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.
When the National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre finally spoke out about the Trayvon Martin shooting, it was to decry the media's coverage of the tragedy as "sensational reporting from Florida." It's understandable that the NRA would be uncomfortable with the intense media attention to this particular shooting tragedy.
For one thing, the shooting has thrown a spotlight on the real-world impact of the "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" (aka "Stand Your Ground") laws the NRA has pushed in Florida and other states across the country that are allowing dangerous individuals to literally "get away with murder." But the NRA's discomfort has even deeper roots. In a real sense, Trayvon Martin's death at the hands of George Zimmerman exposes the mythology of the NRA's core narrative about guns and self-defense.
The NRA has a wonderfully simple story to tell. In the NRA's world, people are neatly divided into two readily identifiable groups: good guys and bad guys. In this imaginary world, we know that legal carriers of guns must be good guys and that good guys use their guns only in legitimate self-defense -- that's what makes them good guys in the first place. The Trayvon Martin tragedy reveals the real world to be far more complicated.
The gun lobby often cites surveys purporting to establish that good guys defend themselves with guns millions of times every year. One survey repeatedly cited by the NRA asked "have you yourself, or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection"? Of course, after he shot Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, a legal concealed carrier under Florida's weak gun laws, would have answered this question, "Yes".
The survey would not have revealed that Zimmerman could have avoided any risk of confrontation with Trayvon Martin had he followed the suggestion of a police dispatcher to stop following Martin and instead left it to the police to investigate Zimmerman's report of a "suspicious" person. It would not have revealed that Zimmerman armed himself for his neighborhood watch duties in violation of the neighborhood watch guidelines that members "shall not carry weapons." Nor would it have revealed that Trayvon Martin was armed only with a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea at the time Zimmerman shot him dead. The Trayvon Martin shooting demonstrates that relying on a person's claim of self-defense is folly, in part because the person's own aggressive behavior may have caused the confrontation in the first place. Indeed, in prison surveys, over 60 percent of convicted felons who have fired a gun claim to have done so in self-defense.
Dennis A. Henigan: Why the NRA Wants the Trayvon Martin Case to Go Away
When the National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre finally spoke out about the Trayvon Martin shooting, it was to decry the media's coverage of the tragedy as "sensational reporting from Florida." It's understandable that the NRA would be uncomfortable with the intense media attention to this particular shooting tragedy.
For one thing, the shooting has thrown a spotlight on the real-world impact of the "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" (aka "Stand Your Ground") laws the NRA has pushed in Florida and other states across the country that are allowing dangerous individuals to literally "get away with murder." But the NRA's discomfort has even deeper roots. In a real sense, Trayvon Martin's death at the hands of George Zimmerman exposes the mythology of the NRA's core narrative about guns and self-defense.
The NRA has a wonderfully simple story to tell. In the NRA's world, people are neatly divided into two readily identifiable groups: good guys and bad guys. In this imaginary world, we know that legal carriers of guns must be good guys and that good guys use their guns only in legitimate self-defense -- that's what makes them good guys in the first place. The Trayvon Martin tragedy reveals the real world to be far more complicated.
The gun lobby often cites surveys purporting to establish that good guys defend themselves with guns millions of times every year. One survey repeatedly cited by the NRA asked "have you yourself, or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection"? Of course, after he shot Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, a legal concealed carrier under Florida's weak gun laws, would have answered this question, "Yes".
The survey would not have revealed that Zimmerman could have avoided any risk of confrontation with Trayvon Martin had he followed the suggestion of a police dispatcher to stop following Martin and instead left it to the police to investigate Zimmerman's report of a "suspicious" person. It would not have revealed that Zimmerman armed himself for his neighborhood watch duties in violation of the neighborhood watch guidelines that members "shall not carry weapons." Nor would it have revealed that Trayvon Martin was armed only with a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea at the time Zimmerman shot him dead. The Trayvon Martin shooting demonstrates that relying on a person's claim of self-defense is folly, in part because the person's own aggressive behavior may have caused the confrontation in the first place. Indeed, in prison surveys, over 60 percent of convicted felons who have fired a gun claim to have done so in self-defense.
In the end its all about money too, the NRA are puppets and prostitutes for the gun and wealons industry.
I'm sure the death of that Afro piece-of-shit is going to be part of every fund raising letter of the NRA. Without a gun, Zimmerman would have been severely beaten and possibly killed. And, if Zimmerman had managed to avoid the Afro, that Trayvon Martin piece-of-shit would still be alive, which is also an undesirable outcome.
The shitbrained Lieberals keep insisting on their false account. That it's unreasonable for someone to want to follow a suspect so he doesn't get away. That Zimmerman was told not not follow. That Zimmerman continued to follow after he was told he didn't need to follow. And, that following the Afro somehow makes Zimmerman guilty when he the Afro attacked him - logic that liberals would never accept if we were talking about a drunk skank in a short skirt getting raped.
Dennis A. Henigan: Why the NRA Wants the Trayvon Martin Case to Go Away
When the National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre finally spoke out about the Trayvon Martin shooting, it was to decry the media's coverage of the tragedy as "sensational reporting from Florida." It's understandable that the NRA would be uncomfortable with the intense media attention to this particular shooting tragedy.
For one thing, the shooting has thrown a spotlight on the real-world impact of the "Shoot First, Ask Questions Later" (aka "Stand Your Ground") laws the NRA has pushed in Florida and other states across the country that are allowing dangerous individuals to literally "get away with murder." But the NRA's discomfort has even deeper roots. In a real sense, Trayvon Martin's death at the hands of George Zimmerman exposes the mythology of the NRA's core narrative about guns and self-defense.
The NRA has a wonderfully simple story to tell. In the NRA's world, people are neatly divided into two readily identifiable groups: good guys and bad guys. In this imaginary world, we know that legal carriers of guns must be good guys and that good guys use their guns only in legitimate self-defense -- that's what makes them good guys in the first place. The Trayvon Martin tragedy reveals the real world to be far more complicated.
The gun lobby often cites surveys purporting to establish that good guys defend themselves with guns millions of times every year. One survey repeatedly cited by the NRA asked "have you yourself, or another member of your household used a gun, even if it was not fired, for self-protection"? Of course, after he shot Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, a legal concealed carrier under Florida's weak gun laws, would have answered this question, "Yes".
The survey would not have revealed that Zimmerman could have avoided any risk of confrontation with Trayvon Martin had he followed the suggestion of a police dispatcher to stop following Martin and instead left it to the police to investigate Zimmerman's report of a "suspicious" person. It would not have revealed that Zimmerman armed himself for his neighborhood watch duties in violation of the neighborhood watch guidelines that members "shall not carry weapons." Nor would it have revealed that Trayvon Martin was armed only with a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea at the time Zimmerman shot him dead. The Trayvon Martin shooting demonstrates that relying on a person's claim of self-defense is folly, in part because the person's own aggressive behavior may have caused the confrontation in the first place. Indeed, in prison surveys, over 60 percent of convicted felons who have fired a gun claim to have done so in self-defense.
In the end its all about money too, the NRA are puppets and prostitutes for the gun and wealons industry.
4 million members...
It would be a mistake, however, to use the Zimmerman/Martin case to put SYG on trial as well, as the problem is not the law but Zimmermans ignorance of, or contempt for, the law.
The law is the problem, unless someone is under a real threat there should be no SYG law, no such law is needed for that. It presupposes that everyone who legally has a weapon are not subject to the type of bullshat that Zimmerman does. Everyone who legally and lawfully owns a gun are not citizens of good judgment trying to defend themselves.
The law is the problem, unless someone is under a real threat there should be no SYG law, no such law is needed for that. It presupposes that everyone who legally has a weapon are not subject to the type of bullshat that Zimmerman does. Everyone who legally and lawfully owns a gun are not citizens of good judgment trying to defend themselves.
If someone is subject to an actual threat with no SYG law in place, his options for self-defense are severely limited.
If someone commits pre-meditated murder and attempts to use SYG as a defense at trial, then hell be convicted of pre-meditated murder. That he believes SYG gives him license to kill outside of the bounds of the legal justified use of deadly force in self-defense, then the fault lies with the individual, not the law, and the individual is punished accordingly.That law is not need and think about this from both sides instead of always from the perespective of the person that feels threatened with a need to react, put yourself in the place of an African American male, who has been portrayed by the media as violent and scary, walking down the street and someone pulls out and blasts you because they feel "threatened." To me its a law that allows careless people with stereotypes to blast people away and get away with. That law does not take into account both sides, thus it should be thrown out.
If someone commits pre-meditated murder and attempts to use SYG as a defense at trial, then hell be convicted of pre-meditated murder. That he believes SYG gives him license to kill outside of the bounds of the legal justified use of deadly force in self-defense, then the fault lies with the individual, not the law, and the individual is punished accordingly.That law is not need and think about this from both sides instead of always from the perespective of the person that feels threatened with a need to react, put yourself in the place of an African American male, who has been portrayed by the media as violent and scary, walking down the street and someone pulls out and blasts you because they feel "threatened." To me its a law that allows careless people with stereotypes to blast people away and get away with. That law does not take into account both sides, thus it should be thrown out.
Constitutional rights, including the right to self-defense, cant be mitigated because the possibility exists that the right might be abused.
the Hufferpost should write a article on, why the people who want to take away your second amendment rights won't let the Trevon Martin case go away..
Like this case is anymore special than any others..but here we are
the Hufferpost should write a article on, why the people who want to take away your second amendment rights won't let the Trevon Martin case go away..
Like this case is anymore special than any others..but here we are
There is no second Amendment right that says a person can shoot first if they feel threatened, it gives the right to bear arms, stupid ass.
the Hufferpost should write a article on, why the people who want to take away your second amendment rights won't let the Trevon Martin case go away..
Like this case is anymore special than any others..but here we are
There is no second Amendment right that says a person can shoot first if they feel threatened, it gives the right to bear arms, stupid ass.
Yeah, and Zimmerman is in court over it...You're the one who posted this dumb article about the NRA.
There is no second Amendment right that says a person can shoot first if they feel threatened, it gives the right to bear arms, stupid ass.
Yeah, and Zimmerman is in court over it...You're the one who posted this dumb article about the NRA.
Dumb ass, you brought up Second Amendment rights being taken away which is a strawman, the circumstances are clear, neighborhood watch means to watch and report suspicious activity, not strap up and play hero rental cop just because you have right to bear arms.
Yeah, and Zimmerman is in court over it...You're the one who posted this dumb article about the NRA.
Dumb ass, you brought up Second Amendment rights being taken away which is a strawman, the circumstances are clear, neighborhood watch means to watch and report suspicious activity, not strap up and play hero rental cop just because you have right to bear arms.
ok if you say so... so what does the NRA have to do with anything again?
and you people and your name calling..so childish
Dumb ass, you brought up Second Amendment rights being taken away which is a strawman, the circumstances are clear, neighborhood watch means to watch and report suspicious activity, not strap up and play hero rental cop just because you have right to bear arms.
ok if you say so... so what does the NRA have to do with anything again?
and you people and your name calling..so childish
They support the law, more guys being sold because they lobby for laws like this, you said Zimmerman's 2nd Amendment rights were being taken, please explain that shat.
ok if you say so... so what does the NRA have to do with anything again?
and you people and your name calling..so childish
They support the law, more guys being sold because they lobby for laws like this, you said Zimmerman's 2nd Amendment rights were being taken, please explain that shat.
no I didn't, I said they are using this case to try and take away, OUR second amendment rights..
but carry on..
They support the law, more guys being sold because they lobby for laws like this, you said Zimmerman's 2nd Amendment rights were being taken, please explain that shat.
no I didn't, I said they are using this case to try and take away, OUR second amendment rights..
but carry on..
No, this case is not about taking away second amendment rights, try again!
