is. And states that grant conceal carry permits obviously have different views than you. The states can do that, too, so says the another part of the Constitution.Well first off..I don't believe the second amendment says what the NRA and some crazy conservatives thinks it says.
And I don't think the average citizen should be carrying a concealed weapon in a densely populated area. I also don't think Lunatics, Criminals and Terrorists should be able to purchase firearms.
Why Jared Loughner was allowed to buy a gun - CSMonitor.com
Virginia Tech Shooter Used Legally Bought Gun
Columbine dad touts gun law in Maine - The Denver Post
The second amendment includes a militia clause which is all but ignored by the anywhere anytime crowd.
And the first amendment makes almost the same anywhere anytime clause that the second makes..yet OWS were cleared out of parks.
Quite a quandry.
Zimmerman is probably a nice guy.
But he looked at himself as a self appointed protector of the neighborhood. You stepped on his turf and you were a suspect....especially if you were a black teen
Nothing wrong with that either, as long as he called the police and reported it. Where he crossed the line is when he left his truck with a pistol. At that point, he became a vigilante. He never should have gotten within a hundred feet of the kid.
At that point, it is Martin who has the right to stand his ground, it is Martin who has the right to be left alone and it is Martin who has the right to defend himself
He could be a fucking angel. He followed and killed someone who was unarmed and not involved in any crimes.
He should have been arrested and charged. Posted bail and had a trial. It's up to a judge and jury to determine guilt..not the police.
I know that is the legal theory but the reality is that in practical terms the police are the first line of the justice system as they decide whether or not to make an arrest.
As to Zimmerman, I think he is innocent of any malicious intent, guilty of only wanting to stay alive and fortunate that he was able to do something about it.
Anyone that carries a gun needs to study this case. Just because the law is on your side does not mean that your life wont be turned inside out if you ever end up killing someone, justified or not.
Again..and with feeling.
The police shouldn't be deciding that. A judge and jury should. The police really really screwed this up. Had the followed procedure..you'd never hear about this. And Zimmerman would probably have gotten a slap on the wrist.
What the law enforcers (and the law) are obliged to do is to presume innocence, unless there is probable cause not to do so. When they detained and questioned Zimmerman AND had witness statements corroborating that he was being physically attacked, the police would have been breaking the law and violating Zimmerman's constitutional rights if they continued detaining him.I know that is the legal theory but the reality is that in practical terms the police are the first line of the justice system as they decide whether or not to make an arrest.
As to Zimmerman, I think he is innocent of any malicious intent, guilty of only wanting to stay alive and fortunate that he was able to do something about it.
Anyone that carries a gun needs to study this case. Just because the law is on your side does not mean that your life wont be turned inside out if you ever end up killing someone, justified or not.
Again..and with feeling.
The police shouldn't be deciding that. A judge and jury should. The police really really screwed this up. Had the followed procedure..you'd never hear about this. And Zimmerman would probably have gotten a slap on the wrist.
Generally, we only arrest, try and convict people when there is sufficient evidence - at least that is the theory. Currently, you have found the man guilty without bothering with the due process.
You don't know that the police screwed up. You don't know that he is guilty of anything other than defending himself. And yet... you are quite happy to convict him anyway. Trial by media is a very dangerous road to walk. You walk it if you want to... I won't. And, more than that, I'll fight you every step of the road.
Yeah, you guys have always differentiated between whites and hispanics. Now this is a racial issue, suddenly the guy's white...
Ummm, not all of us. Most people I grew up around considered hispanics to be white.
What is it about speaking Spanish that makes you not white?
I wonder if they think a blue eyed blonde hispanic from Spain is not white?
Yeah, you guys have always differentiated between whites and hispanics. Now this is a racial issue, suddenly the guy's white...
Ummm, not all of us. Most people I grew up around considered hispanics to be white.
What is it about speaking Spanish that makes you not white?
I wonder if they think a blue eyed blonde hispanic from Spain is not white?
Been wondering that too. I am half hispanic..like Zimmerman..and some peeps are saying I am not white.
It's not fair.
Black friend defends shooter of Florida teen | Reuters
George Zimmerman is not a racist and cried for days after shooting dead a black Florida teenager, a black, longtime friend of Zimmerman said on Sunday in a sympathetic portrayal of a man maligned by critics as a trigger-happy bigot.
Zimmerman, 28, a white Hispanic, shot Trayvon Martin, 17, in what he said was self defense during an altercation in the gated community Zimmerman was watching on February 26 in Sanford, Florida. After attracting little notice initially, the case gained widespread attention, sparking protests and renewing a national debate about race.
"He couldn't stop crying. He's a caring human being," Joe Oliver, 53, a former television news reporter and anchor in Orlando who has known Zimmerman for several years, told Reuters in a telephone interview.
Oliver's wife is a close friend of Zimmerman's mother in law, who told him Zimmerman cried for days in remorse after the shooting. He also spoke directly with Zimmerman on Saturday.
"I mean, he took a man's life and he has no idea what to do about it. He's extremely remorseful about it," Oliver said.
Oliver's account differs from the withering criticism Zimmerman has sustained from demonstrators across the country who have demanded his arrest and accused him of racial bias in targeting Martin.
....
"I'm a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color," Oliver said.
Joe Oliver needs to be careful now.
There could be a bounty out on him soon, too, lol.
And more on the attack by Martin from Zimmermans attorney:
George Zimmerman's Attorney and Friend Speak About Trayvon Martin Incident - ABC News
The attorney counseling George Zimmerman, who shot unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin as he was walking home from the store with a bag of Skittles, says if charges are filed, Zimmerman will argue that he acted in self-defense and that Florida's stand-your-ground law applies.
Attorney Craig Sonner said the public is only hearing part of the story, and when all the facts come out, it will be clear that Zimmerman acted in self defense. A grand jury is scheduled to begin hearing the case April 10.
"George Zimmerman suffered a broken nose, and had an injury to the back of his head, he was attacked by Trayvon Martin on that evening," Sonner said. "This was a case of self defense."
I guess that 6'3" 17 year old football player could pack a mean punch and kick.
Yeah, you guys have always differentiated between whites and hispanics. Now this is a racial issue, suddenly the guy's white...
Ummm, not all of us. Most people I grew up around considered hispanics to be white.
What is it about speaking Spanish that makes you not white?
I wonder if they think a blue eyed blonde hispanic from Spain is not white?
for the thousandth time...
HISPANIC is an ETHNICITY, not a race.
On federal snap application forms, you mark your race (options: Asian, White, Native Hawaiian/pacific islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, or Black or African Americn)....
ETHNICITY is Hispanic or Non-Hispanic.
Hispanics can be either black or white, because hispanic is not a RACE.
This isn't rocket science, I don't know why people have such a hard time with it.
I don't think Zimmerman was happy about it, nor is he the 'happy' shooter that some of his detractors would make him out to be.
The crux of the matter is this (IMO). Why did he keep on following the guy? What gives him the right to walk around the street armed and looking for trouble? Is he a security guard? No. A cop? No. He was a self-appointed neighbourhood watch dude. From the outside looking in (and when I mean outside, I mean outside the US), this is why the country's guns laws are fucked. This is why the second amendment fundametally sux...
Go suck an egg, you have no idea what our rights mean to us. Anyone that would willingly give up the right to arms to a government deserves the eventual loss of all rights.
As for what he was he was a neighborhood watch Captain, it is his responsibility to watch for suspicious activity and to act if he sees it.
All he did is approach the person and he got attacked for it. So bad it broke his nose caused bleeding on the back of his head and knocked him to the ground. He did not shoot until all that happened and even then the person he shot was still facing him. What exactly about him calling for help before he acted don't you understand? What part of he was physically attacked don't you understand? hell if he hadn't been armed he might have been beaten even worse or killed.
