The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

I have little doubt that there are tooled up people hoping somebody will give them an excuse to go into action.

What does "make my day" mean? What does "bring it on" mean?

Remember when the Italians condemned a seismologist to prison
for criminal negligence because there was an earthquake ?

I have little doubt that there are tooled up people hoping somebody
will give them an excuse to go into action.

That describes George Zimmerman.

No one followed Zimmerman around that night,

looking to commit a crime on him.
He intentionally provoked an incident,

with a kid who was minding his own business,
that gave him an excuse to shoot and kill someone.

If the asshole hadn't a gun,

he probably would have acted more rationally, controlled his impulses and emotions,
and just waited in the car for the police to show up,

or he would have continued his trip to Target. There was nothing criminal going on, nothing urgent, and no rational reason for him not to have remained in his car, just as the neighborhood watch rules require--he was not supposed to follow anyone, according to those neighborhood watch rules.

Zimmerman didn't need a gun that night, he needed brains and self-control.

His lack of brains and self-control caused a totally needless death.

The most important line of self defense is not a gun, it's good judgment.

That Zimmerman is held up as an example of why one needs a gun, is to suggest this need is the result of psychological disabilities on the part of the gun-toter that render him incapable of more mature and controlled and rational behavior. Even a chimpanzee can pull a trigger.

In 2005, Florida became the first of nearly two-dozen states to pass a "stand your ground" law that removed the requirement to retreat. If you felt at risk of harm in a park or on the street, you could use lethal force to defend yourself. The shooting of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., drew national attention to these laws.

Now, researchers who've studied the effect of the laws have found that states with a stand your ground law have more homicides than states without such laws.

"These laws lower the cost of using lethal force," says Mark Hoekstra, an economist with Texas A&M University who examined stand your ground laws. "Our study finds that, as a result, you get more of it."...

Hoekstra recently decided to analyze national crime statistics to see what happens in states that pass stand your ground laws. He found the laws are having a measurable effect on the homicide rate.

"Our study finds that, that homicides go up by 7 to 9 percent in states that pass the laws, relative to states that didn't pass the laws over the same time period," he says.

As to whether the laws reduce crime — by creating a deterrence for criminals — he says, "we find no evidence of any deterrence effect over that same time period."

Hoekstra obtained this result by comparing the homicide rate in states before and after they passed the laws. He also compared states with the laws to states without the laws.

"We find that there are 500 to 700 more homicides per year across the 23 states as a result of the laws," he said. There are about 14,000 homicides annually in the United States as a whole.

The fact that more people are being killed doesn't automatically mean the law isn't working. Hoekstra says there are at least three possible explanations.

"It could be that these are self-defense killings," he said. "On the other hand, the increase could be driven by an escalation of violence by criminals. Or it could be an escalation of violence in otherwise nonviolent situations."

But which is it?

Hoekstra checked to see whether police were listing more cases as "justifiable homicides" in states that passed stand your ground laws. If there were more self-defense killings, this number should have gone up. He also examined whether more criminals were showing up armed.

In both cases, he found nothing. There were small increases in both numbers, but it was hard to tell whether there was really any difference.

So if the numbers on justifiable homicide and criminals using lethal force don't explain the rise in homicide, what's causing the increase?

"One possibility for the increase in homicide is that perhaps [in cases where] there would have been a fistfight ... now, because of stand your ground laws, it's possible that those escalate into something much more violent and lethal," says Hoekstra.

It's important to remember that the data Hoekstra is analyzing depend on how police classify shootings. Police guidelines likely vary from state to state, and police in different places may be interpreting shootings differently in light of stand your ground laws.

Still, based on the available data, it appears that crafters of these laws sought to give good guys more latitude to defend themselves against bad guys. But what Hoekstra's data suggest is that in real-life conflicts, both sides think of the other guy as the bad guy. Both believe the law gives them the right to shoot.

In a separate analysis of death certificates before and after stand your ground laws were passed in different states, economists at Georgia State University also found that states that passed the laws ended up with a higher homicide rate...

Stanford law professor John Donohue, on the other hand, praised the study done by Texas A&M's Hoekstra. Donohue has been studying crime and violence for more than two decades and is working on his own independent analysis of stand your ground laws. So far, he says, he's getting the same results Hoekstra did.

"The imperfect but growing evidence seems to suggest that the consequences of adopting stand your ground laws are pernicious, in that they may lead to a greater number of homicides — thus going against the notion that they are serving some sort of protective function for society," he says.

http://www.npr.org/2013/01/02/167984117/-stand-your-ground-linked-to-increase-in-homicide

Trayvon Martin’s Dad Says Loss Can Help Stop Gun Violence
By Michael C. Bender
Jul 24, 2013

The father of slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin told members of Congress that he wants his son’s name on a federal law that would make it a crime to profile minors and kill them in self-defense.

“What can we do as African-American men to instill in our kids that you don’t have to be afraid to walk outside of the house, go to the store and get a bag of Skittles and iced tea and not make it home,” Tracy Martin said today in Washington.

Martin opened the first meeting of the Congressional Caucus on Black Men and Boys. The group of lawmakers was created in March by District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton and Illinois Representative Danny Davis, both Democrats, to address issues facing African-American males.

“The loss of 17-year-old Trayvon has focused attention on black males as nothing else has in decades,” Norton said.

About 200 people filled the hearing room in the Rayburn House Office building where Martin spoke, with another 100 watchers in an overflow room. About two dozen people stood in the hallway outside the meeting room.

Martin’s son, Trayvon, was unarmed when he was shot in February 2012 in Sanford, Florida, by George Zimmerman, who followed him and reported to police that the teenager was acting suspiciously. Martin was walking home from a convenience store....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-24/trayvon-martin-s-dad-says-loss-can-help-stop-gun-violence.html

Its a Bill of RIGHTS, not a bill of needs.

Commentary: Stemming Gun Violence
.By Kenneth R. “Ken” Plum, State Delegate (D-36)
July 24, 2013

#While President Obama in his statement about the Trayvon Martin case reminded us, “we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken,” he went on to say that “we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis.” Not only are we not doing enough, but we are seeing actions on the part of congressmen and senators and state legislators fearful of the gun lobby that may well result in more gun violence. When handguns used in the commission of crimes were traced to Virginia in such great numbers that the state became known as the “gun-running capital of the east,” the state legislature put in place a limitation of one handgun purchase per month. This year the General Assembly repealed that law. If 12 pistols were too few a year, one can now buy however many are desired!

#According to a USA Today editorial, in 1981 19 states prohibited people from carrying a hidden weapon in public, “but a powerful gun lobby has turned that system upside down.” Four states now allow persons to carry hidden firearms without a permit, and in 35 states, including Virginia, officials must issue permits to just about anyone who applies unless they have committed a felony. Hidden guns are now allowed in restaurants and bars and public places.

#Most frightening of all are the changes in state law to allow persons to stand their ground and use deadly force in any location one is legally allowed to be without first attempting to retreat. Florida was the first state to adopt such a law that had been drafted by the National Rifle Association and promoted by the American Legislative Exchange Council to almost two dozen states. The instructions to the jury in the Zimmerman case made it clear that if “he had a right to be where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat.” Efforts to enact a “stand your ground” law have been made in Virginia and are likely to continue until successful. Not only is there a proliferation of guns, but laws are being rewritten to expand the instances in which they can be used against another.

#There were the tragedies at Virginia Tech, Columbine, Newtown and thousands of other instances of gun violence. What will be the tragedy that will cause us to wake up and insist that no constitutional right can be argued that reduces the safety of others and enhances the potential for violence?

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2013/jul/24/commentary-stemming-gun-violence/

Too bad we don't have a list of responsibilities enumerated in the Constitution, as well.

Its a Bill of RIGHTS, not a bill of needs.

Too bad we don't have a list of responsibilities
enumerated in the Constitution, as well.

Harassing burglars is a good idea,
tho admittedly, I have been too lazy to do it.
Denying privacy to burglars helps us to keep our stuff.

NO ONE has standing to object to any violation of those rules, other than his fellow members;
i.e., he owed no one any duty of compliance, other than his fellow members.

An he would still have every damn right in the world to follow anyone he care to follow no the public streets.

I remain very, very happy to be a natural born citizen
of the the Land of the FREE and the Home of the Brave.

I remain very, very happy to be a natural born citizen
of the the Land of the FREE and the Home of the Brave.

Also he would still have every damn right in the world to follow anyone he care to follow no the public streets.

I remain very, very happy to be a natural born citizen
of the the Land of the FREE Gated Community and the Home of the Brave SCARED.

He wouldn't in the UK. It would be classed as stalking or at least as conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace.

I repeat...

That Zimmerman is held up as an example of why one needs a gun,

is to suggest this need is the result of psychological disabilities
on the part of the gun-toter

that render him incapable of more mature and controlled
and rational human behavior.