Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, September 26, 2016

WASHINGTON — It’s understandable if unfortunate that the controversy surrounding the killing of Trayvon Martin has polarized the country along both racial and ideological lines. But there is one issue that should not have any racial connotations: the urgency of repealing “Stand Your Ground” laws.

And leave it to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg to speak the blunt truth about why these laws are dangerous — and why the National Rifle Association keeps pushing them anyway.

“In reality,” Bloomberg said in a speech before the National Press Club last week, “the NRA’s leaders weren’t interested in public safety. They were interested in promoting a culture where people take the law into their own hands and face no consequences for it. Let’s call that by its real name: vigilantism.”

On guns, Bloomberg is strong and everyone else is feckless, to paraphrase the late columnist Murray Kempton.

OK, not exactly everyone else. Bloomberg’s partners in the group Mayors Against Illegal Guns — notably Boston’s Mayor Tom Menino, the organization’s co-chair — have filled the void left in state legislatures, Congress and the White House by moderates, liberals and many conservatives who ought to know better but are too petrified by the NRA to confront it. Mayors face the daily toll taken by gun laws dictated by gun lobbyists and are less easily intimidated.

“Feckless” is a favorite word of columnists. Its first meanings, according to Webster’s, are “weak” and “ineffective,” and it is an ineffectiveness spawned by weakness that explains why Stand Your Ground laws spread through legislatures like a virus. By Bloomberg’s count, they are now on the books in 25 states. These laws didn’t arise in response to broad, spontaneous popular demand. As both The Washington Post and The New York Times reported last week, the idea came from on high, courtesy of the NRA, which worked closely with a right-wing group called the American Legislative Exchange Council.

“It was the NRA taking a stealthy fight to the states,” Mark Glaze, the director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, told me in an interview, “and 25 flowers bloomed.”

Resistance to the gun lobby has grown so feeble and the NRA has won so many victories that its legislative maestros must find ever more creative ways to prove its relevance.

  • PamB1

    The NRA is the retail arm of the Gun industry, and you can bet they want to let any mental or criminal person be able to buy guns! Where do you think they get all that money to lobby and buy Congressmen with !

    • Pam you are mistaken from lies of the Media. The NRA gets the money to lobby from donations of its members and corparations. I give money to the NRA to fight absurd gun laws. If the Justice system would stop plea barganing gun charges down and letting criminals out early we would not have this issue. Most gun crimes are committed in inner cities where drugs are very prevelant. The NRA would love for the gun crimes to drop to zero and does not endorse Mentaly unstable people being aloud to purchase or carry guns. But unfortunately us honest citizens have to protect ourselves from the criminal element, banning guns would just take them away from good citizens. I respect your opionion but do not agree.

      • retrorichard

        But they don’t lie if they write a pro-gun story, right? Make you a bet GC2, take away lobbying and the other pressures/perks the NRA bestows on politicians and gun laws, and pressure to find and eliminate illegal weapons would blossom overnight.

        • I agree with part of your statement, I am all for finding ILLEGAL weapons but not banning them all together as some want to do.

      • digoweli

        To stop the plea bargains you have sensible laws. America has the fullest jails of the industrialized world and all they do is train criminals. People who were minor offenders go into prison and come out radicalized. Meanwhile the right wing continues to refuse competent judges and stall them in Congress. From Richard Nixon’s incompetent nominees to Judge Bork who questioned the right to privacy to the current jokes on the Supreme Court who gave us Bush, Iraq, Homeland Security and constant war with it’s never ending suspension of human rights, our courts have been compromised by the right wing. The only answer is for the left wing to mirror them until they stop.

      • tesla33

        George, I think Pam is right. The NRA supports & promotes gun industry sales and since the Criminal gun market = 25% of the gun industry’s annual sales.* The NRA fights to protect this market share and thus many of its ‘members’ are likely criminals – Follow the money….
        The IRA, to support these sales efforts, must defeat any law that would make it harder for criminals to get guns e.g. laws to stop gun trafficking, closing the gun show loophole, etc. THEN SAY
        “You need a gun with you at all times to protect you from armed criminals.”

        FYI – The “Gun Show Loophole” is a gap in federal law that allows private citizens, who are not licensed firearms dealers, to sell guns without conducting background checks or keeping records. These “private sellers” often sell guns at the thousands of gun shows that take place every weekend across the country. This is how criminals get guns in the US – thanks to the NRA!

        One of the reasons that countries, that don’t allow gun ownership in the same way as the US, have lower murder rates is that there are fewer guns available to use to commit such crimes. Take away the guns and you stop the crimes – also, legalize drugs and you take away the need for 80% of the crime. Result: a peaceful nation (relatively speaking). Police will have more $ for law enforcement and to control the few guns that are available.

        The military and police have guns in the US: Why do Americans have so little faith in their political system that they feel the need to protect themselves from their neighbors and their own government?

        Just curious!

        • The problem is that the ATF will only give you a federal firearms liscence if you have an established place of business. I have a great job but like working the Gun Shows on the weekends but they will not give me a liscense to sell, so we are at a catch 22. If the ATF would do background checks and issue liscenses based on your record then i would agree to close private sale gun shows. The ATF would have plenty of funding then from liscense fees to go after illegal firearms.

          Just by your statement of the military and police should only have weapons is a little scary, Just look at the present political landsape. We are stuck with a terrible two party system that produces professional ploiticians who never worked REAL jobs and have no idea of what the common American is going through. The second Amendement keeps all other Amendements like our freedom of speech intact.

          I think your figure of 25% is a little skewed but do admit that some criminals do get illegal weapons at private collector gun shows but until the ATF allows honest citizens who have cleared background checks obtain liscense then change to liscense gun shows with proper paperwork i will fight any change.

          Thank you for your reply and Good Day!

          • tesla33

            I appreciate your measured and sane response. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of reasonable discourse in this thread.

            Logic would seem to suggest that the 25% estimate is like very low considering that this is VERY easy access to guns by those who shouldn’t, by your criteria, should not have access. It also seems likely that since these gun shows are rarely shut down as illegal operations that the ATF is highly influenced by the NRA – hence restrict licenses, don’t shut down illegal gun shows.

            Again, why are you so afraid of your fellow citizens and your own government? ALL other western democracies don’t allow such access to guns and they enjoy ‘peaceful’ societies and don’t have nearly the rate of gun related crime that you enjoy in the US.

            I don’t think your political system is as bad as you think, they just need to stop being so polarized and start talking like sane, reasonable humans and things would improve for everyone. When I hear, from some blonde woman (don’t recall her name), stating that she hates Democrats and that they are ‘traitors’ – because they are democrats, this can’t help your elected reps get anything done, especially if 1/2 your population are traitors. Both sides need to stop this kind of crap if you hope to avoid the pitfalls that doomed the Roman Empire….. The symbol of the Eagle didn’t seem to help them, I hope it serves you better. We’ve spent 10 years fighting extremism around the World, it won’t help anyone to bring it home?

            Good Luck!

          • Owning firearms is just not for self defense, I love target shooting, sporting clays and hunting. I am an independent person and do not need the Goverment or Police to protect me and my family. I live in the country and the average response time for Law enforcement to respond is 10 to 15 minutes that is plenty of time to be robbed, stabbed, my wife or daughter to be raped. As for the Government you should always be skeptical, to much corporate greed.

            If we had a strong third party that was in the middle that compromised a little each way we could get something done.

            The gun crime rates are misleading in my opionon, the majority are in urban areas relating to drug and gang turf battles but you can’t cut the flow of drugs until the goverment stops supporting the flow to finace wars covertly.

            Thank you for your open debate without being extreme to one side.

    • pintail4

      Foolish thinking. The NRA is not a fly-by-night operation. They would not approve of selling a gun to anyone that is considered incompetent or mantally challenged.
      It isn’t difficult for the NRA to oppose and win debates with people like you PamB1.
      The general public, I’m sure, don’t agree with you either.

  • C

    Remember Hitler

    • kernal_of_truth

      yes I recall reading about him, and what’s your point

      • I think his point is one that the NRA loonies make everytime someone suggests sane laws regarding gun ownership. Apparently there are people who believe that Hitler’s rise to power would have been stemmed by people with handguns. It had nothing to do with ideology or political power. It was all about handguns . . . . Brilliant, right?

      • You don’t recall to much do you!!! Hitler disarmed the population and over 12 million men, women and children were murdered. Stalin disarmed the population and over 30 million men, women, and children were murdered. What about Chairman Mao and China. What about Serbia and Croatia, the Congo, not to mention the streets of all cities of all states in our own country etc., etc. The world has a abundance of evil people and bad things can happen to you long before the police show up. I don’t care about your personnal beliefs but I do want the ability to defend my person, my family, and my property from anyone trying to do us harm. So before you gun nuts try taking our guns away why don’t you demand that our law enforcement agencies do a better job of keeping firearms out of the reach of the bad guys. This is called aligning your priorities.

  • montanabill

    Let’s get to the cause of why ‘stand your ground’ and why people think they need to have the right to carry a concealed weapon. The mayors make no attempt to address those issues, but having the guts to both identify the reasons and then do something about them would go a long way toward achieving the goal of having a society that does not routinely feel the need to carry concealed weapons. One other issue they must also address: why, with so many already existing gun laws, are there so many illegal guns being carried? It is pretty easy to disarm a law abiding citizen. Mayors, get in there and do the hard stuff you choose to gloss over.

    • digoweli

      The only answer montanabill is Liberal gun ranges and an encouragement for every Liberal to carry. A Liberal gun range would have his favorite conservatives like Rush and company, Faux News folks etc. on the targets, at the range, so that Liberal could get used to the same ideas that conservatives have about carry and stand and defend yourself. There would be the need for fewer police because the rule of the Hatfield and McCoys would turn the country back to it’s Appalachian heritage. This would also double the profits of the NRA and the gun companies. It’s the principle that Indian people tried to get passed during the late 19th century but the conservative Robber Barons passed anti-gun laws that made it illegal to sell to the original inhabitants and so genocide ensued. Liberals should take that to heart and arm themselves and prepare.

      • montanabill

        Just a minor flaw in your argument. The original inhabitants at the battle of Greasy Grass (Little Big Horn) were better armed than their Robber Baron supported attackers.

    • klhesse

      Well said!!!

    • klhesse

      Well said!!!

  • kernal_of_truth

    the NRA has changed, they are run by total nutcases and are fixed at the hip with the GOP 95% of the time. their rants about guns and protection work for them. it brings in people with too much fear and their $$ and these people then vote for the GOP who doesn’t give a rats azz about anything but getting at their tax dollars to redistribute to the already very rich.

  • Sorry E.J., this is where we part company politically. Zimmerman’s socially irresponsible behavior should not trump my right to defend myself. As a middle-aged male with congestive heart failure, I can no longer physically defend myself nor able to retreat with sufficient speed or vigor. Granted, I live in a “rural” state where most of us grew up with guns in the home and in our neighbor’s home. In addition, I served six years in the military and was well versed on the use of deadly force. Gore lost the 2000 race over federal gun licensing (I still voted for him, cause I knew that there was not enough political will in Congress to enact such a law). Just like the GOP has had to let go of Gay Marriage and Abortion, the Dem’s need to drop the gun issues.

    • BDD1951

      I don’t think anyone would argue with the fact that you should be able to defend yourself. However, if someone is running away from you, your life is not threatened. There have been too manyoutright murders where the killer got off with this “stand your ground law”. The NRA has become obsessive. My late husband joined NRA the year after he retired. After one year he dropped them.. He said “this is not what I want”. Thank God.

      • labrown69

        And THAT is exactly why this has nothing to do with Stand Your Ground except to the irrational leftists found in abundance reading this left wing rag

        • BDD1951

          Well you know. Sticks and stones.

        • labrown69, are you an ostrich?

          • bullshts

            more like an ass with a head deeply planted inside.

          • labrown69

            Typical well reasoned argument that avoids the topic altogether. I may have stumbled onto Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s understudy. You are a detriment to the progressive cause with your 3rd grade level ad hominem.

          • Great, another well thought out reply by the left. I full concur with Leonard Terango. Stand your ground is a good law and it must stand if we are to protect ourselves from the thugs that run our streets. If someone does something illegal or criminal let them stand in court for their crime… but a dead man cannot stand anywhere.

          • Christian Martin

            How dare someone have a dissenting opinion.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Leftist nutjobs dont like disenting opinions, Christian. We all know that. Sadly!

          • labrown69

            No but you are a moron! What don’t you comprehend about the difference between NOT RETREATING and STALKING. You are the type of intellectually dishonest manipulator that gives honest libs like me a bad reputation.

          • AIMPOINT

            He’s coarse (Not as coarse as bulshts), but there is no logical nexus between the SYG law and the Zimmerman shooting of Martin. Zimmerman claims he was on the ground and not in any position to retreat. If Zimmerman is lying then it isn’t self defense.

          • The point of the article was that SYG was the cause of police and prosecutorial hesitancy to investigate and prosecute.

          • So, when confronted by someone intent on doing you or your family great physical harm, would you NOT reach for a gun if it was available? What would you do, plead for mercy on your knees?

        • From a military standpoint, there is nothing dishonorable or wrong with RETREATING from an enemy who out-mans and/or out-guns you, if you can do so safely. The same holds true in civilian life, to do otherwise is foolish, the stand your own ground laws encourages foolishness.

          • labrown69

            Charlie – You only think that because YOU are “foolish”. Nothing in the Stand Your Ground law “encourages” anyone to pick a fight. Any responsible gun owner or even any responsible person knows that when threatened with violence, the best option is to “retreat” IF you can do so safely. That is true for military and it is equally true for every individual but the Stand Your Ground law does not say, imply or even hint at anything to the contrary, THEREFOR when you say it “encourages foolishness” you are reaching a false and foolish conclusion!

        • Good use of emotionalized weasel words!

          • labrown69

            Gary – you have posted yet another non-responsive non-sequitur. Try making a reasoned argument instead of ad homiem attack like a baby who needs their diaper changed. I’m right because I’m right because I’m right is not just tired, it’s boring to the reader.

        • johninPCFL

          The reason Zimmerman wasn’t thoroughly questioned, and possibly arrested, the night of the shooting was “stand your ground”. The law PROHIBITS the arrest of anyone invoking the statute, and offers legal sanctions (fines, etc.) for anyone arresting the offender anyway.

          • labrown69

            It was reported that Zimmerman was about to be arrested and booked when his father who had been a Florida Magistrate of the Court called and used his influence to get special treatment. This entire flap is not about the shooting but rather the preferential treatment the “white guy” got! The cops are not obligated to go along with anyone and everyone’s claim of innocence just becasue they invoke that law. That is just silly. They interviewed the politician who wrote the law and he re-affirmed that.

          • johninPCFL

            Baloney. The law specifically prohibits the arrest of a suspect who cites the statute as the reason for the shooting. That’s when the DA has to examine the facts and decide whether an arrest is indicated. One fault of the law that was pointed out right after it passed (by the chiefs of police of several cities/counties) is that it allows the suspect to go home and eliminate evidence.

            What the politician (owned by ALEC, by the way) meant, thought, believed, wished, or prayed makes no difference. BTW the case cited by the politician as the example of “urgent need for this law” was a total sham.

          • labrown69

            Actually it is your comments that are baloney. Your contention that “all one has to do is cite the law” subsequent to a homicide and they are exempt from arrest is so ludicrous that it does not even constitute high quality balongna. This has nothing to do with ALEC or any of the other typical liberal knee jerk childishly emotional attempts at “guilt by association”. I am not fan of ALEC, I work against them routinely and if you think Stand Your Ground is a bad law, you should by all means work against it but in this case it is a total red herring and has nothing whatsoever to do with this incident. I don’t know why so many brainwashed liberal ideologues consistently fail to see that when they behave in a “REACTIONARY” manner, they are exactly like the right wingers they loath. If Zimmerman had adhered to the Stand Your Ground law this shooting could not have taken place. If you don’t like the law work to repeal it but don’t use these signature dishonest vapid left wing arguments to attack the law because most people are smart enough to see right through it, even moderate liberals like me.

          • johninPCFL

            Then, of course, there are the facts. See section 2:

            776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

            (1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

            (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

            (3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

          • ObozoMustGo

            labrown… clarification…. Zimmerman is as much a “white guy” as BHO is a “black guy”.

          • labrown69

            “White lookin” guy *S* That’s what I meant. That is also another aspect of this that has not really been discussed. I am not familiar with the vibe in Sanford but I can tell you that if a young Hispanic dude in a mini van was slowly tailing a young Black dude on foot in Southern CA that would almost automatically be called “a drive by shooting”. The Blacks and Hispanics hate each others guts here. Of course the liberal response was for the ACLU to sue the California prison system for segregating inmates. I can’t wait to see the Crips and the Bloods holding hands and singing Kumbaya with the Mexican Mafia and the White Aryan Resistance. Beautiful.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Gotcha! Dont hold your breath waiting for the sounds of Kumbaya. Maybe the ACLU is correct. I’d add that we should give them all a bunch of guns and ammo, lock the doors and let em go at until last man standing! That would solve the overcrowding problem and be a considerable savings to the taxpayer. hmmmmm… just a thought..

            Have a nice day!

        • just another brain dead bushitter.

          • labrown69

            NOT ONE of you lefties has addressed my statement that “stand your ground” was not obeyed. You are a pathetic and vapid bunch of air heads. Zimmerman ignored the Stand your Ground law. Try critical thinking sometime. It yeilds more than name calling. Sorry about that yeast infection.

        • ObozoMustGo

          labrown… nice to see someone else in the lions den with me fighting those from the land of stupidity! There’s lots of leftist nutjobs on this site and a never-ending source of laughter for me poking fun at them. There are a few others here with us. Keep up the good work! In the real world, we WAY outnumber them, but they squeel like loud stuck pigs.

          Have a nice day!

          • labrown69

            I myself am liberal but I am their worst nightmare. An armed lib. I guess ya might call that “a libertarian”.

          • ObozoMustGo

            There’s a difference between a liberal in the classic American tradition (aka libertarian in today’s age) and the leftist nutjobs on this site who have some socialist or collectivist vision for America. By the way, ALL of the columnists are nothing but mouthpieces for Obozo’s democRATic propaganda machine.

          • labrown69

            Yes, that is very true. Obama let Geithner and Summers call the shots while millions of American homes were stolen by the very banks who engineered the melt down by design in the first place. The 29 billion dollar settlement was a joke and yet nobody blames Obama. These guys worship him because he is black and because he is marginally better than the Republicans. A black friend and I spoke a half a dozen times on the phone when Obama spoke from Grant Park on election night and my wife and I had tears in our eyes knowing that we had broken centuries old racial barriers but that is done and can not be taken away from us. On the other hand, it is no justification for the dismal crony capitalism that has been the hallmark of his administration. The reactions of the worshipers on this web site are the reason right wingers think liberals see him as a Messiah. In that respect they are right.

          • ObozoMustGo

            No kidding on that messiah observation. Sheeesh!!! Talk about cult of personality???

          • labrown69

            I myself am liberal but I am their worst nightmare. An armed lib. I guess ya might call that “a libertarian”.

      • AIMPOINT

        The is no evidence anyone who committed a murder got off under a “stand your ground law.” While the laws may be modified I predict they will not be repealed. In fact, this controversy is likely to increase the number of people who choose to own guns.

      • labrown69

        I’ll bet that fruitcake with the handle Eat The Rich would argue it.

        • ObozoMustGo

          yes… and that fruitcake ETR has yet to answer my question… what the hell does “eat the rich” even mean? Can anyone answer that?

      • liberal_with_a_gun

        The problem is not the “Stand your ground” laws, but the poor interpretation of the law by the idiots in the police force in Florida. When Zimmerman failed to follow that 911 operators order to NOT pursue, he became the aggressor and the law does not pertain to him. Bloomberg is so full of manure. If having strict gun laws is so good, why is the crime rate in NYC so high. When only the police and military have guns, then we will have a police state with martial law.

        • ObozoMustGo

          Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. A Representative Republic is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner, and the sheep has a gun!

          I forget who said that… Franklin is sometimes associated with it, but I dont think that’s true.

      • What you just described is NOT a stand your ground law!

      • There are NO reports that Trayvon was running away. To the contrary, the only other eyewitness places Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, hitting him. If Trayvon was running away, he would have been shot in the back fro a distance, not from the front at close range.

    • digoweli

      There are many ways to defend one’s self. The question is whether one is willing to do it? The early pioneers did it by killing Indians as vermin. Are you advocating that minorities arm themselves? How about liberals? Should you have gun ranges for blacks and whites with each shooting targets of the other? Four black panthers scare the huckapuck out of the millions of white folks while white militias advocate against minorities with impunity including marching carrying guns and using them in liberal churches and museums against the patrons. It seems to me that the carrying bespeaks poor police work and bad community cohesion. I grew up in Oklahoma and did not find guns necessary except for fun. I don’t believe they are now either. The same folks who claim that guns are essential are the ones’ whose only entertainment is eating.

      • labrown69

        What a disjointed post. Nothing in Stand Your Ground allows someone to follow and if the law had been followed Trayvon would still be alive. Zimmerman ignored and violated both Stand Your Ground AND Neighborhood Watch standards by stalking his victim. You lefties don’t even enforce the laws we have now. Zimmerman was a gung ho yahoo and there will always be those. That does not mean I do not have the right to defend my home and as for “militias in liberal churches” and your other raving, that only exists in your mind.

        • likelystory2

          Actually, gun rights folks have argued that because the founding fathers carried guns to church, presumably when they were members of a “well-regulated militia,” it was their intent that we should all be able to carry guns to church which is absurd. The NRA’s stock-in-trade is the absurdity of the belief that gun ownership prevents crime when sensible people realize that it can only escalate crime to a deadlier degree … one that, I daresay, we’d be loathe to see in church on a peaceful Sunday.

          • labrown69

            Yea, never mind history! Let’s see what believe instead of believing what we have already seen! Name one despot who has not disarmed the people.

          • metrognome3830

            I’m having trouble following you. You lash out at “righties” and “old libs” while declaring yourself as liberal. You come off sounding like an “old curmudgeon.” I don’t know of any serious despotic movement to disarm the people. That sounds like . . . well . . . I hate to say it, but slightly right wing rhetoric. There is a lot of ground between some regulation of guns and “disarming the people.” I’m liberal, I’m old, I do not disagree that reasonable, sane people should be able to have guns. But what of those who are neither reasonable nor sane nor even remotely trained enough to handle a gun? In 73 years of life, I have never had the need to use a gun on another person. I have owned and used rifles and shotguns for hunting and handguns for target shooting. But I have never carried a gun for protection. Perhaps because I was afraid I might use it if I had it. If someone shoots me, their will no reason for “standing their ground.” You are right about George Zimmerman. He was stalking, not standing his ground, but without that ill-c0nceived law, there would have been no question. We have always had the right to defend ourselves, even without that law.

          • labrown69

            metrognome3830 – you are the ONLY person on this entire thread who has made a rational statement instead of calling names. What does that indicate to you about what percentage of those on the far left are “the reasonable sane people” that your post presumes are the norm? I draw a huge distinction between liberal and far left. I was a registered Democrat for 42 years and I finally re-registered independent precisely because Obama allowed the lobbyists to write his health care bill rather than deliver a public option and because he has been on the side of Wall St since day one while banks steal the homes of Americans. I think you vastly underestimate the number of people who would like to eliminate guns and they are already very hard to come by in California where I live. Most police officers go through an entire career without ever having to fire their weapon in the line of duty so the odds of needing to use a gun to defend your home are even longer BUT I personally know a man who was subject to a home invasion robbery and if you happen to be the poor slob who is “struck my lightning” and have to defend, there is no substitute for a gun. The right wingers are constantly cutting police and every day you are more and more on your own when it comes to home defense and at the age of 64, if someone breaks in during the night when my wife and I are asleep, I want that gun. I respectfully disagree vehemently with you and my opinion is there is a great organized movement to disarm. We already have gun regulation and we already have myriad laws on the books that are not enforced and making more laws will not make a difference. You might think it is just “right wing rhetoric” but the reality is, if you make it difficult for citizens to have guns, only criminals will have them. Let’s face it, this publication is far far far partisan left and I am not. I am liberal but not leftist. I am pro-choice and in fact if a man told one of my daughters she had to carry a rapists baby to term I would put an f-ing bullet in his head. I support gay marriage and I support socialized health care but make no mistake about it, I am not married to a leftist ideology like the idiots in this thread who are making childish comments. These poeple want to use this shooting to attack the “Stand Your Ground” law and I am telling you it does not apply. If Zimmerman disobeyed Stand Your Ground” it is irrational to believe he would obey any other law. Zimmerman had an “assault on a policman” on his record and probably should not even had a permit but there you have it, we do not enforce existing law. Making more and more laws will not make any difference. I applaud you for making a civil case.

          • metrognome3830

            labrown69 – I believe we agree more than disagree. Except for one or two points. You believe there is a movement to disarm us. I don’t. I’m not saying I’m right or you’re wrong. I just disagree. I agree with you that there is left wing and right wing rhetoric. I do not agree with either extreme. I feel that there is too much polarization in this country to allow for any meaningful progress to be made and I don’t see much hope of it getting better any time soon. I don’t see the necessity for the “Stand Your Ground” law because I have always felt I had the right, and have “stood my ground.” I did it without a gun, and sometimes it cost me a few lumps and bruises. I will not rule out the possibility that the day may come when I will regret that I didn’t have a weapon. But you are right that the George Zimmerman case has nothing to do with the “stand your ground” law. As you pointed out, he already had a history of not obeying laws. As to others in this thread making childish comments, yes there are many. I guess I have not considered them to represent the majority. Nor am I sure I do. I live in a community that is predominantly conservative to right wing, so I am usually a minority voice. But, mainly, I agree with you. I don’t even disagree that it might be a good idea to have a gun on the beside stand at my age, since I probably wouldn’t be very effective in hand-to-hand combat with an intruder 40 years my junior.

          • labrown69

            Metrognome – yes, it sounds like we are not that far apart. The truth is I know almost nothing about the Stand Your Ground law and I do believe that under existing law we have the right to self defense. I would certainly never advocate that anyone who is not comfortable with guns keep one. None the less, to those attacking Stand Your Ground ON THE GROUNDS that it encouraged this shooting, I simply do not see it as an honest argument. There may be plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize this law but I fail to see the Martin case as one of them. As for those who would ban all guns, I can tell you that the cities of Washington DC and Chicago both already tried to do just that, ban ALL FIREARMS within the city limits and if there is anything good about the idiotic Supreme Court who gave us “Citizens United” it is that they found those bans unconstitutional. If you research the Mayor Bloombergs of the world I think you will find that there is a very well organized and well funded effort to ban guns alive and well in what’s left of the USA.

          • labrown69

            Metrognome – yes, it sounds like we are not that far apart. The truth is I know almost nothing about the Stand Your Ground law and I do believe that under existing law we have the right to self defense. I would certainly never advocate that anyone who is not comfortable with guns keep one. None the less, to those attacking Stand Your Ground ON THE GROUNDS that it encouraged this shooting, I simply do not see it as an honest argument. There may be plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize this law but I fail to see the Martin case as one of them. As for those who would ban all guns, I can tell you that the cities of Washington DC and Chicago both already tried to do just that, ban ALL FIREARMS within the city limits and if there is anything good about the idiotic Supreme Court who gave us “Citizens United” it is that they found those bans unconstitutional. If you research the Mayor Bloombergs of the world I think you will find that there is a very well organized and well funded effort to ban guns alive and well in what’s left of the USA.

          • ObozoMustGo

            There you go again, labrown! Posing a challenging question that leftist nutjobs will refuse to answer because they cant say that they are wrong.

        • BDD1951

          There is one big difference between us lefties and you radical right wingers and that is that we care about the American people. And don’t bring up abortion to me, that’s an entirely different issue. Just for your info, I am ProLife. I am old so I can remember when we had Republican presidents who cared. Now they are all fixated on lining their own pockets.

          • labrown69

            Actually I am very liberal, but I am not “a leftist” however I am pro-choice, I support gay marriage etc but I honor the 2nd Amendment as well. BDD, you don’t know it but you are just like the right wingers who also are married to an across the board ideology that allows no room for addressing issues one at a time. You and the right wingers are both reactionaries. The only hope radical right wingers have is the irrational knee jerk reactions of brainwashed old fashioned libs who are mired in the thinking of the past and refuse to amend our own mistakes.

    • There is a fundamental difference between self-defense and stand-your-ground, and the NRA conveniently chooses to ignore that fact in its self-serving crusade to arm everyone in sight with any class of firearm he/she desires. The writers of the 2nd amendment (whose unfortunate chice of words has made a shambles of gunlaws) are turning over in their graves.

    • bullshts

      Seems to me that you suffer more from congestive brain failure than heart failure. Your need to protect yourself with guns is a figment of your Dodge City, Tombstone fantasy life. You need to grow up and get over your gun pre-occupation.

      • AllFreedomsFirst

        It’s obvious that many here have never been a victim of typical street thug violent crime before. If I had been armed when I was a victim of the street thug game “Knockout,” maybe I would have the full use of my left eye today.

        • metrognome3830

          Or you might be dead because the other guy was faster than you.

    • bullshts

      Seems to me that you suffer more from congestive brain failure than heart failure. Your need to protect yourself with guns is a figment of your Dodge City, Tombstone fantasy life. You need to grow up and get over your gun pre-occupation.

    • tleeb

      Mr. Terango, I don’t argue with your right to own a handgun–an automatic rifle, yes, but not a handgun. I do argue, however, with the NRA’s position that nothing should stand in the way of that right: no (or minimal) licensing requirements, no (or minimal) education requirements, no recertification requirements, no (or minimal) registration requirements. And then to combine such lack–or virtual lack–of oversight with laws like Stand Your Ground, which legalize vigilantism, is national insanity. E.J. Dionne’s point is not that we should take guns out of your hands. His point is that we need a rationale dialogue on the limits–yes, limits!–we must place on the role of firearms in our society. Let’s remember this: guns are meant to kill. Yet they are universally accessible in our country. No other mortal instrument can be obtained, hidden, used, or redistributed so easily. This is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

    • tleeb

      Mr. Terango, I don’t argue with your right to own a handgun–an automatic rifle, yes, but not a handgun. I do argue, however, with the NRA’s position that nothing should stand in the way of that right: no (or minimal) licensing requirements, no (or minimal) education requirements, no recertification requirements, no (or minimal) registration requirements. And then to combine such lack–or virtual lack–of oversight with laws like Stand Your Ground, which legalize vigilantism, is national insanity. E.J. Dionne’s point is not that we should take guns out of your hands. His point is that we need a rationale dialogue on the limits–yes, limits!–we must place on the role of firearms in our society. Let’s remember this: guns are meant to kill. Yet they are universally accessible in our country. No other mortal instrument can be obtained, hidden, used, or redistributed so easily. This is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

    • Leonard T, your right to defend yourself has never been in question or threatened, but these ” castle doctrine and stand your own ground laws ” have allowed people who don’t share your expertise in the use of deadly force to use it anyway, and that has proven to be dangerous.

    • TheSkalawag929

      I don’t know what state you live in but I’m sure that there were self defense laws on the books long before stand your ground. So how do the stand your ground laws enhance your ability to protect yourself?

    • TheSkalawag929

      I don’t know what state you live in but I’m sure that there were self defense laws on the books long before stand your ground. So how do the stand your ground laws enhance your ability to protect yourself?

    • sheckyb

      Stop watching Fox News propaganda. Nobody is going to take your precious guns away. Nobody is going to prevent you from buying a gun. You can defend yourself all you want with your guns. The proposal is: sensible gun laws. No one should be able to buy an automatic or semi automatic weapon. No one should be able to walk around with concealed weapons. There has to be thorough background checks, both criminal and mental health. No one should be able to walk into a gun show and walk out with an automatic weapon.

    • pacrat4077

      i live in the ocala national forest here in fl. law enforcement has been cut back. i almost never see state trooper. the use of drugs is ramped here do to the high poverty rate. theft is a common happening here also. if we can’t protect ourselves,,,who will????i have friends in Canada who tell us not to let the government take your guns. when that happened there, the crime rate went up.like drugs, the government can,t stop illegal guns, so they go after responsible, law abiding citizens just to show the politicians are busy doing something.

    • For last time Dems are NOT trying to take guns away from law abiding folks. Thats GOP spin to scare you . GOP is great at using fear tactics.. like
      ‘ Mushroom cloud Smoking gun Hidden WMD ‘ Its a way to scare and manipulate us.

    • I full concur with Leonard Terango. Stand your ground is a good law and it must stand if we are to protect ourselves from the thugs that run our streets. If someone does something illegal or criminal let them stand in court for their crime… but a dead man cannot stand anywhere.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      Problem is that the Dem’s did drop the issue. Then they get control of both houses and the presidency, make it an issue again and take away those rights.

      • TheSkalawag929

        As far as I can remember there have been three times that Democrats have brought up gun issues. That was when St. Ronnie was shot and Brady and Giffords. Any other time that the issue was brought up it was republicans and the NRA bringing it up to scare the scary little gun owners into thinking some mean old Democrat monster was comming to take their toys away.

    • montyriff

      The second ammendment has the glaring statement leading to the “right to bear arms should not be denied” and that is “In order to maintain a well organized militia
      ” And the Supreme Court ignored that glaringly clear condition when they gave the NRA its way.

    • And doom our kids to more needless deaths, never!

    • Maybe, the last line in the National Anthem should be changed to say, “The land of the free (for some) and the home of the scared.

  • 2ac911

    I am a veteran, a gun owner, and a responsible person. I have a permit to carry a gun since 1971. I have never shot anyone. The Trayvon Martin case is not about legal guns it’s about irrational people. I believe mr. Zimmerman broke the law by disobeying the police and confronting Mr. Martin. This had nothing to do with guns.

    There are far more illegal guns out there killing people. Why does everyone blame the legally licensed gun owner when it is the crimnial with the illegal unregistared gun doing the killing. Go after the root of the problem. Crimanials, drug dealer, gangs and leave the honest legally licensed gun owner alone..

    SUPPORT THE SECOND AMMENDMENT!!!!!

    • likelystory2

      Yeah, but this is not about an illegal gun owner, this is about a guy with a carry license who carried a gun and was willing to use it despite 911’s order to stand down. These are facts. Now, here comes a guess: In all probability, Zimmerman was fully aware of his rights under the current so-called “Stand Your Ground” law of Florida. My guess is that he was the kinda guy who wouldn’t have had and carried a gun if he didn’t think his use of it would be protected under this law. In a certain sense the killing of this kid, or some kid, or somebody was premeditated by George Zimmerman. He was out there that night to kill somebody and then hide behind the “Stand Your Ground” legislature.

      • 2ac911

        You are right about Zimmerman. He was wrong and in my opinion what he did ws commit murder of and unarmed person. I firmly believe that the STAND YOUR GROUND LAW was not intended to protect people that commit murder. I do believe that everyone has the right to defend themselves even if it mean the use of deadly force. George Zimmerman and people like him are why innocent people suffer. Stupidity can not be governed or legislated. Common sense is a thing of the past. Lets punish everyone for one jerk.

  • Jennifer A. Nolan

    How seriously do we want public safety? If the people turned up and tuned in, rather than just watching the Kardashians, most likely Trayvon Martin would still be alive today.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    This month (April) 6 cops in NY City were shot by thugs right out in the open on public streets. Are public streets the place for guns? Maybe in the wilds of Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and states where they are coping with wild animals they need guns for protection. Public streets like those in big cities are NOT the place for guns. Not when innocent bystanders are placed in harm’s way on a daily basis.

    Just imagine what this country would be like in the most urban areas if the NRA got its way and everyone was armed to the teeth. It would be a bloodbath on every subway, bus, train or in the tunnels to and from the big cities. If it isn’t already.

    Common sense rules when so many guns are killing so many innocent people and now the brazen gun toting thugs think cops are as much as target as anyone else, the rights of a few have to bow to the rights of the many who pay taxes to freely use public streets and transportation.

    The NRA sits backs, pours millions into lobbyists and then the guns flow on public streets to the point where not even the cops can control them.

    Gun running in this country is out of control. It’s time to start inventorying all gun manufacturers to account for every gun they sell. Too bad if that’s too much paperwork. The laws on gun control in the US that already exist don’t work because of brazen aggressive actions of the NRA.

    When human life is second to the right to own a gun, something really stinks in the mentalities of the NRA.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    Here’s the NRA game they don’t admit. The gun manufacturers have to sell more and more guns in order to pay the NRA to keep the government from cracking down with more gun laws. Then, the NRA takes gun manufacturers’ moolah and passes it on to NRA lobbyists.

    So, gun manufacturers are forced to constantly exceed their sales quotas just to keep paying off the NRA who pays that to lobbyists.

    The Second Amendment was never intended to place innocent people in harm’s way just so a tiny group of thugs could have their rights while violating the rights of others.

  • I disagree with the bit on this article. I personally favor a duty to retreat because I think it is easier to establish reasonableness in self defense when one tries to avoid a conflict, which it is fairly clear Zimmerman did not do. However, stand your ground laws have a long history in this country in many states. The biggest issue is that it makes questions of self defense harder questions for a jury.

    But let’s be clear about one thing in the Trayvon Martin case: the specifics of self-defense laws make no difference. In one version of events we have Zimmerman acting in a way which is first- or second-degree murder in every state in the country, and in another version of events, we have Zimmerman acting in a way which is justified self-defense in every state and every city in the country. The arguments over stand your ground laws quite frankly have nothing to do with this case.

    Also I will go out on a limb here and say that I think that supporting Constitutional liberties means supporting all Constitutional liberties, whether it is the promise of equal protection under the laws, whether it is the freedom of speech or the right to due process, or whether it is second amendment rights. Therefore, although no doubt I will get plenty of flack for saying this from both ACLU-type circles and NRA-type circles, I do consider the National Rifle Association to be a worthy civil liberties organization along side the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Constitutional liberties mean all Constitutional liberties and once we start reading any of them out of the Constitution we are in danger of losing those very freedoms we cherish. The Constitution has to mean something and the liberties it supports must be respected.

  • Eleanore Whitaker

    Ever notice how all the NRA gun nuts ever repeat is “I have to protect myself”. Do they? Where do these idiots live that they need so much protection? Next door to a prison? In a ghetto? No…they live in rich butt houses they know attract burglars and then the rest of us have to suffer because rich butts have glutted themselves with possessions, possessions, possessions. Mostly to show off like the ostentatious cretons they are.

    Why should the rest of us who will never have to worry about “protecting ourselves” have to suffer for a few paranoid idiots who glut themselves with prize possessions and then live in mortal fear someone will break into their McMansions?

  • howa4x

    The reality is that the NRA preys upon fear that comes from seeing images on TV of young Afro American youth commiting a crime. The whites fear that this urban rumble is going to spill into their neighborhoods, rape their wives or daughters and they have lost faith in local police that spend most of their time giving traffic tickets. Everyone knows that more police doesn’t mean less crime, so the people have taken it upon themselves to arm. I also blame the Black community who have not come together to stop the rampant gang warfare, the drugs, the treenage mothers, and disease that is sweeping their communities. Liberals, conservatives and others refuse to get to the root causes of crime and violence. As long as that goes on the public will arm themselves.

    • So basically the reason for the killing of Travon and bad things dealing with guns are African Americans fault. That’s a load of crap we live in a society that looks for a quick excuse and a quick way out. The Black community as you say, is not happy about events happen in their community they do work at having a better community. It is a shame that people who knows a little about a community has so much to said. I can’t said that howa4x is one of these people but I know until we all as human being stop blaming each other and try to work together groups like the NRA will take advantage of the gun situation.

  • Trayvon Martin also had the right to stand his ground. Unfortunately, he did not have a gun. The NRA will not be satisfied until everybody has a private arsenal. News show last night stated that Rueger and several other manufacturers were backlogged so badly that they were not accepting new orders for possibly as long as 2 years. NRA stands only for the gun manufacturers, not gun owners.

  • Guns are a form of terrorism, whats the difference than carrying a bomb around actually you get faster results with the Gun.

  • You can’t have that much power through ideology and political power but you can with over whelming firepower. Take the guns away from the bad guys so sheep dogs like me won’t have to die protecting sheep like you.

  • cfcrawmer3

    I’ve carried for 30+ years, never had a need to use & hope I never do, but, would rather carry n not need it then have to call 911 so the police can more easily locate n identify the victim/s. The Trayvon Martin case is a travesty of justice….Zimmerman show have been arrested immediately as he way overstepped “Stand your gound.”

  • About time a politician that is not under the NRA payroll

  • Michael P Reed Sr.

    Everyone who is not a felon or mentally unstable should have the right to carry a weapon if they so choose. Where I live the cops cannot control the bangers or dealers. and stray bullets find their way to innocents. The cops themselves are not much better. I do not know how many cases of murder they have gotten away with becuase the coroners jury comes back that the shooting was justified. The cops here are just as liable to shoot as the gangers are especially north town cops, so the citizens are caught in the middle. At least in some cases we can shoot back at the gangers.

  • Leave it to E.J. Dionne tp put the liberal anti-gun spin on this “front-page” news tradedgy. The violence in our society from many reasons makes laws like this necessary to protect ourselves from the violence. I agree completely with Leonard Terango & montanabill. Maybe E.J. could write an article on the “real” causes that make us need laws as these, and it certainly isn’t our rights to defend ourselves.

  • Tosa720

    As the wild, wild West became more civilized, laws similar to what had passed in other areas of the country were passed to gain order and control killings. Hunting for food was still necessary, thus gun makers were able to continue making a living. Once hunting for food by the general population in most cities began to wane, the gun makers (who rose to becoming manufacturers) had the military and law enforcement to sell their guns to. The demand was steady and the profits were lucrative, so it was easy to continue to grow. Eventually sales to those who still enjoyed hunting, the military and law enforcement weren’t enough. The gun manufacturers – especially those who chose to take on investors had to make even greater profits. Enter the concept of creating a market for gun collectors, and home enthusiasts, as well as those who might enjoy target shooting at gun ranges as a sport. Let’s see: hunters, check – law enforcement, check – the military, check – gun collectors – check, home enthusiasts, check – target shooters, check. Now what?

    AHA!!! A new concept in marketing is spawned. THE PLAN: Step 1 ) CREATE PSYCHOLOGICAL PARANOIA (FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN “OTHERS”). Step 2) Market the need for guns for PERSONAL PROTECTION. Step 3) Convince all manner of people and lobby governors and legislators of the need for a “STAND YOUR GROUND” LAW. Mission accomplished – now they can continue with these new markets, continue to increase profits and pay dividends to their investors. It is nothing but greed folks – at your expense.

  • resolveconflict

    We live in a society that is becomming increasingly polarized. There is far less trust and far more fear. There needs to be a civl discourse to determine which steps are viable to protect the public at large. Stand your ground is only wrong when a conflict can be resolved differently than resorting to violence. If everyone could be reasoned with we would need no such law. Fact is there are many among us that are hostile and cannot be reasoned with.

  • only people in nyc that carry a gun are the criminals. honest people cant as it is cost prohibitive to protect themselves. it’s a nice commie place to live if you dont get mugged

  • 1angeleyes

    Common sense says you have a right to defend yourself. Zimmerman disobeyed authority; just listen to the 911 tape. The child was screaming for his life. Trayvon has a right to defend himself from a person that was chasing him and persuing as a stranger. Trayvon was scrared for his life as anyone would be. Isn’t that what you teach your children and that is to run from a stranger and danger or if you have to kick, scream, fight, get away and run? But now he is dead & killed by a stranger to him and only because Zimmerman decided he wanted that child dead because he was wearing a hood in the rain, going to the store for some skittles and tea. That is not acceptable and Zimmerman should be punished severely. Zimmerman’s conduct in his past history should have been checked out thoroughly by the people who hired him and they would have found that with Zimmerman’s macho and bias background and character background that he should have not been allowed to carry a weapon on any patrol and in the Trayvon Martin’s case Trayvon Martin had every right to be in his own community. Now if Zimmerman wanted to have a gun to protect himself at his own place of resident; that is something all of us share. But Zimmerman was flat out wrong and has caused these parents to be without their son for the rest of their life. Zimmerman had no right to do that.

  • Vigilanties against Blacks will be outlawed. If they think Trayvon Martin caused controvery let them try to pull it again.

  • likelystory2

    Excellent article. Like Mr. Terango (comment posted below) I recognize the stark differences between gun ownership in a rural community v. gun ownership in an urban setting. The experiences of big city mayors can’t be easily dismissed as just “lefty” or “liberal.” These guys know of what they speak. Guns = gun violence. Putting more guns in more hands can only lead to more gun violence. I will never again purchase or own a gun.

  • pintail4

    If the anti gun people would treat the issue fairly, and argue the matter in a logical manner, things could be much different. You start out saying that automatic weapons should be banned, and you may be right since we can’t use them for hunting. I don’t believe that myself however. But if you ever did accomplish banning automatic fire arms, then your next step would be, hey…….a bullet fired from a single shot device can be just as dangerous as a bullet coming from an automatic weapon. Then in your quest to have people completely disarm themselves, your next scenario would be, if all guns are equally dangerous, “then just get rid of all guns”. And that just ain’t gonn’a happen. You leave the NRA no choice but to stand and fight for this right.

    • grannyk8

      Who fires an automatic on ‘single shot’; really? Automatics are meant to shoot many times, and most usually the shooter will empty the magazine. Don’t try to tell anyone that it is no more dangerous than a single shot device. If you believe that, you are the example of why people want gun control; the lack of ability on the part of many gun owners to reason.

    • mnhistoryfan

      There isn’t the slightest excuse for having an automatic. The second amendment says a well-regulated militia, and nobody had any idea that such lethal weapons w2ere on the horizons.
      Why is it that so many pursue an “idea” to its most illogical, paranoid idea?

      • TheSkalawag929

        Fear is the leading cause of Stupid which in turn leads to unnecessary deaths.

    • likelystory2

      Ahhh. There’s that ole’ slippery slope again. Sometimes I’d welcome a good old ad hominem. Just remember the slippery slope slides two ways: on one side complete disarmament; on the other thermonuclear war. Again, “How about a nice game of chess?”.

    • likelystory2

      Ahhh. There’s that ole’ slippery slope again. Sometimes I’d welcome a good old ad hominem. Just remember the slippery slope slides two ways: on one side complete disarmament; on the other thermonuclear war. Again, “How about a nice game of chess?”.

  • The” stand your ground laws” Are a nessary and fundamental to the survival of our Nation as a DEMOCKRACY. The second amendment is the mussel of the constitution and is the assurance and guarintee of all other RIGHTS,FREEDOMS, and LIBERITYS. To abolish the right to defend ower selves, is to ensure slavery.

    • Colorado15

      Wow the Waco type folks are out in full force. I grew up in a rural state where everyone had guns, however nobody thought they had to have one to go to church, the state park, or Starbucks. All you idiots who think you have to be armed everywhere you go, what happens when you kill an innocent person who happens to be in the area when you get into your “gun fight”.

    • Colorado15

      Wow the Waco type folks are out in full force. I grew up in a rural state where everyone had guns, however nobody thought they had to have one to go to church, the state park, or Starbucks. All you idiots who think you have to be armed everywhere you go, what happens when you kill an innocent person who happens to be in the area when you get into your “gun fight”.

  • labrown69

    this is an utter crock of ****! “Stand Your Ground played no role whatsoever in the shooting of Trayvon Martin and IN FACT if “Stand Your Ground” had been honored, he COULD NOT have been shot. Stand your ground means you don’t have to “retreat” but it in no way allows you to follow. You might as well blame the Martin shooting on the winter solstice but then again, irrational fraidy cats of the extreme left never miss an opportunity to issue a false expression of their contempt for the right of self defense. You create a dangerous world with your stupid policies and then say I can’t protect myself. That aint gonna happen.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      You are correct. It does not apply to the shooting situation. The media and others have wrongly tagged it to the incident. Now it’s being used to fuel anti gun sentiment. The real question is, was Zimmerman justified to use his weapon under the circumstances that actually occurred?

      If he really did receive a gash in his head a, a broken nose and a head pounding on the sidewalk, then the evidence will show it and he should be released from the charge accordingly. Was Martin shot at close range with powder burns on his clothes while Zimmerman was supposedly on the ground? Maybe now we’ll find out.

      • labrown69

        AllFreedoms – I am a staunch supporter of the second amendment but I think Zimmerman is guilty whether he was subsequently attacked or not. He had no business following Martin and if he had not disobeyed the police dispatcher who specifically told him not to follow and ignored both Neighborhood Watch and Stand Your Ground standards the incident never would have happened. I think he is guilty of at the very least manslaughter or negligent homicide but if they are going to allow laws like Stand Your Ground I think the only antidote to morons like Zimmerman who argue that it is a license of vigilantism is to throw the book at those who abuse the law. I do think Martin was profiled also and that is a component. Zimmerman was a gung ho yahoo with an itchy trigger finger who had never killed anyone and once he got his way he freaked out with remorse. How this f***ing guy got a gun after assaulting a police officer is beyond me. Even I who would never give up my guns am for that much gun control. Anyone who has a violent crime on their wrap sheet should never be allowed to pack.

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    Mayor’s who keep saying we don’t need these laws all have cities that are out of control and do nothing about their own violent crime problems. Those laws are supposed to apply in your car, home or place of temporary dwelling like a hotel room, not on the streets.
    As to laws that already give you the right to defend yourself, just tell that to Bernard Getz and how worthwhile those laws are.

  • I WILL GO ALONG WITH GUN CONTROL WHEN THE POLITICIANS GET RID OF THEIR BODY GUARDS. I WILL CONTINUE TO DEFEND MY FAMILY AS LONG AS THEY ARE
    ARMED. ONE BLACK KID GETS SHOT AND THEY ALL GO NUTS. IN CHICAGO, SINCE THE
    FIRST OF THE YEAR, THERE HAVE BEEN ABOUT 30 SHOOTINGS AND NOTHING WAS
    DONE ABOUT ANY OF THEM.

  • dardyl

    I agree with Chris and 2ac911. If the legitimate gun owner lay his guns down, the criminals will still get guns. The blame should be placed on the criminal not the law abiding citizen. Zimmerman should have stayed where he was. He was secure there and Trayvon should have been confronted by the police. However, people who have done nothing should not be punished when they have done nothing. Either the Constitution is a viable document or it isn’t. Keeping it true is most important.

  • Al2000

    When I was a teenager, my neighborhood was located inside the Watts riot area. The National Guard put a barb wired fence along the main street half a block from my huse and informed us that we were on our own inside the riot zone. Some of the men in our neighborhoos organized a defence team, I immediately volunteered to help out. My parents were scared and wanted to spend the night at my uncle’s house outside the riot area. I was full of adrenalene, I did not want to back off. I was going to defend my territory no matter what. My dad had purchased legally a shooting rifle which he gave me for my 16th year to use it at the shooting range. Our house was unprotected at one side so the neigborhood built a trench for us to protect the house. The night came and I was in that trench with my rifle and lots of ammunition ready to kill rioters. and warn the rest of the neighborhood. We saw the shopping center down the street go up in flames and the rumors were that the rioters were coming our way. I prayed for the bastards to come our way, I hoped to kill at least one. I envisioned me shooting at them and warning the neighbors that they were coming. They never came, I was so disappointed. It wasn’t untill I was in my tewnties that I realized how lucky I was that the rioters never came. I felt so powerful with that gun ready to shoot someone. I wonder if that poor bastard that killed Trayvon Martin ever reached his tenties.

  • dardyl

    It is reassuring to hear from Orrin, labrown69, AllFreedomsFirst, and Glenda. People have knee jerk reactions and it makes things worse. Luckily, calmer heads prevail.

  • Russ49

    In December 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot four teenagers on a subway in New York for threatening him. One was paralyzed, the others recovered. It was a polarizing incident with people lining up on both sides. Goetz was charged with a list of crimes, but was eventually convicted of just one offense, carrying an unlicensed handgun, for which he served 9 months of a one year sentence. New York didn’t have a Stand Your Ground law, however that is exactly what Goetz did. If his gun had been licensed, he would not have served any time. The point is, Stand Your Ground laws are unnecessary if a person is indeed threatened as juries will always side with the victim if evidence is on his side. Get a gun, get a license, and use it only in extreme situations. Stand Your Ground law or not. PS. I have been mugged. Three guys worked together. One on each side kept me from escaping. One got in my face and said he had a gun. I wasn’t about to argue and gave him what he wanted.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      Were any of the teenagers that tried to stab Goetz with their screwdrivers ever charged?
      If not, then that’s what’s really wrong with our system (rewarding those truly at fault).

  • EJ.. Dose the NY mayor have protection that is armed. Dose he drive a car to work?dose he walk the streets of the project housing.

    • metrognome3830

      Dose he know how to spell does?

  • EJ.. Dose the NY mayor have protection that is armed. Dose he drive a car to work?dose he walk the streets of the project housing.

  • Colorado15

    I don’t think the NRA cares one way or another if the mentally ill have a gun, if they did they wouldn’t oppose meaningful gun control. You are legally entitled to own a gun and I don’t have a problem with that. You are entitled to protect your home and family and that is fine as well. However, when carrying your concealed weapon threatens the safety of my family, I have an issue.

  • ericstevens

    Well,for those of us who can’t physically run away,and not wanting to be a totally forgotten and “how sad” statistic,I am happy that I can still be a “sheepdog” against any “wolves” that see me as easy prey.We don’t have bodyguards and lots of useless political rhetoric as those who can stand before a liberal media and preach their “no gun” propoganda.

  • quasm

    It is notable that not one fact about the dangers of guns in the hands of citizens is a threat to anyone besides people wishing to do them harm. The Martin shooting would probably occurred without a “Stand Your Ground” law.

    Dik Thurston
    Colorado Springs

  • Repeal and replace this awful law, it is too wide and gives people with guns a false sense of power

  • I think we should have the right to have a gun but the Stand Your Ground law is too dangerous. Anyone like Zimmerman can get in their mind that they are going to just kill someone because they feel they want to. To kill someone in my opinion should be where you have no other choice but to do it. We are all humans and we should value life. That law is barbaric we can’t have people taking it upon themselves to make a judgement on when to kill someone. We are not supposed to take the law into our own hands. And I hate say but some people are in the right frame of mind all of the time but some people have mental problems or might be going through something and get mad and kill someone. That is not what guns are for. Really when you think of it what are becoming as people. Why is the right to kill someone so important to someone? is it that people are planning on killing someone. We need to be trying to change our country for the good of all instead of people trying to play God and take it upon themselves to make a judgement on who should die. There are a lot of crazies out here and they are packing guns and who knows when someone might make a judgement that YOU should die. I am not against guns but there are limitations on how far it should go. I understand people are worried about situations but I believe that Stand You Ground law is wrong. Everyday someone is killing each other with guns even children are killing are killing young children. Look at the 11 year old in PA who killed his fathers fiancee. People need to come to a compromise about the guns instead of taking such a hard stand about a law to kill.

  • mike112769

    Bloomberg is the epitome of someone that wants government to run every aspect of your life. He is a disgrace when it comes to civil liberties. Only Leftist, closet communists are in favor of making it illegal for someone to defend themselves. One idiot with a gun brings out the multitude of idiots in government.

    • grannyk8

      Unfortunately, idiots are nortoriously inept at identifying themselves as such.

  • I bet the “Mayor” has a bodyguard when he is out in public areas, he don’t have to worry about getting mugged, or beat up, or even killed, but he wants us (the genera public) to go out in public and just HOPE that we don’t get attacked. Mayor Blumberhead is a far left liberal that wouldn’t know the truth it hit him right in the puss.

  • sgmcb

    I consider myself a responsible 70 year old citizen and I recognize that the years have zapped my agility and strength, but not my judgement. Every day thugs are abusing laws and attacking seniors and others. Therefore I feel more comfortable when I have to be in areas of vurnerability with my weapon of choice at hand. I have witnessed the blinding speed a person can come out of the shadows and attack their intended victim in well lit parking lots, etc. I am not infavor of giving up my right to defend myself or my property, if necessary. Retired US Army.

    • metrognome3830

      And if they come out of the shadows and attack with blinding speed, do you think you will have time to pull your gun and shoot? You most certainly won’t have any time to determine why they are coming out of the shadows. What if they are just running for some other reason? If you witnessed it, did you shoot them to protect the victim? Or did you “witness” this on a TV show. If you know areas of vulnerability, is it necessary to go there? Or could you simply avoid them?

  • I personally, after reading this article, don’t think that a stand your ground order has any meaning here whatsoever. In this case it was stated that Zimmerman chased after trayvon, so how was he standing his ground. If anythging I would say he instigated an incident. I really shouldn’t have even said that, because I was not there and I can’t say what happened or didn’t happen, but it is a fact that Zimmerman did chase him and confronted him it was all heard over the phone call in which Trayvon was having at the time with his girlfriend. I do believe that this law is a very dangerous law to have in place, and given someone the right to kill a person in cold blood and being able to use this law as a defense can have many complications, and backlashes. Just like the one we are in the middle of right now!

  • How are you standing your ground when you shoot someone that is walking or running away from you?

  • Since 1978, when the supreme court said the police do not have to protect you, the good states have shown the courage to let people defend themselves. Most of the bad states are above the Mason Dixon line and show blue on the political map. The stand your ground law in Florida has nothing to do with the Trayvon Martin case, just like racism has nothing to do with it either, unlike what the press and Al Sharpton (Mr. Tawana Brawley) have tried to make it. Michael Bloomberg is Mr Nanny State and thinks he knows what is best for everybody, even if it takes breaking the term limit law in NY to make sure you can’t have any salt. Those who illegally possess firearms do not abide by any rules, and don’t care what they are. The NRA is just protecting the rest of us from people like this author, and the criminals, by making it so we CAN defend ourselves when attacked. Why should I, a senior citizen with a bad leg, be forced to flee from someone who wants to do me harm? Mr.’s Smith and Wesson have made it so that I have as much power to defend myself as those who would do me, and posssibly my family, harm. In those states like Michael Bloomberg’s, or Barack Obama’s, I would be arrested and charged with a crime if I were to defend myself using my firearm. Even carrying a legally registered firearm and having a concealed carry permit from another state, will get you 5-10 years in jail in New York City.
    SO stay away from this author and any blue state if you really want to stay safe, because the police aren’t going to stop any crime, just investigate after it happens. Liberalism is a mental disorder, Maybe this author should walk down the streets of any big cityin a blue state, by himself around midnight and see if the stand your ground laws make sense. It is much safer to do so in those states that have the Stand Your Ground laws than those that do not because the driminals don’t know if you have a weapon in those states, whereas the criminals in the blue states know you are unarmed because you are obeying the stupid laws they have enacted to “keep you safe” from yourself.

  • If it is against the law to drink and drive, why are the clubs parking lots filled up every night, I would assume, that man kind, would consider any action he or she would take, including any law that he or she may or may not agree own, the truth is your wife, daughter or yourself can hardly go to the grocery store at night any more, we teach our love ones to avoid countless communities and cities across this country, lock every door and window you have, have security systems installed, guard dogs, neighbor hood watch, gated communities, with security, and so on, strong arm robberies in your own house, car jacking s, rape, murder, purse snatching s, assault, drive buy shootings, you can hardly safely jog any more, the police can not baby set every body.

  • I have to disagree with this view emphatically. I’ve seen more than enough statistics showing that crime is much lower in countries where the populace is allowed to own and carry firearms for personal protection. The death of a single person, in this case Trayvon Martin, is not sufficient cause to outright ban firearms from the populace, which leaves them helpless to criminals who could care less about such bans and will possess firearms regardless of any motions to ban their existence.

    • metrognome3830

      And where are those statistics? Let the rest of us in on it, post some information on how to find them. Besides the NRA web site, that is.

  • I have to disagree with this view emphatically. I’ve seen more than enough statistics showing that crime is much lower in countries where the populace is allowed to own and carry firearms for personal protection. The death of a single person, in this case Trayvon Martin, is not sufficient cause to outright ban firearms from the populace, which leaves them helpless to criminals who could care less about such bans and will possess firearms regardless of any motions to ban their existence.

  • Desde Panama estan tratando de revolver el rio para pescar en Rio Revuelto y como se acercan las elecciones utilizaran esto para dividirnos. No lo lograran. OBAMA will be the next President. Refards from Panama Humberto.

  • Desde Panama estan tratando de revolver el rio para pescar en Rio Revuelto y como se acercan las elecciones utilizaran esto para dividirnos. No lo lograran. OBAMA will be the next President. Refards from Panama Humberto.

  • TheSkalawag929

    What is the reason for stand your ground laws if states already have laws on the books for self defense.

  • TheSkalawag929

    Well said digoweli.

  • labrown69

    Stand Your Ground = Not retreat “Retreat” – the forced or strategic withdrawal of an army or an armed force before an enemy, or the withdrawing of a naval force from action.
    2.
    the act of withdrawing, as into safety or privacy; retirement; seclusion.

    3.
    a place of refuge, seclusion, or privacy: The library was his retreat.

    WHAT ZIMMERMAN DID – STALKING: stalking
      [staw-king] Show IPA

    noun
    1.
    the act or an instance of stalking, or harassing another in an aggressive, often threatening and illegal manner: Stalking is now a crime in many states.

    SILLY IRRATIONAL LEFTISTS!

  • TheSkalawag929

    Just out of curiosity what, to you, is a leftist?

  • TheSkalawag929

    According to what I’ve seen as to how the Knockout “game” is played it’s not a confrontation. It’s an ambush. In which case you would have been an armed victim who has partial use of his left eye today.

  • Bud

    Lets be realistic here. Zimmermans claim to “stand my ground ” is completely insane. His insistance on following the man after being told not to and confronting the man , made him the bad guy. Any plea of self defense will be ignored by a jury. By not arresting him (Zimmerman) the Sanford police did not do him a favor of ever getting a fair trial in this country. The media has already deemed him quilty. The black community is raged with distaste at another chance of mis justice in the court system.
    “The stand my ground law , is a good law.
    BDD1951 could you please name just a few of the murders that you claim happened where the “killer got off with this stand your ground law”. I don’t believe you can. You are spouting something you may believe true but have no facts to back it up.
    You have now been pulled into communism. Communism, Nazism, Facism, and Socialism can not work in a society that allows the citizens to have guns. Whether for protection or hunting or sport shooting only Gov’t approved people will have access to any guns. You have a president that is working 24/7 to take away the second admendment.. He can not complete his promise to his father until he can be sure there will not be a revolt by armed citizens. There is not a Democratic Party any longer. It is run by communists. Why in the hell would you name CZARS on your staff. If you are really a American citizen that loves this country look into the background of these CZARS. You have to be a stupid uncaring person not to see what is going on.

    • metrognome3830

      Wow, Bud, what state do you live in? I want to be sure to avoid it. I wouldn’t want to run into you on a dark street.

    • mnhistoryfan

      I want to know what specific proposals Pres. Obama is working on 24/7 to take away guns. What has he done already that makes you say that.
      I guess you must like what what’s-his-name said the other day about 78 or 81 or maybe 102 people in Congress are communists. Not a one of you know what that is.
      I think Obama saw his father once or twice when he was a child. Wonder what his father whispered to the boy.

  • dardyl

    Well said Bud.

  • TheSkalawag929

    Why are you holding Bernard Goetz as a reason for stand your ground? He was acquitted of all charges except an illegal firearms possession count, for which he served two-thirds of a one-year sentence.
    I would say that it shows that the system works.

  • Stand Your Ground is a License to KILL NRA really sucks
    Cons FYI NO one is trying to take your precious guns away
    Thats Fox GOP BS for weak minded folks to get them all riled up

  • Trayvon can not tell his story Zimmerman was judge and jury Maybe TRayvon was fighting for HIS life against an armed man . We will never know
    That’s the tragedy . What if it were your teen being followed by a armed 28 yr old man after police told him ‘ ‘Stop following him ‘ ?

  • could he have not just wounded Travon? He took a deadly shot which has forever changed Travon,s life as wel as his

  • TheSkalawag929

    Okay pintail4 lets take on the issue fairly. What reason is there for a person to own an automatic weapon. As far as I know no one has argued to have one for hunting purposes. Are there shooting competitions for automatic weapons?
    I as a leftist liberal don’t care how many guns you own personally. I would just like there to be some sanity in how these instuments of death are sold and bought and regulations on the size of the magazines. Why should a pistol or rifle have an extended magazine?
    Next you make the gigantic leap to the false conclusion that the people who want to regulate guns will want to take your guns from you. My goodness we regulate who can buy and operate motor vehicles and they are more usefull to our well being than a firearm.

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    The mere fact that there are so many pro-carry posts here should be an indication of what most people want.

    If Zimmerman misused his privilege, then he should be punished accordingly. However, now that he has been formally charged, maybe all the real and true facts will come to the surface. Especially both parties criminal histories in both adult and juvenile records.

    Will the public accept those fact? That’s a different story.

    • metrognome3830

      The mere fact that there are so many pro-carry posts here is merely an indication that pro-carry people write posts here. It doesn’t equal a national trend.

    • mnhistoryfan

      This is hardly an accurate and honest survey. All the gun nuts are on here.
      An adult male shooting an unarmed teenager after trailing after him for a while tells me all I need to know: he is a murderer.

  • TheSkalawag929

    Mr Donohoe after reading you comment and seeing all the mistakes that you made in it I cannot take you seriously. You appear to me to be just another card carring happy gun toter.

  • TheSkalawag929

    Just repeal. We already have laws that allow for self protection.

  • The mayor is a jew what can he do except lie.

    • howa4x

      Great an anti semite. Think all jews lie? What about Jesus he was a Jew, how about Jonas salk who gave you polio vaccine, did he lie, or Albert Einstein, did he?
      Fact is you’re a bigot and probably stupid as the day is long

    • mnhistoryfan

      I think you should go back to your own planet and quit messing up this one.
      Anti-semitism and other bigotries are not welcome here.

  • TheSkalawag929

    What difference does it make if any of the thugs were charged they got what they deserved and Mr. Goetz exonerated of all charges except for the illegal possession of a handgun. Had purchased the gun according to New York state law he would have walked away clean.

  • America has never been run by a despot and our Constitution prevents this from ever happening. However America does have a lot of Racists and ignorant people. Our Constitution gives the people the right to bear arms, but the Government shouldn’t be passing laws encourageing an enableing them to go around indiscriminately using them.

  • joyscarbo

    What region of the United States would you say has the hightest murder rates?
    Some may say that the Northeast, with NYC, Boston and Washington DC. Lots of crime there, huh?
    Others may say the West with California and Los Angeles with all those gangs?

    You couldn’t be more wrong…

    Our Southern states have the distinction of having the highest murder rates and they have for decades. The state who holds the highest murder rate is Louisana. Six other southern states are in the top 15- Mississippi, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Florida.
    They all have similar “Stand Your Ground” laws, they all have the death penalty. Infact, they execute more people too. From 2001-2010, the South has executed 1059 people, while the rest of the United States only executed 231. The south also has more gun owners per capita than anywhere in the United States.

    What does that say about guns and living in the South? It’s fairly obvious to draw conclusions, isn’t it?

  • This is a dangerous world, I’ve lived in it over 60 years. Not with the point of a gun, but with liberal use of common sense. It appears to me that today’s people want to dispense with the common sense and shoot their way out of the trouble they get themselves in.

    • mnhistoryfan

      Let’s all go back to “Frontier Town America!” Everybody on their own protecting themselves. Whooppeee. The Wild West all over again.

      • likelystory2

        If we keep on squeezing the funding from law enforcement and schools with after school programs that keep kids off the streets and out of trouble, we will have exactly that … the Wild West all over again. But if we’re really going down THAT slippery slope, let’s go all the way with the weapons argument. Remember how that ended? “How about a nice game of chess?”

  • I cannot believe how quick this congress is to take away our rights, but any law that protects legal citizens can take 20 years and 9 million signatures then it is still rapped in red tape. What ever happen to e-verify, or securing the border we are still waiting. We will have lost every right we have the congress will still be taking away our rights and the borders will still be open.

  • AIMPOINT

    You are confusing military tactics with defense to a crime. Do you think it would be a good idea to require a man to retreat before keep someone from killing his wife or kids?

  • YOU SUCK!!

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    These inappropriately called “Stand Your Ground” Laws are an individual State’s Law. No Federal Law can do anything to change them, no State is going to repeal them and as long as violent street crime and home invasions take place, we’re likely to see more laws passed just like them. People need to get over this.

    If someone misuses the law, they should be punished accordingly. That’s what the courts are for. They should also punish the original aggressors accordingly that cause these problems.

  • This country was built on violence and a racist society. Those same good old boy and self righteous pompous arrogant deceitful class of people still to this day run this country. They are greed driven and have to nerves to tell you their morals are american. We ask ourselves when will this country change? If were honest with yourselves you know the answer is it can’t! Until we change the people that govern this land and make the laws that allow this country to continue to treat the poor, seniors, those that are less fortunate as second class citizens and ignore the will of the people, for the rights of a select few for the sole purpose of gain, at the cost of tanking this country and the people with no regard to those that do not fit their agenda. Until America stands up and push back and go to the polls and start taking back this country by voting out this right wing agenda, and putting those in office that wants to see a thriving America that works for all people of color and class our laws and country is going to remain the same. Most important is we have to realize its not the federal government that is systematically making these laws and trying to turn back the clock on this country, its happening at the state level! Yes it is these republicans in the states that are systematically turning back the clock. Until we get these life long politicians out the White house and out the State Houses were going to continue to see a country of greed and resistance to change, for the good of the people, instead of a few! People we could set term limits, but it wouldn’t matter! another greedy selfish politician is ready to take the next place! and sell you a pile of goods! but we can make a change! by going to the polls and letting them hear our voices by voting them out!

  • the gun was used by a parinoid racist. our guns are the only thing still keeping the nazis from compleating the take over of all of this country. keeping “a gun behind every blade of grass” keeps what little is left , of our freedom.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      If that’s truly what he is and acted wrongly, he should be punished. Now that Zimmerman’s been charged, all the facts will come out in court, including Zimmerman’s and Martin’s adult and juvenile records so we can see what their histories really are and what both of them are really like.

      Maybe we should wait before all the facts are revealed before we decide what happened?

  • dardyl

    I am a senior and I don’t feel like a second class citizen until Obama begins to want to cut my benefits. I am already feeling the effects of the health care bill and medical restraints. I have been dropped by two doctors for being on Medicare because the regulations are so ridiculous. I always worked and provided for myself and now the government is trying to provide for me and I don’t like it. We have a history that is what it is. There is no country on earth that has a pristine history. Being free is great and I don’t need the government telling me how to feel free. If they would butt out it would remedy everything. Guns are a right and I am for gun ownership. If there is another nation better than America, I don’t know of it. If you don’t like it, try living somewhere else. See how pompous and arrogant others are. You will soon see what a second class citizen is. As for career politicians, both parties have them, not just Republicans.

    • joyscarbo

      The changes in Medicare that you are feeling were not enacted by the Obama adminstration. They were enacted by George W. Bush.
      If there is less of what you call “government interference in your life”, you don’t like it. What you REALLY want is more government in your life. That is, you want your health care paid for which requires the government to collect more taxes to pay for it.
      Republicans say you should be paying for your own healthcare, not government. Are you up to that financial task?

      • dardyl

        I am up to the task of insuring myself. I’m saying that the government runs its business like a nightmare. Why would we want it in any area of our lives. This is their reasoning. If you can’t purchase the Obamacare insurance you will be fined. If you can pay a fine, you can purchase insurance. Everyone should rely on himself and not the government.

        • mnhistoryfan

          Give us some examples of the “nightmare.” Social Security? Runs like a Swiss clock. Medicare? Maybe you’d like vouchers better.
          If you cannot afford insurance (and it’s not “Obamacare” it’s private insurance companies, as usual–the insurance companies saw to that in creating these laws), you will be able to get help in buying insurance. If you can afford insurance and don’t buy it, then you might get a fine.
          The health care reform laws, under great pressure–i.e. money–from insurance companies made sure they were still the center of the new laws and would not lose clout or money. It’s the great capitalist system.

      • dardyl

        I am told by the doctors that new regulations from Obamacare are having a huge impact on their practices. That is why I said it is because of the new health care. I believe that it is having an effect.

        • joyscarbo

          Healthcare reform, or “Obamacare,” hasn’t even been established yet.
          Remember that the “Obamacare” legislation is the same “Romneycare” that Mitty initiated in Massachussetts that he likes to now deny. In 1994, Mitt also wanted tighter gun control, he clearly voiced his absolute support of Roe vs. Wade (he said because his dear old mother was pro-choice) and wanted to get poor mothers childcare subsidies so that they could work. Now he’s against ALL of those thing just so he can be in the conservative, right-wing, republican club. What a sell-out!!!
          At a recent $50,000.00 per person fund-raiser that Mitt was having, he was telling his wealthiest supporters that he doesn’t even know what government programs he would cut, that he wouldn’t know until he got to the white house!!!! Another way Mitt doesn’t know what his stance in on anything!!!!

          • dardyl

            I do know what Obama has been like and the things he is willing to do. I don’t like his ideas nor his actions. He talks out of both sides of his mouth and he has had three years to fully reveal himself and his methods. They are destructive. Romney may not be any better, but we gave Obama a chance and he has done little but run us unto the ground. Romney may be the same, but I am sick of Obama and his foolish programs. I gave him a chance and now I am giving Romney one. One day maybe we will stumble on a person who is all he says he is. Obama fooled a lot of people and he is deaf to what the people want and arrogant about it too. He makes insulting statements about the common people’s intelligence and how they need to be guided and led because they can’t understand the ins and outs of what is happening. He denies his actions about what he is doing, bowing, when we have seen it with our own eyes and counts on people’s memories growing dim. Well mine hasn’t and I know what I have seen and what has been lied about and changed. I have only mentioned a few. He doesn’t insist that his people, Holder, do their jobs in a way that has integrity. (Fast and Furious—Black Panthers) He appoints Czars without regard for proper review of Congress and what a name to adopt! He spends us into foreigners pockets without a way out for years and years. He is opposed to energy solutions. He gives money to bankrupt companies and denies the pipeline. I live in an oil rich exploration area. To deny jobs, and yes there are MANY jobs connected to the oil industry, is outrageous. There are millions of people out of jobs and my dollar is worth nothing. Yes, I guess I should be grateful to him, but he said he needed four years and we gave it
            to him. Now I am ready for another change. At this point, blaming it on
            Bush, and I didn’t like him particularly, is wearing a little thin.

        • mnhistoryfan

          How can that be? Most of it isn’t even in effect yet.

  • How many gun carrying body guards does he have, the man keeps talking out of his rear end ??? People shoul have the right to protect themself ahd their property. Lets stop protecting the criminal and give them a room in a federal hotel and take all priveliges away.

  • As usual the political response to unsavory publicity is overkill. The Bill of Rights has been distorted and trampled on long enough. Hold the trigger happy murderers responsible for their actions on a case by case basis and don’t even think about repealing my right to bear arms. Regardless of what anyone says it takes a human finger to pull a trigger motivated by the human brain’s instruction to fire the weapon. My gun is harmless and will remain so until I am in a position of need to defend my life and liberty.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      Well said and succinctly put.

  • over40dq

    If our laws took care of murderers permanently, then fewer murders might occur. I know this sounds crazy, but what is the alternative? Prisons are also a big business in this country that is controlling our legislation. If I had no life, I wouldn’t mind being taken care of by the prison system. They get 3 squares, health care, clean clothes and protection.

    • joyscarbo

      FACTS: States that have no dealth penalty laws DO NOT have higher murder rates.

      • over40dq

        Not the same thing. The death penalty in America’s court of law does not mean that even the most horrific murderer pays for his/her crime. Prisoners live higher than many of low income free people. The average law abiding citizen would think twice about shooting someone in their neighborhood if the consequences were absolute.

  • Absolutely stupid to repeal. There should be a stand your ground law in every state or be the law of the country. FBI stats prove that places where that is in effect have lower violent crime rates overall than where guns have been partially or totally banned or have extremely tough laws against guns. Ridiculous, asinine, stupid and many other adjectives to describe anyone who wants these laws repealed, instead of more of them being passed.

    • joyscarbo

      Not true. The Southern states have the “Stand Your Ground,” laws, have the highest rate of murder and execute nearly 6 times more people than in any other part of the country. It’s obviously NOT a “safer place.” It’s the most dangerous.

  • shootnowasklater

    Of the 25 states which have enacted this SYG law… how many have done so with a democratic majority… does anyone know? How many were put before a referendum and allowed the people of the state to decide? If the answer to both of these questions is none (or nearly none), then the NRA is a political force beyond the power of the people. Regardless of ones second amendment position, this would suggest that our country (in my humble opinion) has officially been bought and sold. That aside, what happens when both parties of a dispute ‘Stand Their Ground’ which I believe is an underlying question in this first of many SYG cases because this law is obscenely vague (as I understand it). What’s almost humors is… many conservatives believe they are the only people that know how to shoot… it’s something that requires great intellect you know. They believe they are the ones who will be standing their ground… not the inversion.

  • jlelandthomas

    The Democrats are not the problem .I am a Democrat and that is not the issue .Now someone out of the blue brought this in and I hold onto my guns firmly. If some one turns and chases me down and jumps on me in or out of my home it does not matter where I am as long as I am not illegally on his ground and where I look is my business legally speeking if my neighbor tells me not to look in a certain direction it doesn’t give any one a lawful reason to turn and jump on me but when he turns and attacks me this then he stepped into a mans shoes and get treated like a man if I cannot control him then I will shoot him in self defense so he will not hurt me more or even kill me so Mayor of NEW YORK and all you REPUBLICAN”S We know those guy’s behind you have gun’s to protect you and you are trying for the public eye with a log in your eye I have as much right to protect myself as you do it is not because of being Black or White so grow up the kid turned and hurt the fellow and he retaliated with his equalizer you evidently do not have any street time or you would know this so tell the truth and wait on the jury as people like you have always been taken care of and I have seen cases already where the law men them selves killed some one in less arguments and got away with it. So I will keep my gun if this does happen to me I will be alive to tell about it and hopefully not in the hospital or dead and I will live to be able to feed my family .The ridicule you people come up with ruin the AMERICAN eye . I do feel deeply for the boy and his family but the truth has to be heard and done for in that manner .We are suppose be innocent until proven guilty in this country am I wrong if not then you people shut up and let the law take it’s course and see . Now because of you all George will if proven innocent will still have to live some where else as your 3 year old mouths have already ruined his life and not because of the gun law but because he protected himself from some one that attacked him .I lost a little brother because he was shot in the heart and in the neck with a 44 magnum by a convicted felon his hands were still in his jacket pockets the law couldn’t run up in front and take the gun moments or days before he murdered my brother just like the law cannot be their when a crime like most are committed and my brother only had a couple of traffics tickets in whole life he 26 years old .I do not care what color the guy was he still murdered him he pulled the trigger not his color it was his eval and selfish mind so hold on to your guns as we know criminals will always have guns and the law will not be their when you need them and their color does not care but if you are bickering skin flint then it will. Damn all you people that are against guns if my little brother had one then he might be here today.If my testamony is needed for us to keep gun’s then I will be their for it as the law can seldom be their for us.
    Johnny Thomas

  • Sensei_American

    NRA

    Denial is a part of human survival. Then there are those times when denial becomes downright dangerous to society. Take the National Rifle Association. I have yet to hear their members admit that assault weapons are designed to kill people. Instead they try to convince the public that these weapons are being used for target practice or to kill animals. A “sporting” weapon. Even non-assault weapons are used for sport they tell us. This may be true in most cases, but the deeper truth is that every man who fires a weapon at a target is secretly pulling the trigger against a fantasy-human. To kill an animal in a sporting hunt brings the hunter a step closer to the fantasy. This fantasy may or may not be conscious, but it is the motivation behind every gun owner’s trigger finger. American society plays a role in this very dangerous form of denial. When handguns or assault weapons are used to murder someone we look for a quick fix. Apprehend someone quickly and put it behind us, even if the alleged perpetrator is the wrong person! The JFK assassination is a case in point. A lone gunman is the usual choice. He’s an outsider, a low-profile crank, not popular in the community, not a person that most people can identify or sympathize with; he’s an aberration. To suggest that the Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy is to probe into the dark side of a deeper truth. Our government in their collective “wisdom,” tries to protect society from such an unsettling truth. Pin the murder on a single man. Arrest that man quickly and put the case behind us. Get on with the business of the nation. Society will soon forget the pain and return to “normalcy.” So is it with every killing. Our government and media ritualize the event like a mantra, then it is forgotten, except by a few who may pursue the truth of the matter. Violence, especially gun violence, is romanticized by the media. Headlines are sensationalized, reporting is brutally graphic, playing on the fears and excitement of the reader. Movies and television frequently portray gunmen as paranoid, deranged or homicidal maniacs (people we don’t like to identify with) who are, in turn, gunned down by heroic law enforcement officials or super strong individuals who take the law into their own hands (always with a gun). These images are sanctioned and sanctified by every societal institution that supports free enterprise and the American way.

    Every school killing in the past 20 years is essentially the same. A killer or killers went on a shooting spree. All used guns—the common denominator. There’s no need to analyze the situation. It won’t bring back the dead and it won’t prevent the next killer from doing it again. Heightened security with metal detectors, armed guards at the doors, high tech warning systems, all that gobbledygook that desperate civic leaders throw at us can never prevent the determined killer from striking. They are always a step ahead.

    But we’re stubborn folk in America. We cling to our manifest destiny as though it was the Holy Grail. And there’s the rub I think. It is the immaturity of a culture that remains in denial, too fearful to face it’s own skeletons, it’s own humanity…so we remain paralyzed, too frozen to look into the heart of darkness.

    The most meaningful action would be to ban all assault weapons and restrict gun ownership to people who do their shooting at gun clubs. Most industrialized countries long ago realized the importance of gun control and have reduced gun crime to ridiculously low levels by American standards. We are privy to this knowledge, but like the stubborn child who cannot admit wrong-doing, we absolutely refuse to budge. Instead we cling to our gun-fantasy of the man, the woman or the child in our gun sights.

    I hope this letter has been of some meaning to you, if nothing more than to say thank you again for the inspiring work you are doing in the struggle for gun control laws that we as a nation need so desperately—whether we know it or not.

  • Michael Bloomberg is an idiot & a liar. It’s Obama’s big mouth and bias media reporting that has made this a racial issue. Wanna made America great again, takes idiots like Bloomberg, Obama, and Napalitano and boot their ass out of the country.

  • Michael Bloomberg is an idiot & a liar. It’s Obama’s big mouth and bias media reporting that has made this a racial issue. Wanna made America great again, takes idiots like Bloomberg, Obama, and Napalitano and boot their ass out of the country.

  • ChristoD

    I am a multiple gun owner, 4 to be exact, and Stand Your Ground laws are an affront to every American who values life. (Hmmmm, pro-life folks should support that right right ? They do NOT. It is time to stand up to the NRA and tell them to piss off. Automatic weapons and SYG laws be damned !

  • ineedthegun

    God knows the last thing anyone would want to do is have to find themselves in a situation that requires self defense or the use of deadly force. To ever be faced with the decision would lend itself to a lifetime of remorse and regret. On the other hand, given the physical impairements of most americans these days, My overweight, out of shape, out of breath overeating, under active self will be needing that gun. I’m thinking I’m gonna pull the trigger twice before you get to close, once to let you know I can and second to stop you from reaching me.

  • Maricia12

    The NRA, which was probably founded as a national gun club for hunters, has morphed into a big political machine over the years for the Republican party. It spreads propaganda and down right lies about every Democract that runs for President, by saying they want to take YOUR GUNS away, with absolutely no proof. Romney has just started the same crap in his campaigning. It would hurt nothing to have the “stand your ground laws” repealed and it may keep some trigger happy idiots from killing someone. We already have self defense laws that give us the right to pull the trigger to save our lives. There are a lot of stupid people who do not have a clue about gun safety. I am all for owning a gun for protection and hunting but I think everyone who buys a gun should have to take a gun safety class and pass it. These are deadly weapons and ownership should be taken seriously. The NRA needs to stay out of politics. Almost all Americans agree we have the right to own guns for protection. That is not just a Republican belief even though they like to say Democrats want to get rid of guns.

    • Deb

      I agree, any law that protects armed racist vigilante bully’s who stalk and murder children in our streets is seriously flawed.

  • RodgerMitchell

    What does the following phrase, in the English language, mean?

    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state . . .”

    According to the NRA, Congress and the Supreme Court, it has no meaning whatsoever. It was just tossed in there by the framers of the Constitution, because they had some extra space to fill.

    Do you agree?

    Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

  • dardyl

    No, RodgerMitchell, I don’t agree. They wrote what they meant.

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    Why is everyone so quick to judge what happened now when the real truth will come out in the court along with both parties real criminal and juvenile records along with the real eye witness accounts? The media has distorted everything so badly that no one here knows the truth anymore or ever even did.

  • Sundance98

    Neighborhood watch….should mean just that: Watch & Report! Responsible Gun Ownership should be just that: Responsible.

    Taking your AK-47 out on sundown patrol in your local neighborhood…is not either
    responsible nor intelligent. What did mom say: “You are looking for trouble…and you
    will probably find it!”

    “Stand your Ground” means: “Protecting myself, family or friends from an outright assault within the confines of your personal abode. The lady with the two kids and the shotgun was obviously not out looking around the neighborhood for homeless folks going through trash cans! If the Florida law or any of the other 25 State laws doesn’t restrict or limit “Stand your Ground Law”…..then they need to quickly be re-written.

    The “Georgy Boy” is not any kind of responsible NRA member…..or worse!

  • I’m not in favor of people murdering others by shooting first and asking questions. However, one has the right to not be mandated by law to flee from an attacker, else the attacker has the ‘right of way’ relative to an intended victim(s). Perhaps ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws need to be revised if used to justify unnecessary shootings (cases where self-defense doesn’t apply), but not simply repealed.

  • mnhistoryfan

    Kevin
    You do not have to be “mandated by Law” — you mean “required”? — to flee. Attackers do not have the R of W anywhere. You do have a requirement to avoid shooting by all possible means, including retreating. It’s cheaper, too. You don’t have bodies to haul away and get rid of, paying someone to clean up the mess, pay for hospitalization if needed, and rehab, perhaps after that.
    Don’t kill people. It’s stupid and not nice.

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine are for homes, vehicles and a temporary dwelling like a hotel. It does not even apply in that shooting in Florida. Armchair experts and the media have distorted what few actual facts we have heard for personal gains (as in selling the news and political agenda advancements).

  • 1AmericanHoney27

    Personally I could care less what law gets repealed concerning guns. I’m the proud owner of several guns & will use them if necessary. I’ve known several God fearing law abiding citizens that second guessed whether or not to own a gun or shoot in certain situations. (May they R.I.P.) I’ve known how to handle & take of guns since age 6. Guns aren’t the problem…. It’s the person holding the gun… Guns will be sold in stores, on the black market, stolen if given the opportunity. The shooting of that Trayvon was just fuel on the already burning fire to waste more tax payer $$$$$ to change not a Damn thing. I’ve read about & knew several White & Hispanic young men that were shot to death… Their stories were put on the back pages of the news. This may sound cruel but everyone didn’t jump up when they too were gunless lying dead….. Again all the facts of this Zimmerman case amen’t in but so many say he was wrong…. If you weren’t there don’t Assume for we all know what that does. Until I’m dead….. “”” I Will Stand My Ground “”” & no law will change my mind…

    • joyscarbo

      Well, “Honey,” Good luck to you…You are 4.5 times more likely than a non-gun owner to be shot and killed. Hope you don’t up your chances for being met by a gunshot injury or death by living in the murder captial of the US…the South.

  • The problem isn’t the legislatures ,or even the nra itself, it is us. We allow politicians to give 3 word answers and 5 second sound bytes to complicated issues. When I ran for the state legislature in Ohio the nra sent me a questionaire asking me to explain my thoughts on gun laws(ALL GUN LAWS MIND YOU) in 25 words or less. You can’t reasonably explain any issue in 25 words or less but that is what we allow leaders to do. We the people need to understand there are complicated issues in this world that need more than “soft on crime” or “reasonable policy”.

  • Knock off the stupdity Leonard. I am a sixty year old retired teacher with high blood pressure and heart problems and there aren’t many 140 pound teenagers I couldn’t whip. You gun toters are a bunch of cowards. So I guess I’ll have to let guys like you hit on my wife in a restaurant, because if I call you out then you’ll be able to shoot me? You heat packing rednecks are one word: cowards.

    • TheSkalawag929

      I think carring a gun only increases the odds of someone being killed more than likely the non criminal. You see criminals aren’t going to give you a chance. They are going to stack the odds as much as they can in their favor.

  • 1AmericanHoney27

    Bloomberg is just another old idiot out of touch with society & the reality of today…. He doesn’t need a gun or the stand your ground law….. His body guards takes care of any problems he may have… Again $$$$$ talks & bullsh*t walks…. Fool talks out the side of his neck……too!

    • joyscarbo

      I’m a common citizen and have never had the need for a gun. Never will. Those who do have a gun are 4.5 more times likely to be shot and killed.
      I have better odds.

  • I have yet to hear any evidence to indicate this incidence was anything but self defense. Where is the questioning of why teenagers feel they can punch and beat up someone with no cosequences?

    • TheSkalawag929

      Thomasf if you haven’t heard any evidence that is contrary to Mr. Zimmerman’s self-defense claim then you just haven’t been paying attention.
      The teenager was walking along minding his buisiness when Mr. Zimmerman confronted him.
      In my opinion Trayvon Martin had every right to stand HIS ground and protect himself. Unfortunately for him he didn’t have a gun and had to defend himself as best he could with a bag of Skittles and an Ice Tea.

  • LIONHEART316

    MY FELLOW AMERICANS: Mayor Bloomberg and the Rest of the TRAITORS to OUR CONSTITUTION ,especially all the rest of the Mayors against Guns, They all swoar an “OATH of OFFICE” To Protect and Defend the CONSTITUTION yet all they do is try and Destroy ALL of OUR RIGHTS and FREEDOMS. Vote them all out of Office before You have the United Nations marching down a steet near YOU. or the local TERRIST group knocking on Your Door without any Protection at all. MY GOD ARE YOU ALL COWARDS. ??????

    • TheSkalawag929

      Dude you need to calm yourself and stop being so paranoid. I don’t see anyone advocating taking away your guns and there aren’t boogymen behind EVERY tree.

    • joyscarbo

      LIONHEART316 is EXACTLY why we need to have gun controll…especially when checking someone’s psychological background.

  • LIONHEART316

    MY FELLOW AMERICANS: When You think of the Freedom and Safety You have in this ight and Die EVERYDAYto PROTECT YOUR FREEDOMS and “DO NOT” let the Bloombergs ,Clintons,Obama’s,Holders,pilossi’s and the rest of this Countries TRAITORS let them Die in Vain, STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS….Your forefathers would be Proud of You.

  • SteveLC

    I to is no longer a member of the NRA, they do not use common sense in dealing with the right to have a firearm. Yes a American citizen should have the right to protect themselves from an attack with a firearm, however not after they initiated and provoked the confrontation. NRA you just can’t have open murdering of people because THEY FELT that they were threaten. The amount of people killed under the Florida law has tripled since being passed. What the families of those that were killed, should sue the murderers.
    The NRA should support any rules or laws that will keep firearms from ex convicts, and those arrested for domestic assaults and mentally illness. Stop over the table gun sales at Gun Shows, unless the buyer has a concealed hand gun(CHL) permit. Support a police background and OK to-buy permit. Support a national Concealed Handgun Permit, that is good in all states, such like the driver license, with the most stringent CHL test to be used in all states. The NRA should support stiffer sentences for improper use of a firearm used in all crimes.

  • More people die from alcohol related deaths and Auto related deaths….. And you idiots want to repeal sensible gun laws.

  • I never felt the need to get an NRA membership before but since this whole Martin Zimmerman fiasco I got a life membership!

  • capldot5

    Zimmerman has head problems, on hood watch with a gun?Was he a cop? Not that is any better.How can you controll Guns Just as hard as drugs . From Utah we know how th shoot from a young age .When did gun controll become a dem isue the brady bill was g o p

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      That’s why we need to vote out all politicians, regardless of party affiliation if they want to deny your rights of any constitutional freedom.

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    Maybe there wouldn’t be a need for the NRA if there weren’t a dozen or so organizations out there that are trying to take away many of our personal freedoms along with people in our government (both elected and appointed) that support those organizations and do their bidding.

  • So, Mr Bloomberg, we are to believe that we should NOT have the right to defend ourselves when faced with possibly life-threatening force? Seems to me that an armed public is your #1 enemy and getting guns away from us will somehow solve all social ills. BULL$HIT! I am no real fan of the NRA but I know that when a criminal is faced with deadly force, the oucome of the crime can be vastly different. And, to call Trayvon Martin an unarmed youth is completely wrong. He was several inches taller than Mr Zimmerman and ourweighed him as well. Unarmed? Not hardly! Ever been hit by a full can of liquid? Suppose Trayvon was carrying a 1lb brick, or a 1lb piece of pipe. Would he then be called unarmed? The configuration of the weapon doesn’t always reduce its effectiveness.

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      It’s interesting that New York City has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country yet it’s one of the most dangerous cities in the country. Bloomberg and his cronies blame everyone and everything else but themselves and his own people that he governs over.

      • mnhistoryfan

        New York City doesn’t even appear on a list of the country’s most dangerous cities.
        Try Memphis, Las Vegas, Stockton CA, Detroit and Flint MI, St. Louis, New Haven.
        Crime has been dropping in NYC for a long time–as well as in the U.S.

  • mnhistoryfan

    This entire discussion is making me fear for America more than ever–here are bigots, people blasting the unarmed 17-year-old, fear, paranoia, lies, smearing people, failure of logic, stupidity, ignorance–it’s all here and it all shows why America is in such trouble with its 1% and 99% economic gap. Those 1% are leading you around by the nose. You are being bamboozled for a reason. Why do you think the NRA and other groups spend millions to reach you? And fox news–people who watch fox are LESS well informed than people who watch or read NOTHING. All of these people are making money off of you.
    All I can hope is that you are in NO WAY representative of the American public.l I’m ashamed of these comments that you are making–with a few exceptions; you know who you are.

  • cartaviejo

    “Stand Your Ground” is just a sure way of guaranteeing we will eventually become just like the nations we so readily invaded. Gun use training is not the same as crisis response training and allowing untrained individuals to escape the crime of murder based on such a law is beyond nuts. Even legitimately trained professionals kill unjustly sometimes. Law enforcement officials hate these laws as should all civilized citizens. Until we peacefully and legally stand up as a nation to the paranoia and fear mass gun availability has created on our streets and in our neighborhoods we will continue to head down the road to uncontrolled societies like Iraq and Afghanistan. That will lead to civil wars with only wrong sides to join. How many of us have to die to figure this out?

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    It’s painfully obvious a a lot of people here have forgotten world history and the abuses of regimes in Germany, Japan and other countries from the tyranny those and other governments that disarm the populace have imposed upon the citizens of the world.

  • labrown69

    johninPCFL – if you are intelligent enough to formulate sentences and type, what eludes you about the phrase:

    776.012 ”Use of force in defense of person”. (stalking when you have already called the cops and been told to walk away is not self defense):

    776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.— (he was in his damn car you idiot, he was in no fear of bodily harm)

    776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use
    of force. <— To be determined by a court!

    • AllFreedomsFirst

      These are good points. The law is not what the Press or those who are emotional about the misconceptions they have been told. The true facts of the case (which have yet to be released) will determine what laws apply there.

  • When you are told by the police not to pursue a person and you defy them, that is not stand your ground but defiance. And that you kill someone and try to use this law as a defense is a slap in the face to sane people. This child would not have been shot if Zimmerman had did what he was supposed to do. Now, to stand behind this law when you are guilty should make those who love the law a little perturbed. After all, if it had happened to your child would you be so easily placated with the “not guilty” plea?

  • AllFreedomsFirst

    First of all, a not guilty plea at an arraignment (formal reading of the charges) is common practice and prior to discovery, malpractice to do so otherwise by the defense attorney; and,

    Second, no one even knows what the real facts are of what happened yet. The police and prosecuting attorney haven’t released everything to the media or even to Zimmerman’s attorney and to do so might prejudice Zimmerman’s rights to the point of the case being thrown out.

    Everyone on both sides are hysterical over mere conjecture stirred up by the media for the media’s own profit.

    Here’s the applicable statute:

    776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
    (a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
    (b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
    (2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
    (a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
    (b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
    (c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
    (d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
    (3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
    (4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
    (5) As used in this section, the term:
    (a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
    (b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
    (c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
    History.—s. 1, ch. 2005-27.Quick Links

    •Statute Search Tips
    •Preface to Florida Statutes (2011)
    •Table of Section Changes (2011)
    •General Laws Conversion Table (2011)
    •Table Tracing Session Laws to Florida Statutes
    •Archived Statutes (Prior to 2010)

  • AIMPOINT

    It’s a good thing Bloomberg is against gun rights – He’s a despicable twerp who allows his police force to brutalize and kill innocents usually because they are black.

  • In the State of Washington, we have on the books a very permissive law on justifiable homicide which gives legal permission to private individuals to use lethal force on anybody who looks like he is getting ready to commit a felony. What this law does is that it puts the law – in any heated altercation – on the side of the antagonist most skillful in the use of lethal force. It is a bad law which ought to be repealed. If person is actually under attack, that person should have the legal right of self defense by any means necessary. There is a big difference between that and picking a fight with a person who looks suspicious.

  • This country was founded on violence and the type that founded it are the ones in power, and their not going to change. The only way to see real change, is to vote them out of office!

  • I am a Florida native, grew up in a community where we never locked our doors or windows … Ft.Lauderdale! We never owned a gun in those days, but those days are long gone. I am in TOTAL support of the law and in fact can say that I am certain it saved me from great bodily harm if not death. As I traveled on a major road Okeechobee Blvd. in West Palm Beach the traffic seemed to come to a standstill in the right hand lane, this went on for several minutes. At first I thought it was due to traffic, or that there were just many people turning into various businesses and or fast food restaurants along the route. This is a busy major road traveling east and west (3 lanes in each direction plus a 4th for turning) so when at approx. 8 pm at night when the traffic in this right hand lane came to a standstill with a busy traffic flow I could not change lanes, I just waited. Traffic remained at a standstill and so after a few minutes and as other traffic continued by I became impatient as I could see no reason for the hold-up (other than a lot of young kids on the sidewalk) and blew my horn.

    It was the I noticed that there was a large number of cars and people crowed in the parking lot of a Taco Bell, but still could not see that it was these people who were holding up the traffic (cars in front of me were slowly being able to get into the next left lane). This “crowd” of people had been impeding the driver of a vehicle (surrounded his car) and were hitting/scratching,rocking it back and forth,damaging it and pulling on the doors trying to get in. When I blew my horn (before realizing what was happening) some of the crowd (and more from the parking lot) descended on my vehicle doing the same to me as the vehicle several cars ahead of me who was trapped in this lane as well. The passenger in my car happened to have a license to carry and was. As this “mob” of young hoodlums began assaulting my SUV and trying to open the doors of my vehicle and smash the windows my passenger brandished his gun. Not only did this out of control mob of youths disban from attacking my vehicle, but they all fled (from the other vehicles trapped) to the parking lot once again allowing those of us trapped in this lane to continue on to safety. We traveled to the safe distance away from this mob and waited for police to arrive to report this. Had they been successful in smashing my windows or overturning my car I would have been grateful that my passenger would have been able to defend us that night as this angry mob surely would have minimally caused us great bodily harm.

    Florida has a serious problem with gang activity, to the point of where ordinary citizens simply living their lives; i.e. traveling home at 8pm or coming out of the grocery/drugstore are victims of crime, can you not see where it has become necessary to protect ourselves? If these gang members are better armed than the police and we are not safe in our own home or on the streets of our community are we simply to continue to become victims? LET THE LAW STAND, ITS THERE TO PROTECT THOSE WHO ABIDE THE LAW!!!!

  • GoodGuy1234

    I don’t get it. I guess if I were Mayor Bloomberg with 30,000 heavily armed police to protect me, I would not need a means to protect myself either. If you go around threatening prople with bodily harm, you should be aware they do have the right to defend temselves. If you treat everyone with respect, and the same as you wish to be treated, you should have no fear that a reasonable law abiding person will feel the need to shoot you. However, if you are a thug or a criminal, be careful, because the person you are trying to intimidate or harm, may have a gun and be able to defend themselves. If you ask me, that is a good thing. Stand your ground is a good law, if properly applied.

  • ggmama1

    Everyone should be allowed to defend themselves when they are in danger. But no one should be allowed to kill or hurt another person if there is no danger. I agree that if you feel in danger but can retreat from the situation without anyone being hurt, you should do so. If not, then do whatever you have to in order to be safe. What part of that is hard to understand. I will do everything in my power to protect my right to bear arms in order to protect myself and the ones I love, not to shoot people for the fun of it. It seems to me the problem is the idiots who can’t figure out the meaning of the law, not the NRA.

    The neighborhood watches should not be controlled by people with a God complex. These organizations are supposed to WATCH and then notify those who are trained to handle problems. The NRA is not responsible for these either.

  • SteveLC

    I would like to live to see a national Conceal Handgun Permit, but the narrow minded NRA I’ll never see it. The NRA main agenda is mostly trying to keep guns right for ALL citizens. However, they do not support laws and procedures that will keep mentally ill,felons and those convicted of assault type crimes of owning or having a firearm in their possession. The NRA should support and help States to write stiffer penalties for those that use a firearm in a crime, and to stop unregulated purchases of firearms at gun shows.