Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What this person also seems to be oblivious the fact Britain was entering into the Industrial Age with the ablity ability to make more modern guns in quanity which they did and endered up controlling 1/5th of the world and 1/3 of its people. The largest empire in human history and quite an achievement for a nation with less than 30 million people living in a nation about the same size as New England!
Really? Are you seriously trying to suggest that Zimmerman using the stand-your-ground law to justify killing Martin is in any way comparable to the goings-on of the revolutionary war?
First off I am not against stand your ground laws or guns, I own more than my fair share. That said, comparing the revolutionary soldiers to zimmerman is a stretch if there ever was one, what was a watch person doing carrying a gun, without a licence, and following someone is not standing your ground, especially after the police had told him to back off. We will see what the courts think of the facts but right now I would say he is in deep trouble.
If the quote from the Revolution is "Don't fire unless fired upon" does it not say the reaction of firing upon someone unarmed is not so American?
While I think too often we try to protect criminals in cases like this it is hard to identify who the criminal is.
Imagine this.... if the fist fight ended with one party over the other, with distance between them and one holding a gun on the other, while the other is defenseless and tears streaming as they cry for their life..... offering no further threat, is it still right to end their life because you are pumped on adrenaline and can't distinguish a rational thought any longer?
If the gun provides the power to overcome an aggressor, is that not enough protection, without pulling the trigger? I would agree if someone then continues to offer a threat you are justified to protect yourself, but if no threat persist can you still kill someone?
Doesn't the right to carry come with the responsibility to discriminate when to use?
The right to bare arms was not put in place to kill each other with impunity. It was put there so a couple of thousand men with muskets could storm government strong holds when their public servants became corrupt and harmed the populace rather than serve the people.
Stand your ground is a symbolic law that states a man or woman's home is sacred- that property and person have a right to exist in security without fear of criminal advance and attack...It is a anti-plunder law...a law to protect the individual...It's a law where a man and woman are queen and king in their own home.
It is not a law designed too grant the power to hunt your fellow human being with a gun pointing out of the kitchen window.
It is not a law that allow you to use deadly force the second a perceived intruder crosses your thresh hold. It IS a law that applies that you become the law in the realm of your own home- That once a person is on your ground (in your home) and they present a threat of physical harm to you- you can use equal force if not more to utterly destroy the threat.
-
It is NOT a "get off my lawn" LAW.
Nor is it a law that extends out of your living room and down the street- The stand your ground law is just and it allows you to be judge jury and executioner if need be, It is a law designed for the intelligent of good and sound judgement, I believe that the law makers over estimated the level of good judgement and intelligence of the average person- Zimmerman did not understand this law.
He must have confused it with the :SHOOT A GANGSTER ON SIGHT LAW...not only did he not grasp the meaning of the law- he also failed to grasp the meaning of gangster...black does not equal bad guy,
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,827,481 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn
For you anti-Zimmermans who feel "Stand Your Ground" laws are un-American
I believe you have the right to defend yourself. I also believe that Zimmerman's city has police officers who responded within - minutes - of a young man being shot. If he had waited 5 minutes for the cops to arrive, that young man would most certainly be alive.
You have to ask yourself, what would you do, if you was a young man from out of town, and a stranger was stalking you and had a gun? People who have never been threatened can make whatever assumptions they like. I have been stalked and attacked by people before. Twice, actually. One time, in Colorado Springs, I ran like hell. The other time, I was pursued and attacked inside my own vehicle. I responded with force. Actually I slammed the driver's side door into one guy's body while the other guy was trying to open my passenger side door. Then I grabbed Guy number 1's arm and held it as I accelerated and ran the red light. I hope to this day i either broke or dislocated it. Maybe both. They didn't pursue me, so there's that.
People make comments like "Trayvon's at fault." He was a black kid in a hoodie with a can of tea and some skittles. In my book, that means you don't shoot him.
I'm not anti-Zimmerman. I'm anti "idiots with a gun" who get away with stalking a man, causing an altercation, ishooting him on the sidewalk, and saying "I was protecting myself."
Think about the ramifications of that. You could literrally just pick someone out, stalk them, shoot them in the chest and say "Self defence!" It's pure idiocy.
70 Ford took the words right out of my mouth- very articulate and clearly stated..That this is NOT an us against them incident..and there are no anti-Zimmerman people out here..It's a case of logic and taking the time to think this matter through...Being gun ho with a gun is just not acceptable..Responsible gun ownership and use must be re-addressed and people have to remember the basics of why they are allowed this privilege. The UN would like to totally dis-arm America.
Partly because they want to oppress AMERICA and the other camp realize that AMERICANS are wrecking their own nation through the mis-use of personal arms. Every man or woman is entitled to possess a sword..but if you live by the sword you will perish by the sword..Guns are not to be a way of life- but an accessory to freedom and the enforcement of law when need be.
You can not sustain a society through sheer force - and power does not come from the barrel of a Gun- You want to end up like China? With all rights removed....Keep it up with this foolishness and in time they will dis-arm you by force if need be...Keep your arms and tempers in check...keep your dignity and use the power of the mind and not the projectile...only primitives toss stones to ward off mad dogs....surely you can handle a human dog without killing it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
