Well take the backstrap,only part of a blackie worth eating,and Glen. just pop it in the head with a .223.
This ain't no Griz:)
Printable View
Well take the backstrap,only part of a blackie worth eating,and Glen. just pop it in the head with a .223.
This ain't no Griz:)
Here is my take FWIW, feel free to poke holes in it.
Put everything aside up to when the gun goes off.
If there is a physical altercation between two parties and the losing party happens to have a pistol, my belief is it should be used.
I know there is no proof in this case, but imagine Martin had have beaten Zimmerman, then used his gun to kill him?
If the "story" is true, than you can bet Zimmerman was imagining that same scenario, and made the choice that his life was more valuable.
Its just my personal belief that race, drugs, football, age, size, ect have absolutely no bearing when its time to decide who's life is more valuable.
That being said, I find it hard to take a side in this case.
I dont find it hard to believe Zimmerman was attacked while heading back to his vehicle,
But I also couldnt imagine being in a position where I was so desperate I absolutely had to put a bullet in someone.
My respects go to both parties, its an unfortunate situation that has changed two lives forever.
If I am physically attacked by anyone, unprovoked, I would not hesitate to use my gun. I would feel bad about it later, but I plan to survive.
If my family was with me, I would have even less hesitation. If I happened to stumble upon a robbery situation where the man was carrying a gun, I think I would use it in that situation also. If my family was present I know I would. I've carried a gun every day for many years and I have carefully thought through every situation I can imagine.
When someone threatens deadly force, they reap what they sow. Banging someone's head on the ground is deadly force. Unless they can prove Zimmerman started the altercation, I hope he gets off.
Since everyone is dropping their two cents into this - I'll drop a nickle.
I was no angel in my youth, not in the least. I still bear the tattoos from it so my kids can learn from MY mistakes.
If you dress and act a certain way - expect the flak that comes with it. I have a ring in my nose, gauged ears and lots of tattoos. I KNOW the looks I get and when I was overseas, I KNOW the comments that were being made by very conservative people. Do I get worked up? No - it is MY choice to look this way - no one made me do this. So, if you look like a thug and are walking around at night (prowling) - expect some person to stop you and ask some questions or harass you (come to my neighborhood and you will get it as well - especially if you do not look like you belong here). Big difference is - when I was confronted I knew either tell them where I was going or get the hell out of Dodge, not mouth off and jump on someone. I have plenty of scars from my proud days when I was worried more worried about my ego and not enough about being just and fair. I just love when people talk to me and change their view because I am a lot more articulate and personable than they expected (the Mrs will tell you I am a teddy bear).
BOTH parties have to accept responsibility for their actions - simple enough. Trayvon paid a price for ignorance and pride, Zimmerman is paying for being a bit aggressive in his actions and not backing off when the police said they were en route. Maybe if Trayvon's mother and father chose to be parents instead of watching their son act the fool and encouraging it (I got the snot beat out of me when my mother saw my first tattoo and she tried to wash it off with bleach) maybe he would not have put himself in harms way. The problem all around is lack of respect.
Should have learned the motto - Don't start nothing and there will be nothing......
Was he hired or did he volunteer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
Anyway, I think that is neither here nor there. And whether zimmerman was injured is irrelevant either.
The key point on which this whole case will hinge is whether trayvon had reason to feel threatened enough to take on zimmerman.
Because while Zimmerman didn't do anything wrong per se, neither did Trayvon up until the confrontation.
Someone will be covered by self defense, and the other won't. The fact that zimmerman has injuries and shot trayvon will not matter if trayvon could have been justified in a preemptive strike.
This is what it will all be about. I wonder if the truth will come out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
I am not up to date on the efficiency of the legal system. What is the expected date that this will go to trial?
Or has the case not yet appeared before the grand jury?
It is my understanding that Zimmerman was Hired to watch the neighborhood.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
This is part of the problem. The case will not go to the Grand Jury. The prosecutor decided to bypass that step. I suspect that she realized the she didn't have a strong enough case to get past the Grand Jury.
It is my understanding he was a neighborhood watch volunteer. When you say hired it has the connotation he was a paid employee like a security guard or something similar. Usually neighborhood watch people have very specific rules governing what they can or can not do. If he was a paid security person the rules are even more stringent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
Actually, often times Grand Juries are used for political reasons. If it's a hot case and a GJ says no then the prosecutor can say it's not his fault blame the GJ or if it's a very strong case he may not need them. All kinds of scenarios there.
I thought the neighborhood hired him, but I am going on memory of a story I read over a month ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
The case was originally going to the GJ, but after the special prosecutor was appointed and all the Feds descended on the county, it was decided not to go there. The whole thing is so politically charged now that the trial will be a circus. Politics and public opinion should have no part at all, but of course it does.
Fair and impartial has become a joke.
I learned a very simple rule long ago, if you are going to carry a weapon as a civilian/citizen, "It is a life insurance policy" nothing more nothing less, you only pull the weapon to protect your life or that of another... If you pull the weapon, then intend to kill, and know that you will have to deal with the fallout...
You will probably get charged, and even if found innocent, you will probably lose in civil court, very very few shooters "get away with it" so to speak, especially if you are not inside your own home...
The right or wrong of the shooting has very little to do with the outcome, this case is a prime example Zimmerman cannot win, he will have his entire life destroyed regardless of if he was justified with the shooting...
When he put on a gun he made a choice, as do I, and every other person that carries, and only he knows if the was justified in using his weapon, no Judge or Jury will ever know the truth... Nor will we
That stupid old saying "I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6" well George made his choice...
Glen, thats exactally why my guns (other than sporting arms) do not go outside my home.
The odds of you getting killed by say an outside robbery attempt are slim and none,even the baddest of the bad do not shoot people over a watch or a wallet if the victim is passive and quickly complies.
Packing heat (legally) changes a persons mindset,all of a sudden they become omnipotant,I do not care how intelligent you are or how well you have been trained,guns can be like alcohol,can turn a 90 lb wimp into hulk hogan.
You state that your CCW is like a life insurance policy,well,you confront another armed person, worst case scenario,one of you may die on the spot,and it may be you. so much for the policy.
CCW advocates, have made claims that if a CCW person was on campus at Columbine Or V tech,the carnage could have been averted,99% of that is bullshit,the first thing any person under fire will do is look for a place to hide and wish they had a change of pants.
Ya know, if zimmerman had no gun.legal carry or not,the kid would most likly still be alive,just a good ole street fight,end of story.
As a lifetime NRA member, and a firm believer in the 2nd,The day, if it ever comes when everyone is packing heat scares the shit out of me,maybe need to get into a major training regimin so I can run 1600 FPS and get away from the bad guys:))
I sat in on a CCW class last summer and one of the first things the teacher said was that the second you find yourself being comfortable in a situation when you have your gun that you wouldn't be comfortable in without it, you need to quit carrying.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
That is so true.you have the oppurtunity to walk away most of the time,99% of the time,some will argue what about the 1% an unknown for sure,ya know, I am 64 yrs old, I wgt 198 lbs,am 6ft1,am quick as a snake and strong like a bull (as the wife says,and twice as smart:) face off with me in my driveway with your holsterd Glock,give me a two by four in hand.and you will be DOA before you get that sucker pulled.Wood products rule:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
In certain respects carrying is like a country having a nuclear weapon. You have it and it is there if you really need it and it may very well save your life but the consequences of using it may be much more than you bargained for especially if you made a poor decision and depending on the laws where you use it.
This may be true where you live, it is not true here. The violent crime rate has been dropping steadily since CCW was made law.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
Maybe passive walking away works where you are. It does not work here. Just yesterday a store clerk was robbed. The last thing the robber did was douse the clerk with lighter fluid and set her on fire.
She wasn't armed. She didn't fight back. She is a 76 year old grandmother. She is now in critical condition with burns over 40% of her body. She was still on fire as the police drove up. With her description they caught the man breaking into a house. The cash register wasn't enough for him.
You want to let someone like this decide whether you live or die? I would rather go down fighting.
There are wolves out there. I refuse to be a sheep. Every time someone guns down a robber, it makes the rest think about it.
If Travon attacked Zimmerman he deserved what he got.
"Even now we’re standing there dying, daring to do nothing decisive, because we’ve declared ourselves to be better than our terrorist enemies — more moral, more civilized." Paul Harvey
I do believe you grossly mis-interpreted my post :) it is rather easy to do when we are only communicating using a single mediumQuote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
I never said don't protect yourself, I said be prepared to deal with the fallout..
The same as when I teach women "Steet Defense Classes" (BTW calling them Rape Defense is not PC any longer)
They have to make a decision whether to submit, or fight, all I do is give them skills to try... No one else can tell them in that instant what to do, it is their sole decision, same as GZ had a decision to make when he pulled his weapon... Only he knows if it was right
[QUOTE=Crotalus
If Travon attacked Zimmerman he deserved what he got.
Nobody deserves to die over such a stupid altercation Crotalus,no way, no how.
take a lead from your namesake,The diamondback will give a warning,than attempt to flee before using deadly force.
You're statement above, I pretty much agree with; so this reply is not meant to be adversarial. My reply is only from a different set of eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelfixed
When it comes to my life, my loved ones lives or the life of an innocent person, suddenly coming under attack; I do not play the odds. I try to leave home every day with the winning hand. This includes my training with and without firearms. The odds always look good in crime stats; unless you are one of the stats.
In your own words, “the baddest of the bad do not shoot people over a watch or a wallet if the victim is passive and quickly complies”, this is correct for the most part; because the “baddest of the Bad” are working in crews/groups that hit high risk, profitable targets and pull home invasions on other bad guys. The ones that are shooting us over our wallets, are the desperate/mentally ill ones and Pixel, there are a lot of them around. Most of the armed robberies do not make the news, even some of the ones with death the result. I know this first hand, because I have been on these crime scenes many times. Probably every time I stood there and waited for the body to get removed, I wondered what the deceased could have done differently and lived. We all are told/taught by police, parents and Monday Morning Quarterbacks to hand over the requested items and your odds of living through the incident are in your favor. I really do not believe this increases your chance of surviving. I truly believe based on my life’s experience, that a person has made up his mind to kill you, before he requests your valuables in many cases. One fact is for sure, any person who brings a weapon to rob you, has already considered that he may have to use that weapon on you; and in the fact that he still brought the weapon; this indicates that your life is worthless to him, regardless of how much you pay him.
Yes, some people seek out the CCW to make up for feelings of inadequacy in dealing with physical confrontations. A false sense of security at least; a deadly mistake waiting to happen, at most. It’s possible that Zimmerman fell into this category. Only two really know & one is dead.
My CCW is a life insurance policy, of sorts; a policy for me and innocents. A policy that has a very long, detailed “Stupidity Clause”. You really have to read that clause.
CCW Advocates say many things and I agree with your comments on Columbine & V Tech. It’s just that the Anti-Gun Crowd hits us hard with their BS also. We have to try and take a foot of ground where ever we can find it.
If Zimmerman had not had a gun, the kid ( 17 year old young man. When I was 17, I was already signed by the Marines, better shape than most twice my age.) would be alive, but Zimmerman would probably be dead or damaged goods at best. I believe he does have a family to feed. There is no such thing as a “good ole street fight” anymore. In our time, you & I would have fought unarmed and the winner/better fighter would have known when to stop. The winner would have bragging rights in school and our fathers would have put us all in a room to work out our differences verbally, so the fight did not repeat itself. Now its dog eat dog with death or serious injury waiting on the sidelines. This is not our generation in the streets these days.
Just my thoughts.....
[QUOTE=pixelfixed;969142][QUOTE=Crotalus
If Travon attacked Zimmerman he deserved what he got.
Nobody deserves to die over such a stupid altercation Crotalus,no way, no how.
take a lead from your namesake,The diamondback will give a warning,than attempt to flee before using deadly force.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but if you touch him, you WILL get bitten. This isn't the movies. You don't pull your gun and wave it in his face expecting him to back off. If you pull your gun you must use it immediately if the bad guy is close. "Make my day" is movie crap.
If you attack someone with deadly force, and banging someone's head on concrete qualifies, your life is forfeit. You deserve no mercy as long as you are committing the act. You are attempting to kill someone. You deserve to die.
If you notice, a lot of these mass killings are taking place in "gun free" zones. The killers are going where they have the least chance of being confronted by an armed defender.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hirlau
Very True.
I hate that saying and I am glad you call it stupid. I sometimes hear it in martial arts discussions as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by gssixgun
It is a stupid saying because it puts people in the mindset that those are the only 2 options.
They're not. The saying should be amended to something like:
Better not to put myself in a risky situation than be judged by 12 or carried by 6.
Or.
Better to put your ego aside than be judged by 12 or carried by 6.
Or
Better to both go home than be judged by 12 or carried by 6.
Or
...
You get the idea.
Guns (like other weapons) should only come out if someone is going to be killed anyway, and you'd rather it not be you.
Why does everyone immediately think if Zimmerman didn't shoot, he would have been dead or damaged goods?
This:Attachment 97604Attachment 97605
Does not look like a guy on death's door who fired to stave off certain death. I've looked worse than that after sparring...
I heard something interesting today. The ONLY wounds Travon had was the gunshot wound and to his knuckles. This doesn't look like he was trying to defend himself, only attack.
The severity of Zimmerman's wounds means nothing. Zimmerman was knocked to the ground. His nose was broken. His head was bashed on the concrete. His back was injured. He was being physically attacked. NO ONE should be required to surrender to a beating. The law is clear. That's what stand your ground means. We are not sheep, we are men. It does not matter what your feelings are on deadly force. Travon should have known that when you attack someone your life is forfeit.
Zimmerman had more than enough justification to use deadly force. In Texas he would be a free man. They should drop the case.
You should go tell them that you know exactly what happened and they should drop the case :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
I don't think anyone should have to surrender to a beating either...that's why I punch back. It may make me more of a sheep than shooting someone, but I'm not dead or on trial...fair exchange in my opinion.
The word "Ethics" should never be used to the media in the US.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephisto
I am not in good enough health to punch back. If I had been in Zimmerman's place I would expect a heart attack during or immediately after the attack no matter if I had shot Travon or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanjewell
Agreed, it is pretty sleazy. I rarely watch TV anymore, especially the news outlets. The book I was teaching out of stated that there are 'no right or wrong answers just well reasoned ones.' Basically ethics, to the book, comes down to you can do what you want just cover your butt and be prepared for the consequences of your actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1OldGI
( QUOTEC=CW Advocates say many things and I agree with your comments on Columbine & V Tech. It’s just that the Anti-Gun Crowd hits us hard with their BS also. We have to try and take a foot of ground where ever we can find it.)
Huh? Name me one anti gun group that has even 10% of the political muscle that the NRA has. They pretty much own Congress and get passed any bill they want. The anti gun people mostly make a lot of noise which leads nowhere. I wouldn't be worried about losing any gun issues.
Forget about the talking points and the rhetoric about guns. Criminals take the easy route. if no one has guns they use knives to commit crimes. If that ain't enough they carry guns and if there is a chance they will encounter an armed person then they get bigger guns AND they assume the armed person will act so that armed robbery with the threat of self defense on the part of the victim turns into a situation where the bad guy will shoot first in self defense himself. You see these things can go either way. Sometimes the bad guy worries about what might happen to him too and ramps up his violence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
You know, when that congresswoman in Arizona was shot there was a guy coming out of the mall armed and what did he do to stop the violence? Nothing. He didn't have a clue who the bad guy was which is a very common situation in such cases so you take cover and watch until you can figure out what is going on. Ask any cop who has been involved in responding to a gunfight in progress about that and he'll tell you.
As far as claims that places where folks are armed have lower crimes rates there has never been any statistical correlation indicating that to be the case. In general violent crimes in this country have been decreasing for years. it doesn't seem like it but that's because of the news cycle we have these days where everything gets blown out of proportion.
I'm just saying having a gun isn't what it seems to be to many people, the universal answer to something bad happening and can in and of itself cause problems.
I agree. I don't go around with John Wayne syndrome. I'm still paranoid and try to be aware of what is going on around me. I hope to God that I never have to pull it. If I hear a gunshot inside a store I'm not going to run up to find out what is happening. I think I would have to see the robber pull his gun out and point it at the clerk to actually pull mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
There are specific instances where having one is life itself. The incident in Texas that caused our CCW law to be passed is a perfect example.
Belton Texas, a man rammed his truck through the wall of a Luby's Cafeteria. He then started randomly shooting people. Reloaded and continued to shoot people. Workers ran outside pleading with anyone that might have a gun. No one did. Lives could have been saved.
One of the safest places to be in the world is at a gun show. Everyone is polite.
Actually, some statistics have been kept about more guns = lower crime rates. Gun Ownership Mandatory in Kennesaw, Georgia .Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigspendur
It's general knowledge that rapes, car-jacking, and many other crimes went way down after Indiana became a "shall issue" state for License to Carry Handgun. In particular, right after passage there was a spate of car-jacking deaths (dead perpetrators) by legal concealed and open carriers. It was reported in all the newspapers, and then car-jackings seemed to fall way off. I'll see if I can find the IN statistics on the reduction when I feel like Googling. I read about them years ago, but can't remember the website offhand. The Indiana gunowners website has threads on successful (and some unsuccessful) armed defense quite often.
Agree; a carrier should learn the state and local laws on use of deadly force, especially on "when" and "how". A gun can cause more problems than it solves for the uninformed or untrained. Everyone's state "gunowners" website, if it exists, might have "stickys" about local defense statutes and the like.Quote:
I'm just saying having a gun isn't what it seems to be to many people, the universal answer to something bad happening and can in and of itself cause problems.
[QUOTE=thebigspendur;969374]( QUOTEC=CW Advocates say many things and I agree with your comments on Columbine & V Tech. It’s just that the Anti-Gun Crowd hits us hard with their BS also. We have to try and take a foot of ground where ever we can find it.)
QUOTE "Huh? Name me one anti gun group that has even 10% of the political muscle that the NRA has. They pretty much own Congress and get passed any bill they want. The anti gun people mostly make a lot of noise which leads nowhere. I wouldn't be worried about losing any gun issues."
You misunderstood my comment, but it's really not important anyway.
I guess he never heard of the Clinton "Crime Bill". Gun owners certainly lost there.
Obama does a lot under the radar. He has ordered that all military brass be shredded instead of being sold to reloaders.
That brass is being sold to China and will probably be used against us someday.
Must be why I cannot find brass for my BMG:(
I have to wonder what would be going on IF Zimmerman was catching a beating and in fear for his life,and pulled a knife and cut the kids throat and killed him.
would there be as much ruckus? Especially if it was just a pocket knife. As for carrying a gun outside, when I did it for a living (rent collector) I found that I was a much calmer person and walked away from altercations that could have easily gotten out of hand, having the ultimate winner on my hip made me walk away as no matter if I was involved in a clean shoot or not,as Glen mentioned,there was going to be consequences,whether I was right or wrong,and when in my twenties,and unarmed,I was just as likely to start swinging as not because I was young and not going to be charged with weapon possession.just my 2 cents/
You have to be very careful where you get your statistics from. often times if they come from any organization with an interest either pro or against guns the stats are worthless because when you try and verify them you can't. Often times they are based on anecdotal sources or simply made up.
Very True !
I am not Rambo. Let me tell you a little story about why I am such a supporter of CCW and why I carried before it was legal.
27 years ago I was introduced to a gentleman by a childhood friend. Let's just call him SB. Over the period of a year or two SB became my friend. SB was not your average person. He lived with a wife and girlfriend. The girls worked together and all 3 slept in the same waterbed.
SB started having some mental problems and was going to a therapist. He was on medication to calm him down. One day the wife decided that she had enough and moved out. SB went crazy apparently. A week later I got a call from him. He said, "Come and help me, I have shot both the girls". Now my friendship did not extend to attempted murder. My brother-in-law and I cruised by the house a couple of hours later and there were cop cars all over the place. I thought this would be the end of my involvement. Sadly, no. He shot both girls twice. Neither was killed. The girlfriend was just wounded and was out of the hospital in a few days. The wife lost the use of her legs.
The girlfriend called and wanted me to guard her and both mothers while they cleaned out the house. I did this for them. None of us knew when he would get out of jail or what his state of mind was. At his trial he got 10 years for the wife and 10 years probation for the girlfriend. He was out in 3.5 years.
I was shocked to learn at the trial that he claimed he went crazy because I was having an affair with his wife. No truth in it at all. He wrote me a letter from jail asking why I didn't visit him. My wife and I had dumped ALL our friends, got all new ones and changed our lives. We wanted no part of the old one.
When he got out of jail he left a message on my house phone telling me to say hi to my wife for him. We started keeping a gun by the door. I always thought I might run into him somewhere. It was kinda like a dog that turned on you once. You never will completely trust him again. I started carrying a gun against the time we met. In all these years we never have. Carrying a gun got to be a habit especially that it is legal now. I even carry when I fly to other states, carefully checking the gun laws and airline regulations. I feel undressed without one now even with it dragging my pants down and the discomfort. I wear one at work with the consent of my employers. I wear it on service calls.
It is the reason I study politics and pay attention to what politicians do.
man...irving's gotten wild since i lived there ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus
i'm sure everyone has good reasons to carry that do...well, maybe not EVERYONE...but most. i always figured if i was in a situation where i was defending my own life, the guy trying to do harm to me would probably have the drop on me and i would get myself shot reaching for mine...so i figure i have a better chance just trying to disarm him depending on how close he is.
Here's one verifiable source for Kennesaw, GA : Kennesaw Crime Statistics: Georgia (GA) - CityRating.com These stats are much more recent than the earlier article link. The source of actual data on this crime rate report is the FBI Report of Offenses Known to Law Enforcement. If the FBI was going to "cook" some stats, it would probably be in the "anti-gun" direction instead of "pro-gun" (ref: Hijacking The Second Amendment).
Then again, maybe some percentage of the reported incidents were fudged (perhaps by Kennesaw or GA?) in the hope of acquiring some state or federal crime funding.
EDIT: a news report from 2001 with more verifiable info.
