quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

OMG I hope not.
Trayvon circles around, assaults Zimmerman, beats, him, goes for his gun... and his civil rights were impugned?
Is this a sick country, or what?

The "issue" of the Zimmerman/Martin affair has no more to do with the facts of the case than your opinions, Truck.

It's a question of whether the President will feel the need to weigh in with a federal response, the way he did with that dumbass comment about Trayvon looking a hypothetical son of his.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin

quote:

My contention is that carrying a gun in your waistband is a horrifically stupid idea. It is even stupider to get into a fist fight while doing so.

but thats not what you said, in your previous statment the struggle for the gun had already ensued, and you contended that after the stuggle ensues you are inthe wrong for firing before you lose control completely...

my contnetion was that once the struggle for a gun starts only and IDIOT wouldn't do everything in his power to have that struggle end with himself in control of the gun. and the surest way to insure that would ne to take the shot while you still have control

fact is, were I put in that situation and I had time to mull over my options I'd surely decide the better course of action is to shot the guy and take my chances in court

Didn't you finish reading that post?

quote:

If you think you need a gun to defend yourself you are a fool

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

If your opponent grabs for your gun it is just as likely, if not more likely, because they intend to kill...just like Trayvon had told his 'girlfriend' he was going to do to the "creepy ass cracker" following him just a couple minutes before Trayvon grab for Zimmerman's gun.

If I am in a fight with someone and I see they have a gun you can be sure I'm going to do what ever necessary to either disarm them or gain control of that weapon. To do otherwise would be foolish in the extreme.

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

I would argue that exactly the other way around. Requiring retreat in the face of aggression is not, I think, centuries old, nor is it effective. Witness Chicago and L.A.
Furthermore, I do not care if it is effective. It is morally repugnant to require an innocent man to retreat. Morally. Repugnant. Period. I am a free citizen, I am no one's subject (except, occasionally, Taylor St Claire's).

quote:

Wherefore, to excuse homicide by the plea of self-defense, it must appear that the slayer had no other possible means of escaping from his assailant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Believe me I am not defending this man... Or the law that enabled him. But so far I just cannot see where there is enough evidence to convict him.

If I were Martins parents and Zimmerman was quitted I would pursue him in civil court where there may be enough evidence...even though it would be little solace. And it is a shame they could not sue the State of Florida the real culprits in this tragedy.

Butch

The Martins have already won a SEVEN FIGURE (>$1M) wrongful death suit against the Retreat at Twin Lakes' Home Owner's Association. If I were the HOA and Zimmerman is acquitted, which it looks like he should be given the prosecution's total lack of evidence against him, I'd sue the Martins to recoup whatever they got under false pretenses. I'd also sue Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC for TEN FIGURES (>$1B) for creating and exacerbating the racially-charged environment which eventually caused charges to filed against Zimmerman at the behest of who knows who (IMHO Holder or Obama) 45 days after the police had determined (from evidence and witnesses) he had not committed a crime. And it is a shame he could not sue the Federal Government, specifically Holder or Obama, the real culprits in this racially driven tragedy.

The HOA settled the suit out of court. they have no recourse as long as the Martin family does not violate the terms of the settlement.

Your fantasy that the President or the AG could pressure a local prosecutor and no one would leak that is as absurd as the rest of you conspiracy ravings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin
lets take a hypothetical situation,

you're out with your GF, you have your gun on your person, some guy in a parking lot makes an off color comment about your GF, you confront him and things get heated, st some point one or the other takes a swing and the fight is on, the guy sees your gun, and even though you have not drawn it or even threathened to draw it he makes a grab for it.
what ya gonna do? you going to just let him have it and hope for he best? you going to try to maintian control and hold on tight and hope for the best? or like I think most would you, you going to take the shot and take your chances in court?

that is in my opinion is how things happen in the real world

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave



I've been more than a few places, and in more than a few situations, where the unarmed are too frequently called not foolish but deceased

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

That's not the law anywhere

You and others insist that Zimmerman wasn't injured enough to justify self defense if I'm wrong you have been pushing a known false position.

quote:

Combining shall issue concealed carry laws and SYG means complete buffoons who shouldn't even own a gun are going about in public armed

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

If your opponent grabs for your gun it is just as likely, if not more likely, because they intend to kill...just like Trayvon had told his 'girlfriend' he was going to do to the "creepy ass cracker" following him just a couple minutes before Trayvon grab for Zimmerman's gun.

If I am in a fight with someone and I see they have a gun you can be sure I'm going to do what ever necessary to either disarm them or gain control of that weapon. To do otherwise would be foolish in the extreme.

whoooaaaaa here, nowww haven't you been contending all along you would be obligated under law to RETREAT?

now you are saying in a real world situtation you would make a play for the gun and escalate the situation?

thank you for making my point here!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Do you not get it? People are getting killed because of that law. Combining shall issue concealed carry laws and SYG means complete buffoons who shouldn't even own a gun are going about in public armed and they are shooting people because of things like a disagreement over loud music.


Citation
must show total effects not isolated incidents

and once again there has to be something wrong with anyone who disagrees with you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin
lets take a hypothetical situation,

you're out with your GF, you have your gun on your person, some guy in a parking lot makes an off color comment about your GF, you confront him and things get heated, st some point one or the other takes a swing and the fight is on, the guy sees your gun, and even though you have not drawn it or even threathened to draw it he makes a grab for it.
what ya gonna do? you going to just let him have it and hope for he best? you going to try to maintian control and hold on tight and hope for the best? or like I think most would you, you going to take the shot and take your chances in court?

that is in my opinion is how things happen in the real world

If I ever carry a gun in public it will be in a secure holster and another person grabbing for it won't worry me.

You see I'm not a fucking moron and would never carry a weapon in a way that would make me less safe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

I realize the HOA settled out of court. Do you realize it's looking more and more like they did so based on a fraudulent/trumped-up charge by the Martin family?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BitYakin
lets take a hypothetical situation,

you're out with your GF, you have your gun on your person, some guy in a parking lot makes an off color comment about your GF, you confront him and things get heated, st some point one or the other takes a swing and the fight is on, the guy sees your gun, and even though you have not drawn it or even threathened to draw it he makes a grab for it.
what ya gonna do? you going to just let him have it and hope for he best? you going to try to maintian control and hold on tight and hope for the best? or like I think most would you, you going to take the shot and take your chances in court?

that is in my opinion is how things happen in the real world

If I ever carry a gun in public it will be in a secure holster and another person grabbing for it won't worry me.

You see I'm not a fucking moron and would never carry a weapon in a way that would make me less safe.

secure or not, once the fight is in progress and the gun is seen, and the other person makes a play/grab for it wouldn't you say its now your obligation to maintain control of it?

you said yourself if in a fight you saw a gun you'd make a play for it

or are you saying if you saw a gun and saw it was in a secure holster you'd then rethink your attempt to gain control of it?

put yourself in the position of being the gun carrier and tell me what you would do once the gun is seen and a grab for it is made