General Political Thread

[JUDE]

  If nothing else, hopefully this will serve as a reminder for people who possess CCW permits that they aren't cops and shouldn't behave like one.

 

I possess a permit to carry and have for years, I find it quite humorous that people have the impression that CCW holders are all playing cop or looking for a chance to shoot someone. When it's quite the opposite actually, the majority of the training is spent on the consequences of having to pull your weapon and use it in a self-defense situation, always stressing trying to avoid those situations or remove yourself from the potential of having to use deadly force.

 

One instructor liked to say, when you have a CCW permit you "lose the right to be an asshole".

 

As to your conjecture, re: Zimmermann not having a firearm, I see Zimmerman be a bit overzealous trying to protect his neighborhood and not having a firearm probably wouldn’t temper his zeal to try and do the right thing, I would argue he still would have grabbed his flashlight, left his vehicle and tried to reacquire the suspects location. I will concede that Martin would likely still be alive today, but I question if Zimmerman would be.

[Hixter]

If I'm following someone as a neighborhood watch person

He was not on neighborhood watch patrol at the time he shot Martin. He was on his way to the store when he noticed him.

 

Hitter, you seem unwilling to acknowledge he did anything wrong (criminal or otherwise) that night. 

It's all Monday morning quarterbacking at this time. Zimmerman thought he was just keeping an eye on Martin until the cops arrived. Martin thought Zimmerman was a creepy-ass, gay cracka preparing to rape him. I'm sure they both wish (or would have wished) that they'd done things differently that night but, as it stands, no laws were broken by George Zimmerman.

 

Also, curious, what restrictions on magazines do you favor?

From my post on April 11th:

 

Feel free to ban the ridiculously large, bulky and unreliable aftermarket magazines that hold a hundred rounds; anyone with half a brain wouldn't waste their money on them.

Please note that I don't think banning magazines of any kind will result in a lowering of our gun crime rate.

 

Take a few steps back and it might get clearer.  Most people living in larger cities know of neighborhoods where physical violence, or "a beat down" is a weekly reality.  Where the tenants of that neighborhood are well accustomed to having to use bravado, and their fists as a method of self preservation.  Picture yourself getting out of your car in one of these neighborhoods and chasing a young man, shouting "Hey, what the hell do you think you're doing?".  Some percentage of the time that young man is going to kick your ass, or try to.

And some percentage of the time the beat-ee will have a gun and shoot the beat-er. If the shooter was somewhere he was allowed to be and wasn't committing a crime at the time, he is within his rights to use deadly force if he believes his life is in danger.

[lost highway]

it's not condescension, it's disagreement.  if you'd like to explain how a situation involving competing gang members could in some way be relevant to the zimmerman/martin case I'm all ears.

 

Because it assumes the exact same actions are taken but the conditions that we presuppose, the characterization of who is doing it, is changed.  What I'm saying is the law is supposed to be blind, to judge everyone the same for what they do.  But do you see how quickly (so quickly that you make fun of it as irrelevant) changing the characters, but not their actions makes it look different.

 

To me it's not that big of a stretch anyways.  What's the difference between a neighborhood watch "member" driving around with a gun and noticing someone who he doesn't like the looks of, vs. a gang "member" driving around with a gun noticing some he doesn't like the looks of?  People get assaulted, and/or shot in both situations.

[Hixter]

 What's the difference between a neighborhood watch "member" driving around with a gun and noticing someone who he doesn't like the looks of, vs. a gang "member" driving around with a gun noticing some he doesn't like the looks of?  People get assaulted, and/or shot in both situations.

As I mentioned earlier, Zimmerman wasn't on neighborhood watch patrol at the time of the incident. That said, the difference between neighborhood watch members and gang members is night and day:

 

Neighborhood watches are typically coordinated by police departments. Cops train the members and work closely with the group. The purpose of the group is to aid the police department by serving as their eyes and ears in the community. They are the good guys.

 

Gang members work outside of the law. They break the law. They hide from cops. They kill cops. They are the bad guys.

[lost highway]

Your entire defense is based on what hat people are wearing.  He was a dude driving around with a gun literally looking for trouble.  I see no difference.

 

The "good guys" and "bad guys" stuff is childish logic.  Do you think being trained makes you a reliable, good person?  Does having a concealed carry trainer telling you you "can't be an asshole" mean that you won't?  Is every member of a neighborhood watch automatically a good person?

 

I'm calling bullshit.  By the way, your "good guy" Mr. Zimmerman was arrested for resisting an officer with violence, and battery of a law enforcement officer.  Your "good guy" was arrested for beating up the "good guys".

[Mr. Heartbreak]

 

I'm calling bullshit.  By the way, your "good guy" Mr. Zimmerman was arrested for resisting an officer with violence, and battery of a law enforcement officer.  Your "good guy" was arrested for beating up the "good guys".

Thank you for clarifying this. He was also accused of molesting a cousin for a period of time, in addition to domestic violence. He would probably have quite a lengthy rap sheet were it not for daddy being a judge. He is hardly what I would call a "good guy."

[Guest Jules]

All of that is irrelevant to this case though.

[Atticus]

Because it assumes the exact same actions are taken but the conditions that we presuppose, the characterization of who is doing it, is changed.  What I'm saying is the law is supposed to be blind, to judge everyone the same for what they do.  But do you see how quickly (so quickly that you make fun of it as irrelevant) changing the characters, but not their actions makes it look different.

 

To me it's not that big of a stretch anyways.  What's the difference between a neighborhood watch "member" driving around with a gun and noticing someone who he doesn't like the looks of, vs. a gang "member" driving around with a gun noticing some he doesn't like the looks of?  People get assaulted, and/or shot in both situations.

 

but you didn't just change the characters, you changed intent.  2 rivaling gang members is a different situation than the case at hand.  and while the law is to treat parties equally, in criminal matters, intent is often a determinant factor.

[Hixter]

Do you think being trained makes you a reliable, good person?  Does having a concealed carry trainer telling you you "can't be an asshole" mean that you won't?

People with concealed handgun licenses undergo background checks and training. If they pass and are awarded a CHL, they are essentially good guys in the eyes of the law right up until the point where they break the law. George Zimmerman was legally allowed to carry a handgun that night and he was legally allowed to defend himself when he feared that his life was in danger. Had he illegally brandished his weapon when he was following Martin it would have been an entirely different story.

 

I'm calling bullshit.  By the way, your "good guy" Mr. Zimmerman was arrested for resisting an officer with violence, and battery of a law enforcement officer.  Your "good guy" was arrested for beating up the "good guys".

Touching a police officer with your pinky is considered battery of a LEO. From what I've read, Zimmerman was drunk and pushed a cop while he was arresting his friend. That's not exactly the same sort of beating that Martin dished out but, most importantly, it has nothing to do with this case. If you think it does, then I hope you weren't one of the people complaining that Martin's history of fighting, guns and drugs weren't relevant to the case.

 

He was also accused of molesting a cousin for a period of time

Then by all means, try him and throw the book at him if he's guilty.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Then by all means, try him and throw the book at him if he's guilty.

Unfortunately, not considered relevant to his murder case. However, she had some other things to say about him that were interesting:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/05/28/george-zimmermans-relevant-past/

[Hixter]

Unfortunately, not considered relevant to his murder case. However, she had some other things to say about him that were interesting:

That blog post has a glaring error, claiming that Zimmerman had called the police 46 times to report suspicious black males. That's simply untrue, but I guess we shouldn't expect unbiased reporting from a blog with the word "Partisan" in the title.

 

Like I said, follow through on the cousin's allegations. If he committed a crime, throw him in jail. But there may be more to the picture than meets the eye. As someone who has been falsely accused of sexual assault in the past, I'd like to make sure she's not just a mentally unstable person with an ax to grind with her family.

[Good Old Neon]

Those defending Zimmerman's actions are either being willfully obtuse or an asshole.

[Atticus]

that's the spirit!

[Hixter]

"Think like me or you're an asshole!" 

[Good Old Neon]

Consider it profiling - only in this instance, I have tangible evidence to support my suspicions, unlike Zimmerman.

 

Zimmerman stays in car - this never happens. Period. What could Martin have done differently?

[Hixter]

What could Martin have done differently?

Gone home instead of attacking Zimmerman.

[Good Old Neon]

According to Zimmerman. Putting aside the fact the Martin was simply walking down the street, which, is, I think, still legal - even in Florida.

 

I'm not sure, at 17 (or 42) how I would react if a stranger were to get out of his car and approach me, asking questions I was under no obligation to answer. Martin spontaneously screaming - "you're going to die tonight", and then jumping on Zimmerman sounds a bit far fetched - without some form of provocation.

 

While growing up, I, along with many of my friends, found myself on both sides of an asskicking - strangely enough - I/we never felt the need to shoot our adversary in the chest. Or, as we used to say, don't let your mouth/behavior write a check your ass can't cash.

[lost highway]

While growing up, I, along with many of my friends, found myself on both sides of an asskicking - strangely enough - I/we never felt the need to shoot our adversary in the chest.

 

This.

[uncool2pillow]

He was not on neighborhood watch patrol at the time he shot Martin. He was on his way to the store when he noticed him.

But he was a trained neighborhood watch volunteer.  So how is this difference substantial in the slightest?

[Hixter]

Putting aside the fact the Martin was simply walking down the street, which, is, I think, still legal - even in Florida.

And George Zimmerman was also walking down the street. Legally. No crime was committed that night until Trayvon Martin began beating Zimmerman and threatening to kill him.

 

While growing up, I, along with many of my friends, found myself on both sides of an asskicking - strangely enough - I/we never felt the need to shoot our adversary in the chest.

People are beaten to death every day. A single punch can be deadly and having your head slammed on the concrete even more so. Remember that you are more than twice as likely to be murdered by bare hands and feet than by a so-called "assault" rifle.

 

Or, as we used to say, don't let your mouth/behavior write a check your ass can't cash.

Like it or not, George Zimmerman won the fight that night.

 

But he was a trained neighborhood watch volunteer.  So how is this difference substantial in the slightest?

Neighborhood watch members aren't supposed to carry weapons or follow suspicious persons. Zimmerman was under no requirement to follows those rules if he was just going about his everyday business.

[uncool2pillow]

Neighborhood watch members aren't supposed to carry weapons or follow suspicious persons. Zimmerman was under no requirement to follows those rules if he was just going about his everyday business.

All the more reason for him to have heeded the advice (probably legally "ambiguous", but come on...) to not pursue Martin.  I suppose neighborhood watch volunteers are to be unarmed to avoid this kind of situation. 

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Like it or not, George Zimmerman won the fight that night.

 

This is probably the line of thinking many object to the most. Could he not have pistol-whipped him instead? Fired a warning shot? He shot at close range, he shot in the heart, so he only had to shoot once. He shot to kill.

As for going about his everyday business, I don't see how that's possible. Listen to what he was saying on the phone, and you'll know better than that.

[Good Old Neon]

Tonight on Street Justice, another negro dares to be a negro in public.

 

[Hixter]

Tonight on Street Justice, another negro dares to be a negro in public.

As I've said earlier, making racist remarks is just as offensive if you're just putting words in another person's mouth.

[indy81]

Gone home instead of attacking Zimmerman.

 

Martin's not allowed to "Stand His Ground" in the face of a threatening stranger?