[Cincinnatus.45-70]

In a nation of cowards, such as ours, self-defense is always under attack.

[G Larry]

New Florida Law:

“All victims and potential victims are required under penalty of imprisonment, to be able to outrun any and all potential criminal adversaries.”

[samtheman]

They don’t come much stupider than Bloomberg.

[FLAMING DEATH]

Bottom line:

Because of anecdotal incidents which aren’t significant enough to skew any statistic, or are outright fabricated, the “Surrender First” crowd wants the CRIMINALS to dictate what YOUR actions will be in a confrontation, rather than giving YOU the power as a law abiding citizen who’s rights have been violated to decide the best way to respond to the threat.

They’re telling you, “Run, peasant”. Think any of their bodyguards would respond this way in the face of a threat?

Another “hug-a-thug” feel-good effort not grounded in reality. These people are evil.

[TigersEye]

anti-self defense and anti-gun

Now there's two popular issues. Run hard on that, Dems!

[SWAMPSNIPER]

The libs are always waiting for something to exploit, it doesn’t matter if it’s relevant or not.

[sarasmom]

The prosecution better have indisputable physical evidence negating Zimmerman’s accounting of the killing at this point.

As it now stands, it looks very much like a politically induced prosecution.

That would be a very bad thing right about now.....

[neverdem]

The rats are so smart. They want to commit suicide again with the right to self defense!

Stand Your Ground makes sense

Making a Hash of the Second Amendment

Obama Wins Close or Loses Big

Scrounging around for Asian workers (Marion Barry again)

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[Pontiac]

In the meantime, it is worth noting that Florida's violent crime rate, which fell by 12 percent in the five years before the "stand your ground" law was enacted, fell by 23 percent in the five years afterward. Since 1987, when Florida adopted a nondiscretionary carry permit law that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence blames for "year after year of carnage," the state's violent crime rate has been cut nearly in half.

The beauty of being a Democrat is that you just don’t have to have any evidence to support your arguments. You just have to say if you do it my way things will be so much better. Or you say look at all of this suffering that would be avoided.

Of course the press just picks up their inflammatory rhetoric and prints it uncritically or if they print any arguments from the opposition it is printed near the end of the article in the most condescending fashion possible.

[FreedomPoster]

>>The law’s opponents note that the annual number of justifiable homicides in Florida (excluding police shootings) nearly tripled after the law was passed in 2005, from an average of 12 between 2000 and 2004 to an average of 35 between 2006 and 2010.

I would observe that some people just need shootin’. And in a state the size of Florida, it is probably larger than 35 a year.

[familyop]

Your Second Amendment right is under attack, as are other rights. The obvious plan by the bipartisan, political/regulator class is to create racial tensions through troublemaking policy pressures on police/courts and eventually cause incidents. Then, they’ll make their new legislative moves. Don’t take the bait, folks. The political people of today are afraid of you because of the economy and some of their other activities.

[Vendome]

Morons!

It isn’t a stand your ground case!

He was on his back on the ground! He’d ceded about as much as he could before acting in Self Defense.

Doesn’t matter. The case is so thin it won’t make it past May 8th.

[Iron Munro]

When you are slugged from behind and find yourself laying on the ground with a healthy black teenager pounding your head into the pavement you don't stop and think:

"If I shoot this scumbag will I be covered by the 'Stand-Your-Ground-Law' or should I just let him turn my brains into mashed potatoes?"

[Condor51]

... a right to "stand your ground" in public places, which eliminated the duty to retreat from an assailant.

Here's the problem with "the duty to retreat from an assailant". Many people CAN'T retreat.

Either from a medical condition, age, or the situation at hand. Or due to a combination thereof. If you're facing eminent danger of life or limb you have to stay and defend yourself. And that's that.

A young strapping 30 year old who just had knee surgery and has to to a cane can't run away (retreat). Or an older person with a cane, walker, or in a wheelchair. In those situations the feral street vermin look at you as an easy target, which you are if unarmed. Not to mention the average female who'd be any easy target for a Rapist.

But the gun-grabbers know this and don't give a crap. They want POWER over the masses and an unarmed people are the easiest to control. And if a few people get killed along the way so be it. It's for the 'Greater Good' (theirs not ours). As they say, 'The End Justifies The Means'.

However, that saying works both ways. As my 'End' is to stay alive and not become a victim. Which 'Justifies' any 'Means' I choose to achieve that 'End'.
(yes I'm in IL and technically I'm supposed to be a 'voluntary victim' when outside, ha!)