Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

@firefly,

Quote:

It can interfere with the right to live through a Batman movie.

OH? and if I had been in that movie or someone else with a CW permit at least there would had been a chance of more survivors. Hell if both my wife and I have been there the chance of a far better outcome would had gone through the roof.

As it was it was a theater full of sheep in a pen waiting to be slaughter.

In fact with what you wish to be the case given there are over 200 millions firearms in the nation that even with a complete legal ban of all firearms those who wish to kill with them for many generations will have no problem getting them.

Limiting access to law abiding citizens just mean that the killers will be far safer then they are now.

That remind me I need to visit the gun range in the near future in order to keep my skills sharp in case it is ever needed.

4 Replies

@BillRM,

What are you now, a highly trained secret agent who can maneuver a gun professionally in a highly crowded, constricted and a dimly lit room? Grow the **** up, life isn't some holly wood movie.
Seriously, be realistic. if you or an average citizen with a concealed weapon were there trying to be all heroic in such a situation, you'd more likely kill innocents in the cross fire than get the perpetrator.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

That remind me I need to visit the gun range in the near future in order to keep my skills sharp in case it is ever needed.

You'd be better off visiting a rudimentary English class.

0 Replies

@RST,

Well I am a damn good shot and so is my wife and even given that a swat team would be highly prefer having people in the movie theater with the ability to fight back still is far far better then waiting for some gun man to get around to killing you like a sheep in a pen.

But somehow I am sure you would prefer to die along with any of your family members that happen to be along then have a 'gun nut" save your life.

Footnote in Florida the chance of having an arm CW license person in a theater is ten times greater then having an off duty police officer or such in the theater.

Footnote thank god neither I or my wife have been in a firefight to date but then most police officers had not been in one either and I may be wrong but you would have no problem with a so call "train" police officer firing back at a guess.

We both however been in life threating situations that call for us to keep our cool and act correctly in stressful situations mainly involving flying and sky diving so I nor my wife would likely kill you before the gun man that your seems to prefer does the job on you.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

But somehow I am sure you would prefer to die along with any of your family members that happen to be along then have a 'gun nut" save your life.

I prefer living in a country where idiots like you don't have access to handguns or automatic weapons, and judging from your posts it's highly unlikely you'd get any sort of gun licence over here.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Limiting access to law abiding citizens just mean that the killers will be far safer then they are now.

Why would law abiding citizens need military-type assault weapons?

Quote:

Footnote in Florida the chance of having an arm CW license person in a theater is ten times greater then having an off duty police officer or such in the theater.

And you're assuming that all of those armed patrons are mentally stable? What sort of psychological evaluation did you have to pass to get your gun permit?

Zimmerman was receiving psychological treatment, and was on psychiatric medication for impulsivity, and had a past history of a court referral for anger management. Is that your idea of the sort of responsible person who should be walking around armed with a gun?

2 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

And you're assuming that all of those armed patrons are mentally stable? What sort of psychological evaluation did you have to pass to get your gun permit?

My my sixty-four years and counting without any inaction with law enforcement other then a few traffic tickets and no history of mental diseases second studies had shown that the numbers of CW license carriers in Florida that do get into problems with law enforcement after they get their license is far far less then a similar number of random citizens.

It is not the people who go to the trouble to get a license that is of concern it is the people who carry illegally that is the problem and no law will effect that number not with 200 million plus weapons in private hands.

Hell even in gun "free" England that is so silly with it gun laws that it national pistol team needed to leave the country to practice, guns are still available for those willing to break the laws.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

It is not the people who go to the trouble to get a license that is of concern it is the people who carry illegally that is the problem...

It's absurd to claim that those who legally carry guns never misuse them, or are mentally and emotionally stable enough to only fire them responsibly.

The fact that Zimmerman was in psychological treatment, and on psychiatric medication to control impulsivity, and had a documented history of problems with anger management, are all factors that should raise red flags about his perceptions, judgment, actions, and self-control, prior to his shooting of Trayvon Martin--as well as raising questions about whether he was stable enough to be carrying a gun.

Quote:

My my sixty-four years and counting without any inaction with law enforcement other then a few traffic tickets and no history of mental diseases...

You mean you have no documented history of mental disease--that doesn't mean you are psychologically sound, or emotionally stable, or have good judgment, it just means you haven't sought treatment.

2 Replies

@firefly,

America is an extrememly drugged up country....your argument is a back door way to severely limit the right of americans to carry guns. Besides, I am pretty sure the the medical profession wants you to know that people tend to be more healthy when under their care than when not, so you should be careful about arguing that having a persription should remove rights from the citizens

2 Replies

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=161637

Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement

John R. Lott Jr.
University of Maryland Foundation, University of Maryland

William M. Landes
University of Chicago Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

April 1999

University of Chicago Law School, John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 73

Abstract:
Few events obtain the same instant worldwide news coverage as multiple victim public shootings. These crimes allow us to study the alternative methods used to kill a large number of people (e.g., shootings versus bombings), marginal deterrence and the severity of the crime, substitutability of penalties, private versus public methods of deterrence and incapacitation, and whether attacks produce copycats. Yet, economists have not studied this phenomenon. Our results are surprising and dramatic. While arrest or conviction rates and the death penalty reduce normal murder rates, our results find that the only policy factor to influence multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. We explain why public shootings are more sensitive than other violent crimes to concealed handguns, why the laws reduce both the number of shootings as well as their severity, and why other penalties like executions have differential deterrent effects depending upon the type of murder.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 52

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

America is an extrememly drugged up country....your argument is a back door way to severely limit the right of americans to carry guns.

Are you saying that even "drugged up" people should be legally carrying guns? Do you feel that everyone should have the "right" to legally carry a gun, regardless of whether medical or psychiatric ptroblems significantly impair that person's perceptions, or judgment, or impulse control, or ability to otherwise use a gun responsibly?

We already remove driving privileges from those who suffer from certain medical conditions based on physician's opinions. Why shouldn't the same apply to gun ownership or to the ability to obtain a gun permit?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

oralloy wrote:
No one was saying anything about automatic weapons until you brought them up just now.

You were. Scroll back up on this page. Idiot.

No, earlier I was answering your questions about assault weapons. Your pivot to full auto weapons was did not occur until late last night.

MontereyJack wrote:

I haven't looked in on this thread in a couple of months. Come back, and find out you're still trying to peddle the same load of crap.

Interesting perspective. Those of us who love America do not view freedom and civil rights as "a load of crap".

MontereyJack wrote:

Fact is, every time some kid gets a bunch of guns and shoots up his school or university or a movie premiere, it's on your head.

Nope. That is the fault of the guy who went on the shooting spree.

MontereyJack wrote:

Everytime some guy shoots and kills his wife and kids, it's on your head.

Nope. That is on the guy who did the shooting.

MontereyJack wrote:

Every time soembody gets caught in the crossfire between gangbangers, it's on your head.

Nope. That is the fault of the gangbangers.

MontereyJack wrote:

Every time some asshole in Florida shoots "seven or eight shots" into a car full of unarmed teenagers because they were playing the music too loud, and then claims "stand your ground" covers him, it's on your head. Yours and the NRA's.

I have not looked into that case, but am not sure that your characterization of it is fair or accurate.

If the shooter did do something wrong, it's his own fault.

MontereyJack wrote:

How does it feel to be an accessory to murder, oralloy?

Believing in American freedom does not make me an accessory to murder.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

It's absurd to claim that those who legally carry guns never misuse them, or are mentally and emotionally stable enough to only fire them responsibly

How is my statement that those who legally go to the trouble to get a license to carry firearms are far far far less likely to be in trouble with law enforcement then the general population turn into never having anyone with such a license being in trouble or misusing firearms Firefly?????

By the way as a footnote the hundreds of thousands of legally register fully automatic weapons and their owners the last I check there had been only one case of such a weapon being used in a crime.

Quote:

You mean you have no documented history of mental disease--that doesn't mean you are psychologically sound, or emotionally stable, or have good judgment, it just means you haven't sought treatment.

Let see went to college and earn a BSEE degree, held down one job for 33 years, never been arrested or charge with a crime in 64 years and so on..........................

If I am not emotional stable then emotionally stability have no connections with functioning successfully in life.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

OH? and if I had been in that movie or someone else with a CW permit at least there would had been a chance of more survivors. Hell if both my wife and I have been there the chance of a far better outcome would had gone through the roof.

That depends. That guy was decked out in body armor. It would have been a challenging defensive environment.

The best way to defend in such a situation would be to carry one of those AR-15's cut down to handgun size, and load your own ammo so you can use faster-burning power that does not go to waste in the short barrel (in other words, duplicate the brown-tip ammo that the Special Forces use for their own short-barreled rifles).

That would not have any hope of penetrating a hard armor plate, but it would glide right through Kevlar like it wasn't even there, and would still have great terminal effectiveness afterwards.

2 Replies

@RST,

RST wrote:

What are you now, a highly trained secret agent who can maneuver a gun professionally in a highly crowded, constricted and a dimly lit room? Grow the **** up, life isn't some holly wood movie.
Seriously, be realistic. if you or an average citizen with a concealed weapon were there trying to be all heroic in such a situation, you'd more likely kill innocents in the cross fire than get the perpetrator.

You're assuming that gun owners know as little of guns as you do.

A responsible gun owner will only fire when he is sure of his target.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

a movie theater full of modified AR15s.

yep. that's the ticket...

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

A responsible gun owner will only fire when he is sure of his target.

Like this guy?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/teens-shot-dead-basement-homeowner-article-1.1208337

Quote:

A Minnesota homeowner who shot two teenagers in the midst of an apparent Thanksgiving Day break-in told authorities he feared they had a weapon, but acknowledged firing "more shots than I needed to" and appeared to take pride in "a good clean finishing shot" for one teen, according to investigators.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

BillRM wrote:
Limiting access to law abiding citizens just mean that the killers will be far safer then they are now.

Why would law abiding citizens need military-type assault weapons?

There is no such thing as a "military type" assault weapon.

More importantly, your question of "need" has no place in America. The Constitution protects our right to have them. Need is irrelevant.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

That you post an article irrelevant to the topic does nothing to bolster the impression you have good judgment--in fact, quite the opposite.

That article does not address the issue of who obtains the gun permits, and whether better background checks, and better evaluations are called for, before permits are handed out and guns are sold.

It certainly does not address the issue of whether Zimmerman should have been carrying a gun, or whether, given his psychiatric problems, and their influence on his perceptions, actions, judgment, and ability to exercise self-control, he needlessly escalated a benign situation into a tragedy simply because his gun was available to him.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The constitution also protects my right to feel safe and be happy. When your rights interfere with my rights, you don't get to decide unilaterally that your rights take precedence.

2 Replies

Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know