OT: Zimmerman Not Guilty

[yossarian]

Wrong. Guns turn men into equals. And if you are wandering around in my neighborhood at night uninvited and you started a confrontation with me you'd get your confrontation alright; it'd be with the business end of a gun.

So if I shove you I deserve to get shot? If we are just having a normal fight and you pull a gun does that mean you're justified in gunning me down? Maybe in Florida, maybe not in some other state. There's too much bloviating about this subject now, I can't fucking wait for training camp to start so that people who don't know the law can quit commenting on it.

 

[yossarian]

Here's the thing --- The provision, enacted by the Florida Legislature in 2005 and since adopted by more than 20 other states, allows people who fear great harm or death not to retreat, even if they can safely do so. If an attacker is retreating, people are still permitted to use deadly force.

n Washington and Idaho, there is no statute that gives anyone the right to “stand your ground” and use deadly force in public when faced with a perceived threat.

So this whole issue is bound up in the particular laws each state has on self defense, as well as the burden of proof. It has very little to do if there's some "right" to do this or that. Under Florida law, Zimmerman had a great chance of getting acquitted, if he had done the same actions in another state, probably a lot less of a chance.

 

[TobyTyler]

As usual, the Onion hits it on the head.

In Our Defense, These Were Some Pretty Fucked-Up Laws And We Were Ordered To Deliberate In Accordance With Them | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

I couldn't disagree more.

 

[TobyTyler]

So if I shove you I deserve to get shot? If we are just having a normal fight and you pull a gun does that mean you're justified in gunning me down? Maybe in Florida, maybe not in some other state. There's too much bloviating about this subject now, I can't fucking wait for training camp to start so that people who don't know the law can quit commenting on it.

Probably not, I'd cuss you out or perhaps strike you back. However, if it escalated from there, this thing YOU started, I'd have no problem shooting you in order to prevent physical harm to me.

 

[Rvnight18]

That about sums it up. Despite the egregious grammatical and spelling errors, you hit it on the head. I'm going to chalk those errors up though to you being justifiably outraged by this nonsense.

I am on my iPhone. Cable is down

 

[TobyTyler]

I am on my iPhone. Cable is down

Good work then.

 

[MarkOU]

Then you should never own a gun, flat out. Guns turn men into pussies. If you follow me around and start shit, there is going to be a confrontation. If Martin went into his home then you might have a point, but Zimmerman was following him around, and provoking the incident. Zimmerman on the phone with police referred to Martin (because there had been some break ins recently) as "these fucking punks" and "these assholes who always get away." Martin even talked about being scared on the phone because he was being followed and tried to run away. Zimmerman is a pussy, who thought he was a big man with a gun, and he killed a kid. Take your lumps like a man.

I own a gun. Have a liscence that allows me to carry it. I don't feel like a pussy.

Maybe if more and more people carried guns, we would have fewer victims of r*pe and assault and more dead bad guys.

 

[EaseUrStorm]

Ignore the absurd media racial influence nonsense and focus on the facts. The mainstream media has morphed into something scary. It will always be "he said, she said."

If someone told me I was going to die today and proceeded to crack the back of my head with fists against concrete, I'd probably start to fear for my life. If I couldn't get my head off the concrete and onto nearby grass, I'd be resorted to doing anything and everything possible to save my life. After I shot the guy, when the cop interrogates me and falsely tells me the whole thing was caught on video, I'd say "thank God" just like he did. Now if I made the whole thing up to save my own ass, and the police gave me that same piece of info, I probably wouldn't instantly respond with a "thank God." That's a big reason why he walked.

Now did he overreact and shoot too early? Maybe. That's what the media focus needs to be on.

 

[NinerSickness]

Ignore the absurd media racial influence nonsense and focus on the facts. The mainstream media has morphed into something scary. It will always be "he said, she said."

This was a hit job from the beginning. The DA didn't even think he had a case & didn't want to prosecute. NBC edited the 911 call to make him look like he's a racist. The decision was made in Washington to arrest him when political groups called for his head (in other words, this was 100% politics not a criminal issue).

I don't even think they cared if they got a conviction; they just wanted this story all over the news for months to piss people off who didn't follow the evidence of the case & just react emotionally.

 

[erckm510]

I own a gun. Have a liscence that allows me to carry it. I don't feel like a pussy.

Maybe if more and more people carried guns, we would have fewer victims of r*pe and assault and more dead bad guys.

Or maybe there would be more accidental shootings or more accidental deaths. Maybe Ahmad Brooks would have shot his teammate because he was a drunk who said he should go get his gun. What if he had his gun on him? Or take the incident in the movie theater in Colorado. if everyone had a gun yeah they would have killed that guy. Can you tell me that they wouldn't hit an innocent accidentally? Most civilians aren't actually trained to use a gun properly especially if someone is firing a gun back at them.

In any case the logic of more people carry guns there would be fewer victims of crime is silly. Tell me what countries have people carry guns everywhere in plain sight and the countries that have restricted gun laws and let me know where you would want to live.

 

[MHSL82]

I couldn't disagree more.

But you could care less, right?

 

[MarkOU]

Or maybe there would be more accidental shootings or more accidental deaths. Maybe Ahmad Brooks would have shot his teammate because he was a drunk who said he should go get his gun. What if he had his gun on him? Or take the incident in the movie theater in Colorado. if everyone had a gun yeah they would have killed that guy. Can you tell me that they wouldn't hit an innocent accidentally? Most civilians aren't actually trained to use a gun properly especially if someone is firing a gun back at them.

In any case the logic of more people carry guns there would be fewer victims of crime is silly. Tell me what countries have people carry guns everywhere in plain sight and the countries that have restricted gun laws and let me know where you would want to live.

I didn't say fewer crime. I was specific on which crimes.

I don't fear guns sir. Training is widely available, if you choose to seek it out. I see no problem mandating gun training, much like a person must take a driving test. It would do the public some good.

 

[jarrod49]

Or maybe there would be more accidental shootings or more accidental deaths. Maybe Ahmad Brooks would have shot his teammate because he was a drunk who said he should go get his gun. What if he had his gun on him? Or take the incident in the movie theater in Colorado. if everyone had a gun yeah they would have killed that guy. Can you tell me that they wouldn't hit an innocent accidentally? Most civilians aren't actually trained to use a gun properly especially if someone is firing a gun back at them.

In any case the logic of more people carry guns there would be fewer victims of crime is silly. Tell me what countries have people carry guns everywhere in plain sight and the countries that have restricted gun laws and let me know where you would want to live.

You can open carry in Arizona and you can not carry at all in Chicago

2011 crime rates as follows

Murders robberies assaults burglaries theft
PHX 116 3324 4090 18666 38258
CHI 431 13975 12408 26420 72373

Per 100,000 people
PHX 7.9 226.7 279 1273.2 2609.7
CHI 15.9 516.9 458.9 977.2 2676

so in a city that you can open carry vs a city you are not allowed to carry at all the city you can carry in you have half as many murders per 100,000 people, and less than half as many robberies and little more than half as many assaults. Coincidence or because people can carry open or concealed without a permit to protect themselves.


links to stats
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Chicago-Illinois.html
http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Phoenix-Arizona.html

 

[MHSL82]

Well if he followed him cuz he was black thats racial profiling. Thats like me thinking all blacks are thugs, pimps and gangsters. All mexicans must be illegals that ran across the boarder and all whites are hillbilly sister fuckers. All of these are profiling someone by the color of their skin.

If you listen to the whole 911 tape, look at other facts, etc., is there proof or reasonable belief that he followed him because he was black? Did he at first see a young guy in a hoodie and that made him a paranoid man? Did he simply think he had more power or responsibility than he did? I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'd think editing the 911 tape, people talking in certainties one way or another, etc. makes this a harder case to determine.

He could be lying or telling the truth and either way, he could be wrong or justified. If we were to know one fact, we'd think one thing and if another, we'd think the opposite. It's a lot based on mentality, both of Zimmerman and ourselves. If we believe Zimmerman is racist, that might change one's mind, even if he killed or followed him for non-race reasons (these things aren't exclusive, as a police officer could believe racecars to be speeders but pull them over if they indeed appeared to be speeding - even if they weren't).

If we believe guns are bad and that this wouldn't have happened without one, that informs us, even if Zimmerman feared death and really felt like he was protecting the neighborhood (not saying he'd be innocent even then - there's a difference between not guilty and innocent). For example, juries if they improperly are informed that a defendant has insurance and the plaintiff is in pain, they might be more willing to convict without all the information because they feel bad for the plaintiff and with insurance, no harm no foul.

 

[NinerSickness]

I see no problem mandating gun training, much like a person must take a driving test. It would do the public some good.

Except any law mandating gun training as a prerequisite for gun ownership would be thrown out of the courts as unconstitutional. In fact, I think the courts have ruled on things like this already if I'm not mistaken.

 

[erckm510]

I didn't say fewer crime. I was specific on which crimes.

I don't fear guns sir. Training is widely available, if you choose to seek it out. I see no problem mandating gun training, much like a person must take a driving test. It would do the public some good.

I meant those specific crimes you mentioned.

Requiring gun training and to go to a range periodically would be nice.

 

[yossarian]

Except any law mandating gun training as a prerequisite for gun ownership would be thrown out of the courts as unconstitutional. In fact, I think the courts have ruled on things like this already if I'm not mistaken.

I'm not sure that particular requirement has ever been ruled upon

 

[jarrod49]

Except any law mandating gun training as a prerequisite for gun ownership would be thrown out of the courts as unconstitutional. In fact, I think the courts have ruled on things like this already if I'm not mistaken.

In some states you have to have classes to get a concealed permit. before az went to open carry and concealed with out permits you had to take a class, I took it at a community college and it was 2 days for 8 hours it went over gun safety and proper stances and so on, one day in class 2nd day on the range.

 

[MarkOU]

Except any law mandating gun training as a prerequisite for gun ownership would be thrown out of the courts as unconstitutional. In fact, I think the courts have ruled on things like this already if I'm not mistaken.

Sorry let me elaborate, not needed for ownership. I'm simply referring to better training for a carry/conceal permit because what they have now is a joke, at least in my state. I could've passed that class in my sleep.

 

[erckm510]

You can open carry in Arizona and you can not carry at all in Chicago

2011 crime rates as follows

Murders robberies assaults burglaries theft
PHX 116 3324 4090 18666 38258
CHI 431 13975 12408 26420 72373

Per 100,000 people
PHX 7.9 226.7 279 1273.2 2609.7
CHI 15.9 516.9 458.9 977.2 2676

so in a city that you can open carry vs a city you are not allowed to carry at all the city you can carry in you have half as many murders per 100,000 people, and less than half as many robberies and little more than half as many assaults. Coincidence or because people can carry open or concealed without a permit to protect themselves.


links to stats
Crime rate in Chicago, Illinois (IL): murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, auto thefts, arson, law enforcement employees, police officers statistics
Crime rate in Phoenix, Arizona (AZ): murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, auto thefts, arson, law enforcement employees, police officers statistics

I've seen this argument. There is so much information that is left out. Why use Chicago? Why not use San Francisco, Seattle, New York, Honolulu, or Atlanta(choose one)? Why does it have to be the home town of the current sitting President(agenda maybe)? Show me the crime rates of every state with permissive/licensed open carry to those that don't. Then explain to me why gun nut states like Texas and Florida don't have open carry laws. Your example doesn't help your argument to me since it's biased.