Posted on 04/13/2012 5:44:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Officially the National Rifle Association convention is not supposed to begin until Friday, at the America’s Center of St. Louis, Mo. But really the NRA convention began Thursday in a courtroom in Sanford, Fla., its keynote speech delivered by a man in a jail jumpsuit who barely said a word.
His name is George Zimmerman and he is not just the face of the NRA in this country, he is the face of gun laws built on the fears and paranoia of the gun lovers in the NRA, the ones who have made a mockery of the Second Amendment. His name is George Zimmerman and in all the big ways he is the darling of the NRA, which wants the whole country to shoot first and ask questions later.
And if an unarmed 17-year old kid ends up dead in the street, well, that’s just the cost of doing business.
Zimmerman: Another guy in America who should never have been allowed to carry a gun but sure had one the night he shot Trayvon Martin. A guy who finally got arrested for murder because a brave Florida prosecutor decided George Zimmerman wasn’t allowed to hide behind one of those Stand Your Ground laws that have become a better license to kill than James Bond ever had.
Mayor Bloomberg was talking about laws like that again yesterday, one day after delivering a speech in Washington that was the biggest and best speech any major American politician has ever given on the subject of guns.
“These laws are vigilantism masquerading as self-defense, and getting 25 states to pass them is one of the best con jobs the NRA’s leaders have ever pulled off,” Bloomberg said. “They don’t give a damn whether innocent people are shot and killed. And they don’t give a damn about the integrity of the American justice system. They want to create a nation where disputes are settled by guns instead of gavels, and where suspects are shot by civilians instead of arrested by police. These laws destabilize our justice system, they degrade our society, and they destroy innocent lives. We can’t be silent — and we can’t let them stand.”
And here is what Bloomberg said on Wednesday at the National Press Club, on the day when he and national African-American leaders announced a new partnership to reform or repeal shoot-first laws now on the books in Florida and 24 other states:
“The NRA’s leaders weren’t interested in public safety. They were interested in promoting a culture where people take the law into their own hands and face no consequences for it. Let’s call that by its real name: vigilantism.”
(VIDEO AT LINK)
I don't think they are. It's only the loony left and ratbag right that are trying to associate them.
a new black guy in the neighborhood.....6'2”...wearing a hoodie...walking between houses after dark and not on the sidewalk...nothing suspicious there!...
Black guy feels threatened and challenged by some local white rube watching and following him....That's normal! (its called being dissed in the “hood”)
Rube approaches with a stick....Black guy pulls his heat and greases the white rube....that's normal in the hood too...but so much for your theory of mitigating the attack...lol...
(PS...just a friendly word of advise in other matters.....Don't ever play any games of chance that requires a reasonable understanding of odds....I think you'd suck at ‘em!...*W*)
How many times should he have his head pounded into the concrete before it would have been enough?
“the ones who have made a mockery of the Second Amendment”
If this writer believed in the 2nd amendment before it was purportedly made a mockery of, or in any condition for that matter, I’ll eat my hat.
I wouldn't touch that bet. He might still use it to justify him attacking GZ.
Did you see his face when Treyvon's mom said it was probably an accident on the Today show? Hilarious!
“Let’s call that by its real name: vigilantism.”
If you want to call self-defense under limited circumstances vigilantism, fine, I believe in vigilantism. Better a nation of vigilantes than a nation waiting around for the cops to save them. You’ll wait yourself into the grave.
“All he took was a concealed weapon. He didn’t want anyone to know he was armed.”
Uh, yeah, that’s what “conceal and carry” means. Surely open carry has greater deterrent effect, but what are you saying? That anyone who doesn’t brandish their gun isn’t doing everything in their power to avoid being assaulted? That it’s somehow okay to beat up on people who aren’t carrying visible weapons? I really don’t get it.
http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/Improper-Exhibition-Firearm-Weapon.html
Zimmerman could have been charged for `brandishing’ a firearm, if he had been waving it around.
The story I’ve read is he didn’t pull it until Martin attacked him.
Moral? If you don’t want to get shot, don’t attack guys smaller than you because you consider yourself a `No_limit_nigga.’
“A ball bat in Zimmerman’s hand likely would have mitigated the attack.”
People being down on him for provocative following I can understand. It’s plain wrong, but I understand why people might come to that conclusion. As for your loopiness, I can’t understand where you’re coming from. Zimmerman should have been wielding a bat? He invited attack by lack of implied threat? I’ve got it: how about after 6pm it’s mandatory for all citizens wishing to walk the streets to carry a locked and loaded shotgun at average eye level. That should cut down on beatings, though possibly shotgun-related deaths will shoot up.
[[Overtly challenging the kid while carrying concealed is a big NO NO]]
first of all, whjere did he challenge the kid? Apparently you have evidnece that hte rest of the world isn’t privy to- Secondly, He can carry and confront ANYONE he likes ANY TIME HE LIKES- confrontation is NOT agaisnt hte law- Martin however CRIMINALLY ASSAULTED Zimmerman which Martin did NOT have a right to do
You are makign up rules and makign up facts of the case as you go along in order to support your bleeding heart liberal biass agaisnt gun owners- Martin was LEGALLY within his rights do be o nthat street patroling IF he so wanted to WITH a concealed gun if he so chose to, and confronting any damn person he wanted to whether he was armed or not armed- Martin was NOT legally justified in Criminally Assaulting Zimmerman-
It doesn’t matter if zimmerman was on ‘official neighbiorhood duty’ or not- He was FULLY WITIHIN HIS RIGHTS to carry any damn time he liked and he was udner NO obligation to make that fact known to ANYONE
As for the club comment- Wow- Stunning! You carry your club-, people that actually want protection agaisnt thugs that they don’;t know whether they are armed or not, will continue carrying firearms- You can’t argue with hte FACTS- Violent crimes in Florida have dropped to 40 year low AFTER a million plus conceal carry permits were issued to ordinary citizens fed up with being murdered by thugs with guns- Cities where it’s impossible to get permits to carry the violent crimes are still at all time highs, and climbing every year
“Overtly challenging the kid while carrying concealed is a big NO NO”
If he was overtly challenging him then Zimmerman wouldn’t be able to assert self-defense, as Martin would be within his rights to meet the challenge with violence. Which would make the issue of whether Zimmerman should have been carrying concealed moot, because with or without a weapon showing he wouldn’t have been able to use it in self-defense. Or are you just making the overt challenge part up? That’s my guess.
Is following someone inherently overtly challenging? No. Do you know something we don’t? Probably not. So what you’re saying is anyone who follows anyone else without a clearly visible weapon is inviting violence upon themselves. That’s not how it works in our world, but keep cool in yours.
“From his 911 log it looks as if he was frustrated, and maybe fed-up with his town’s law enforcement(or lack thereof).”
Oh, boy, they’re really piling up. Now one cannot assert self-defense if they’ve been frustrated by the cops. Which I guess excludes most black people, among others.
“He didn’t do everything within his power to avoid this.”
Oh, Waaaah!
He was not obligated to so do by law, morality, custom, of survival.
Hint: Think twice before posting once.
“He can carry and confront ANYONE he likes ANY TIME HE LIKES- confrontation is NOT agaisnt hte law- Martin however CRIMINALLY ASSAULTED Zimmerman which Martin did NOT have a right to do”
This is an important point, and according to many conversations I’ve heard lately needs to be pounded into many heads. You can’t instigate violence on a whim, nor to implied threats or potential future threats. The old “freedom to swing my arm ends at your nose” rule applies. The exceptions are few, and are limited to: “fighting words” and obvious overt threats. They do not include following someone and informing on them to a non-emergency telephone service.
“They do not include following someone and informing on them”
Ignore the “and”
Right ... because one is not allowed to open carry in Florida ... thus the concealed weapon.
[[The exceptions are few, and are limited to: “fighting words” and obvious overt threats.]]
Or to brandishing a weapon, which there is absolutely NO evidence George did, and EVERY evidnce to show that he only did so AFTER he was in fear for his life after martin informed him he was goign to kill him and was ifnact tryign to do just that. Had george taken the gun out at the first confrontatiion, Martin would have been within his rights to strike george Had he folishly decided to do so- however, that is NOT what happened- And you’re right- this FACT of hte case should be pounded into the heads of he bleeding heart leftists who refuse to acknowledge that noone has a right to assault someoen else- Martin was the ONLY one hwo committed a criminal act in this case, and by all rights, geoerge should probaqbly be suing the martins for what hteir son did to him- but justice will NEVER prevail in htis case because hte left REFUSES to admit that Martin was the who committed the criminal act in this case, NOT zimmerman
I hope to God he did.
I do.
Feds can't tell me what to do.
Trayvon Martin got exactly what he deserved. Live like a thug, die like a thug.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.