Comment

Comment by TheLasersShadow on March 27, 2012 at 12:25pm

They want to change the laws to require a criminal investigation for every self defense situation. The reason being people will eventually be very afraid of guns and defending themselves. Reliance on government will be the only recourse in peoples minds, the phasing out of self defense.

Comment by Cryptocurrency on March 27, 2012 at 12:17pm

Comment by Cryptocurrency on March 26, 2012 at 11:10pm

Stand Your Ground Laws To Come Under Attack After Trayvon Martin Ki...

Comment by Cryptocurrency on March 26, 2012 at 10:36pm

You said all the known witnesses seem to be saying the opposite. Who are these people you speak of?

This is what I DON'T like:

Last week President Barack Obama jumped into the case saying if he had a son “he would look like Trayvon.”

They are turning this into a media frenzy and pissing off the black community and now, even Obama is throwing in his subtle manipulations. If shit stinks it's usually rotten.

They are using this to create division, uprising, and watch how they use it to attack concealed carry.

Here is another article that says there have been no witnesses to the original blow:

Martin said something like “well you do now,” and punched him in the nose, Zimmerman told police. There has been no report of witnesses to that alleged initial blow.

Not sure why the police would lie about witnesses. Nor does it make sense to me why numerous reporters across the board who have talked to the police department in detail, would lie about the number of witnesses.

I still have not found the witness who came forward saying the police lied or misrepresented their version of events. Do you have a link?

I found this article that say's the boy may have been victimized and then shot:

Witnesses in Trayvon Martin death heard cries before shot

I just took a plea deal from the state because they had five police witnesses all willing to lie on the stand about what I supposedly did. Precisely why I took the plea deal. In the case of this shooting, one witness coming forward saying the police are lying is no more credible than the police telling the press they have witnesses.

Again the bigger issue, like this article has identified, is the attack on the 2nd amendment. Who threw the first punch, who saw what, what the police claim as far as witnesses, it's all inconsequential to the larger issue; cultural divide and gun control.

Comment by Marklar on March 26, 2012 at 9:27pm

Once again what the police say is irrelevant after one of those witnesses has already come forward to say police lied about what she told them. What unidentified police say about what witnesses said is hearsay evidence to the nth degree and should be disregarded as being worthless for forming an opinion as it would be in a court of law.

This is why I said "known" witnesses. the primary witness is named in several stories as "John" but unless he talks to somebody besides the police about it we certainly don't know whether he even exists. For that matter we don't know if any cop even said that or if a reporter just pulled it out of his ass since the cops themselves are "unidentified".

It just seems to me that both sides of the aisle are awfully sure of themselves when in truth neither side knows shit.

Certainly he is innocent until proven guilty but a jury should probably decide that in a case like this rather than the police I would think whether the shooting was justified or not. Further more every police shooting should be held to the same standard. When somebody ends up dead at the hands of another it is just stupid to give the police discretion as to whether an arrest is made whether it involves Joe Blow, one of their own, or the president.

Yes, the second amendment aspect is certainly more important. I agree with you there. I really don't see where the stand your ground principle or castle doctrine come into play on this one though. If he is telling the truth he did not choose whether to flee or fight since he was on his back being beaten. The stand your ground principle is only relevant when you CHOOSE to stand and fight rather than run. According to his story he didn't have that choice available to him as he was flat on his back getting his ass whooped. So simple self defense would exonerate him without any need for trying to bring the stand your ground principle into play.

Nuff said. Screw Schumer's dumb ass.

Comment by Cryptocurrency on March 26, 2012 at 7:12pm

I just read two articles that say the opposite Marklar. Here is a quote from the latest msnbc article here:

"Zimmerman's account emerged for the first time Monday in a report by The Orlando Sentinel. Quoting unidentified "law enforcement authorities," the Sentinel reported that Zimmerman told police that Trayvon Martin knocked him down with a single punch and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times before the shooting — an account that police said witnesses have corroborated."

Witnesses, plural.

Like I said, innocent until proven guilty. I don't know what happened, and I am obviously speculating as to what happened. I try very hard not to put forward anything I can not verify myself.

Regardless of what happened the bigger issue is the attack on the second amendment which extends to the Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground. I'm sorry for this boy's family and I am also sorry for this man and what his life is likely to become. It's to bad there is such division and hate and total apathy in this world. It's too bad we can not find common ground and set aside our differences whatever they may be.

Comment by Marklar on March 26, 2012 at 6:47pm

Actually all the known witnesses seem to be saying the opposite and in at least one case a known witness has called the police out for lying about what she told them making police assertions about what was or wasn't said by any witnesses rather worthless. Nobody seems to have seen the encounter start only having heard what happened. So it comes down to who threw the first punch. If the kid started a fight because he was insulted by Zimmerman's questioning then stand your ground applies. If Zimmerman swung first or tried to detain the kid in any way then got his clock cleaned and fired when Trayvon got the best of him then he is clearly guilty of second degree murder. Starting a fist fight then ending it with a gun when you start losing is certainly not self-defense. Unless an actual eyewitness steps forward instead of a bunch of earwitnesses it's highly unlikely that anybody but Zimmerman will ever know the truth for sure.

In either case Trayvon did'nt die from a stand your ground law but from an act of incredible stupidity whether it was Zimmerman's or his own.

Comment by Cryptocurrency on March 26, 2012 at 5:41pm

I kneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew they were going to do this!! Bastards!! That kid assaulted this man and beat him to the ground. Witnesses have corroborated his account of the events that took place. Innocent until proven guilty.

If some young punk ran up on me like that and I was unable to better him physically, if I was carrying, at the very least he would get severely pistol whipped. Chuck Schumer needs to get mugged once before he opens his mouth.