well, the trial is over and the verdict is in. is now the appropriate time to make comment?

No winner in this one. If Zimmerman thought blacks were suspicious before he is going to really be a nervous wreck now.

There have always been risks in getting into a street fight under any circumstances. All states now have concealed carry laws. Most have "stand your ground" laws. The risks are even greater now than they were ten years ago.

I didn't understand why Zimmerman waived his right to go before a judge in a self-defense hearing. Had he been successful in that hearing he would have been immune from prosecution for the shooting.

I wonder if the US Justice Department is going to file some kind of charges against Zimmerman, accusing him of violating Martin's civil rights or of committing a hate crime.

The steady flow of spun, filtered, and inaccurate reporting of the events, pictures, and law certainly looked to me like persecution by the media. Even though there were recent pictures of the 17 year old Mr. Martin available the ones the media displayed were almost all taken when he was 14 and younger. The color picture of Zimmerman's face taken right after the shooting by one of the investigating cops with cellphone hardly made it onto the web or TV. The grainy black and white taken of him after he had been cleaned up were published far and wide.

The commentators also stated many times that since Zimmerman followed Martin it was his fault he was getting his ass whipped and because of that Zimmerman had no right to use deadly force to stop the ass whipping. I won't go into the morals but that is not the law in Florida. As I understand the "stand your ground" law, Zimmerman could have been following Martin, calling him names and using racial slurs. Zimmerman could have insulted Martin's race, his family, his looks, his character, his clothes ... But once Martin started to give him the ass whipping Zimmerman may have certainly deserved it was legal for Zimmerman to use deadly force to stop it. The media misreported this aspect of the law too.

Zimmerman was correctly found to not be guilty of murder or manslaughter. He was certainly guilty of making a few bad decisions but he did not commit a crime under Florida law.

mike: by packin a handgun on his weekly trip to the grocery store, did Zimmerman make a bad decision? ie: without the presence of a firearm, there is no way he could have shot anyone.

ed, in my opinion, he didn't make a bad decision when he chose to take his gun with him on his trip to the grocery store. Zimmerman made a bad decision when he got out of his car and followed Martin at night in the rain by himself. And I don't think Zimmerman would have done that had he not had a pistol.

But following Martin was not a crime. If Martin jumped Zimmerman because Zimmerman was following him Martin committed a crime. If Zimmerman shot Martin to stop the beating Martin was givinig him he did not commit a crime.

so, without a firearm, Zimmerman would have stayed in his car? and if Zimmerman would have stayed in his car, this whole thing would never have happened? sounds like carrying firearms on ones person or in ones car, while going about ones normal travels, sometimes leads to people getting shot and killed unnecessarily?

Well, using that logic it would seem that going to the grocery store was the cause. Or perhaps it was possession of a car and a driver's license. If he hadn't had a car he wouldn't have been out on that rainy evening. Or perhaps the error was not sending his wife to pick up the groceries. Or maybe it was his decision to live in the city instead of out on a farm where he could grow his own food.

I certainly wouldn't get out of my car in the rain at night and by myself to follow an individual I suspected might be about to commit a criminal act. If I was legally carrying a concealed weapon I still wouldn't do it. There are many, many, many reasons not to do that. That I might wind up in Zimmerman's shoes is just one of them. That the person I am following might might shoot me is another. That the cops might shoot me is another. That a criminal might sneak up behind me and take my gun and beat me is another.

By the way the New York Times reports that some politicians and "civil rights" leaders are already talking about Federal charges against Zimmerman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/us/debate-on-race-and-justice-is-renewed.html?src=twr

" Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, said that as a trial lawyer himself, 'I don’t always agree with what the jury does, but that’s the system, and I support the system.'

But he said he believed Floridians should take a close look at the law at the center of the case, which he called 'so unusual.'

He also said, in an interview on NBC’s 'Meet the Press,' that he thought President Obama should have a role as the public debate goes forward.

Both he and Mr. Jealous indicated that the federal government would pursue the case. The NAACP leader said that he and his staff had spoken to senior staff of Attorney General Eric Holder and had been assured that the Justice Department would study it carefully. "

So Zimmerman may have another trial, and another, and another. Another good reason to stay in the car.

I think if someone could look at the facts, there's no way to determine what Zimmerman would've done without a gun. I also believe Zimmerman thought his life was in danger when his head was buzzing from being hit into concrete and he felt like he was drowning in his own blood.

Ed, if Martin were on his way home, why did he put himself at risk of the unknown, when it was shown he had plenty of time to just go home and eat his candy. Maybe he was unnecessarily suicidal, and George was duped into assisting.

mike: I agree, there are many reasons why Zimmerman should have stayed in his car, rather than going afoot, armed and in pursuit of a suspicious character. in retrospect, it was a bad decision to leave the safely of his car. better if he had stayed in his car where he last saw martin and waited for a policeman to show up?

Everyone is capable of conjecture, only one of the two people who know the truth is here today. The jury got the prosecution's best pitch and the defense's.

Noone wins, someone is still dead. Only the two involved and God will know the truth of it. The rest of us to include the jury (who is in our system is accepted as the best suited to judge) will make a call one way or the other.

The great sadness in this is the not knowing and yet so many seem to know (actually opinion) so very much.

Most legal cases fall to this imperfect solution whether guilty or not. It is the reality of our past and our future.

The terrible part of the story is the emotion and opinion brought from various quarters regardless of factual knowledge.

As for the validity of his decision to pursue, I was once in a similar position. My car stolen from in front of my house after midnight, while on the phone with the dispatcher it drives by my house in front of my face. I leap into my other car to be told by the dispatcher they have police officer who has sight of it and not to pursue. I stopped as I tend to listen. I was wrong as the dispatcher either lied, or confused it with another call. My car was found several days later totaled. Note it took several days of chewing on the local police to even get them to admit to the facts. I had to demand the 911 call tapes to prove my point. So when I hear he should have listened, well it goes back to opinion.

Ed, it seems that you are saying that you are not in favor of concealed carry and the right of self defense. We could also say that none of this would have happened if Martin was not prowling around a gated community at night in an area where there had been numerous break-ins and burglaries. He could have bought his Skittles and went straight home. The Liberal media never missed an opportunity to point out that Zimmerman, a community watch volunteer, was a wannabe cop and had taken criminal justice classes. They seemed to be saying that anyone who might aspire to a career in law enforcement should not excercise their right to carry a concealed weapon. This of course would include anyone who eventually became a cop.

Many liberals are also crowing about the extent of Zimmermans injuries, the ones that we were only shown after they were cleaned up as Mike points out. They say this is proof that he was never in danger of being severely injured or killed. Anyone who has ever been in a street fight knows that the next punch could result in a crushed windpipe or a fatal subdural hematoma. A high school friend who was big and strong had his life changed forever during a fight outside a bar, when the girlfriend of the guy he was whipping, kicked him squarely in the eye with her Cowboy boots, and popped it like a water balloon. This former heavyweight wrestler was beaten by a 100 lb. girl, and maimed for life.

I would not be surprised to see the Obama Justice Dept. pursue Civil Rights charges even though there is zero evidence Zimmerman profiled Martin on the basis of race. They would love to send the message that using a gun, even on someone who is beating, raping, or robbing, is just not worth it. Zimmerman could sue to recover legal fees, but the Gov't has deep pockets and our money to spend. Remember that the same Obama administration had no problem attempting to restrict the Civil Rights of law abiding gun owners after Newtown. Civil Rights laws aren't meant for white folks. You never even see them contemplating Civil Rights charges when a black attacks a white person even though it happens virtually every day. Our resident Libtards see nothing wrong with that.

It is instructive right now to tune in to MSNBC to see just how the Liberal Democrats view gun owners and the NRA.

Trayvon deserved to die..he had a number of arrests for criminal activity..so it was all a matter of when...not IF.

If a punk like that was playing those games where I live he'd have been shot too.

Perhaps the Justice Department could finance some additional protest in order to ensure the public support for their actions (I am joking). Governmentally inspired mob action reeks of the anti civil rights movement by local governments in the South in the 1950' & 60's. I had grown up with the impression that mob action was inherently wrong. I guess on the east coast liberal establishment some mobs are more equal than others. Government manipulation of protests creates real questions.

Only Zimmerman knows what happened that night. If he was faced with the decision to shoot or be killed, that is one thing, and was entitled to self defense. However, he could've avoided the situation by listening to the 911 operator who told him to stop following and leave it to the police. I don't think he should be made into a guns' rights poster boy nor should Martin be made a martyr of jury racism. He was acquited because the State couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was not acting in self defense. The lesson we should take from this is to never let a gun influence one's decision to do something we wouldn't do if we didn't have a gun. I think the gun gave him a sense of bravery to continue following Martin despite being told not to. I don't know how many of you have read Massad Ayoob's works, but he stresses that a gun should never influence someone to go where they wouldn't go without a gun or choose a course of conduct because of having a gun unless it is self defense against an imminent threat. I bet Zimmerman wishes he had obeyed the 911 operator. The case should stand for our system's reasonable doubt standard, the privilege against self incrimination, and the burden of proof in a criminal case. Zimmerman didn't take the stand because of our Constitution's Bill of Rights, the 5th Amendment. Not only did he have the right not to testify, the State is prohibited from arguing that he didn't and the jury is cautioned and admonished not to draw a negative infrerence because he didn't testify. The burden in this case was entirely on the State and it never shifted to Zimmerman to prove anything. Self defense became an issue because of his recorded statements introduced by the State into evidence. Had he not made any statement, he wouldn't have been able to invoke self defense without taking the stand. In my state as is in Florida, reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof in a court of law. To take your money in a damages suit, the standard is the greater weight of evidence; just enough to tilt Lady Justice's scales. In an action by the State of Georgia to take someone's children from a parent, the standard is clear and convincing evidence. Beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case is a higher standard than used to take someone's children from them and award them to the State. I hope the "race" angle of this case disapppears as it should and I hope that Zimmerman isn't raised on the shoulders of guns' rights activists because neither should have played into the jury's decision nor become standard bearers for anything other than our system of justice works as it should.

As for a "civil rights" violation charge, Federal law permits certain actions against state officials for excessive use of force if they acted under color of law. Zimmerman is a private citizen and is not subject to the Civil Rights Act for his conduct in shooting Martin. It is mercifully over as far as criminal prosecution goes. As for a "stand your ground" hearing which would have arguably found him immune, the judge could have easily ruled that when he followed Martin after being told not to, he wasn't "standing his ground". The decision was a smart one because it left room for his lawyer to argue "stand your ground" and good old "self defense" using deadly force because of his fear of imminent grievous bodily injury or death.

GLS.....something too many people assume..is that a 911 operator has any authority to tell anyone what they HAVE to do...

They are private citizens manning a phone in effect. They do not work for the police and have zero authority to dictate anyone else's actions.

I know this because my cousin works as a 911 operator in Virginia....she couldn't get a job with the police if she tried...

If I followed someone snooping in my or my neighbors back yard.....I'd tell them to get stuffed....their stuff and physical well being isn't being threatened by a criminal.

Thanks for that, GLS.

Everyone is talking about Zimmermann's decision to get out of the car as the reason for the shooting.Consider this: if Trayvon hadn't decided to carry a baggie of weed to school, he wouldn't have been suspended and wouldn't have been at is Dad's in the first place. This is just as valid as all the "what ifs" abuot Zimmermann. As far as Trayvon being a child, the State of Flordia, charges 17 year olds as adults all the time, for violent crimes( is slamming someones head into concrete violent?).
Mike

Um....exactly WHAT authority does some person answer a phone at a call center have to dictate what someone else can and can't do in his own neighborhood on public property? The answer is none... Zimmerman had the legal right to be walking anywhere he wanted..its his neighborhood.

And something forgotten...Trayvon wasn't walking on the sidewalk that cause the suspicion...he was walking in the grass very close to the houses. Trayvon wasn't a resident of that gated community...how about why didn't HE beat feet out of there since it was he that didn't lave a legal reason to be there that night.

Another reason that the defense didn't conduct a "stand your ground" pre-trial hearing probably was that Zimmerman would have had to take the stand. He couldn't have been compelled to testify, but I doubt if any judge would have held him immune without hearing from him. One of the big decisions made in criminal defense is whether or not a client will take the stand. The decision to testify can only be made by the Defendant and the lawyer can't prevent it. However, a lawyer sizes up his client's ability to talk and answer questions and can advise the client that it is not in his best interests to testify. In a case like this, I suspect that Zimmerman was cross examined more than once by other skilled lawyers outside of his trial team and that it was videotaped for replay to Zimmerman so that he could see how he looked on video. From what I've seen and read about Zimmerman he couldn't talk his way out of a burning building and it was a good decision for him not to testify. Had he testified at a "stand your ground" hearing, the State would have been able to conduct a thorough and sifting cross examination with him under oath that often can make someone not skilled in communication look very bad even when telling the truth. His lawyers handled pre-trial and trial proceedings skillfuly and he was well repesented.

There was never enough evidence for the Prosecutor to even file charges of Second Degree Murder in the first place. The case was built on conjecture and fueled by Liberals who wanted to crucify Zimmerman at any cost. The prosecution realized that and that's why they pursued manslaughter as a fallback position. Had this case been brought before a Grand Jury, it's unlikely that Zimmerman would have even been charged and brought to trial.

I'm not saying Zimmerman is totally innocent or without fault. I wasn't there to witness what happened. But it is absolutely true that the Liberals and race-baiters moved heaven and earth to try to paint Zimmerman as a murderer, and did all they could to paint Martin as an innocent child eating a bag of Skittles. They used this case to put a taint on concealed carry laws everywhere. The Liberal press heavily edited Zimmermans 911 call to try to show racial profiling where there is none, and they totally ignored Trayvon's criminal past. I'm sure King Brown is OK with that!

trayvon martin was 17 years old when he died. we know he had the body of a man, just under six feet tall and just under 160 pounds in weight. that was also my weight and height when I was 17. presuming he was your typical 17 year old, as was I, he was a big kid with not a lot street smarts, but thought he knew it all and was pretty cool. I aint 17 no mo, but still remember kinda what it was like to be 17. do any of you remember being 17?

too bad Zimmerman did not stay in the car and wait for the cops.

It's too bad that Travon turned and went after Zimmerman. He didn't have to do that. Nor did he have to punch Zimmerman and bash his head on the ground.

I wouldn't have stayed in the car...it was his neighborhood and he had every right to walk wherever he pleased, whenever he pleased.

And nobody had the authority to prohibit him from walking on those streets.

Your average 17 year old..particularly a 17 year old athlete is in far better physical condition that the average 30 something guy.

If some young punk that he was man enough to attack me.....then he was man enough to deal with anything that might happen..including getting shot to death.

and Trayvon was a thug with a criminal history...he was VERY street smart.
Tayvon was the one who should have turned and left....he wasn't a resident there...and it wasn't daytime.

This is a Federal indictment for a hate crime - from the FBI's website:

"WASHINGTON—Yesterday a federal grand jury in Portland, Oregon indicted George Allen Mason, Jr., 23, and his wife, Saraya Sophia Lisa Gardner, 23, on charges related to a the assault of a 26-year-old gay man who was walking his dog with his boyfriend on the streets of Hillsboro, Oregon, which occurred because of animus against the victim’s sexual orientation."

http://www.fbi.gov/portland/press-releas...nti-gay-assault

And another:

"WASHINGTON—The Department of Justice today announced Jamie Larson, 49, pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Seattle to a federal hate crime relating to a racially motivated assault of a 50-year-old Sikh man who works as a taxi cab driver."

http://www.fbi.gov/seattle/press-release...ack-on-sikh-man

And another:

"LONDON, KY—Four Harlan County, Kentucky relatives were sentenced today by U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove for their roles in kidnapping and assaulting Kevin Pennington, a gay man. David Jason Jenkins (“Jason”), 39, received 30 years in prison; Anthony Ray Jenkins, 22, 17 years in prison; Mable Ashley Jenkins (“Ashley”), 20, 100 months in prison; and Alexis LeeAnn Jenkins, 20, eight years in prison."

http://www.fbi.gov/louisville/press-rele...cher-county-man

GLS that explanation about why Zimmerman may have turned down the stand-your-ground hearing was informative and made sense - thanks.

Exactly....case closed and Justis served.

Thanks, Mike. I've been out of the Federal game for over 10 years. I see by your links where the Hate Crimes Prevention act was passed in 2009 after I pulled out. I doubt if there is a shred of evidence to prove a Hate Crimes violation in the Martin killing. While not a bar to Federal prosecution, Feds usually defer to bona fide state prosecutions for the same essential conduct under a doctrine the name of which escapes me. (It is not double jeopardy if there is another element under the federal statute absent in the state criminal statute.) In any event, I can't see any US attorney in his right mind attempting to present these facts to a grand jury. There was no testimony or evidence that Zimmerman acted out of racial animus as would be required for a Hate Crimes violation. If there had been, we would have heard it in the Florida trial. Any talk about a federal prosecution is political posturing by a bunch of blowhards. The Civil Rights Act that I referred to was for civil damages only and not criminal conduct.

If this was a civil rights crime OR a hate crime...then EVERY crime against a non-black person by a Black person is too...and should be pursued to the full limit of the law.

Racial profiling is a concept that applies only to law enforcement. You cannot arrest someone because of their skin color, the way they are dressed, etc.. A private citizen cannot be charged with racial profiling. (I wish the media would do their homework) A private citizen can follow and observe another human being; there is no law against this. The only thing Zimmerman could possibly have been charged with was a misdemeanor for discharging a firearm in city limits. This was a case that should never have come to court and wouldn't have but for Obama's un-presidential and inflammatory comment which the lapdog adoring media grabbed and run with along with race baiters (who make money off their comments) Sharpton and Jackson. The media, in their eagerness to stir the cauldron of divisiveness and portray a racist incident, originally identified Zimmerman as white and then invented a new ethnicity by changing it to a "white Hispanic". NBC altered the ER photos of Zimmerman's injuries to fit their original claims that there was no incidence of self-defense. I assure you, if the situation was reversed and Martin had shot Zimmerman, we would not have heard a word from the media, and due to his age, Martin would have received probation and been back on the street in a month. Where was the media when 3 black crackheads murdered a teenage waitress for her tip money? What coverage have they given to the weekly murders in Obama's hometown of Chicago? The media chooses to feature only the stories that fit their agenda which, by definition, is propaganda. What they did not report is the lawsuit the Martin family made against the homeowners association for which Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch captain....settled out of court for 1 million. Ed....anytime I leave my house I am armed; I don't want to return from the grocery store and surprise a burglar in my home and the only thing I have in my hands is the milk and bread.

Let us look at the facts and forget the "what ifs" (I'm amazed how many people on facebook have suddenly received their law degrees since the verdict came in.) "If a frog had wings, he wouldn't bust his ass everytime he jumps." There was no law broken that could result in an indictment...bad judgement and wrong decisions perhaps (I wasn't there, so I don't know) but bad judgements and wrong decisions aren't against the law or most of us here on the forum would still be in jail.

For those who want to label Martin as a thug, what about the wannabe vigilante Zimmerman? Is he any less a thug for packing a gun and wanting to throw his weight? Stay in the car, wait for the cops. You've done your duty. If he does that, this whole thing never happens.

The burglary rate had recently gone way up in Zimmerman's neighborhood. He was trying to help his community.

I didn't read or hear anything about Mr. Martin that made me think he was a thug.

Zimmerman made a bad decision when he decided to follow Martin on foot. I doubt Zimmerman thought he could whip Martin in a street fight. It was not illegal for Zimmerman to follow Martin, bad judgement, but not illegal. If, as Zimmerman contends, Martin jumped him and then started beating him then Martin committed a crime. At that point Zimmerman was legally allowed to defend himself as the law doesn't require him to lay there and be beaten.

So, a stranger poking around in your yard, looking in your window is just fine as long as you do your duty and call the police. Depends what the definition of a thug is, but he sure seems like quite a bit less of a thug than Martin actually was.

Why, thank you for the new evidence we weren't aware of. Martin was "poking around" in someone's yard, and "looking in" someone's windows? I guess I missed that part.

Both were a couple of accidents waiting to happen. "Neighborhood watch" means just that and Zimmerman should have called the police and kept his fat ass in the car. Trayvon had decided that he was not going to submit to any authority a long time ago and wasn't going to take any shit from some guy he was pretty sure he could take.I feel very sorry for his parents. There seem to be a lot of "Zimmermans" on this forum waiting for the chance to "cap" some dumb thug wannabe. That's a shame too.It's too bad the racists on this forum can't be the neighborhood watch in certain parts of Chicago.I'm sure they'd get their chance to let their hate take action.

What complete and utter bullshit...exactly WHY should Zimmerman WHO ACTUALLY LIVED THERE..be required to cower ..when Martin who was a Welfare bum that was a resident of the Projects nearby was terrorizing Zimmermans neighborhood.

And another thing...the 911 operator had absolutely ZERO authority to demand anything....nothing...zip...nada...

I bet you would be hiding in your basement while thugs terrorized your neighborhood...because heaven forbid YOU violate the rights of the criminals to roan the streets where they don't live.


The only one of those two who actually had the RIGHT to be there was Zimmerman...not Martin.

It was in the 911 call...it was also brought up during the trial. In fact it was never denied at any point...Martin was trespassing on private property. If he wasn't doing that....and wasn't suck a cocky [censored] to assault someone else...he'd still be alive. This was Martins fault...

If you saw someone looking in your sons or daughters bedroom window at night...or any of your windows for that matter....I suppose you would just let them.

Me..I wouldn't the law allows me to walk in my own neighborhood...and defend my own property as well as myself.

And it does in FLorida too. However the racists at the NAACP seem to think blacks have the RIGHT to assault, rob...and break any law they want....and scream racism every time the get caught.

I have a cousin who actually works as a 911 operator. She told me she has ZERO legal authority to demand anyone do anything.

I wonder if he'd grab a beer and watch if his wife or daughter was being raped by one of those thugs...because heaven forbid he violate their rights to do it.

I wouldn't sit back if I saw someone looking in my neighbors windows at night either....and neither would they if it was my house being looked into.

Zimmerman was not trained to take someone on that would resist his "authority" and he should have realized that.Discretion is the better part of valor.Why put yourself in harms way when there is no need to as there is no actual violence/crime in progress? Feeling justified in accosting someone verbally because they are on your turf is guaranteed to get you in trouble. Zimmerman might have won the battle but the war is far from over for him,legally speaking.

There was no indication or proof Zimmerman accosted anyone....but we got all the proof needed that Martin was a racist intent on accosting Zimmerman in Zimmermans own back yard.

His girlfriend told the world about the "crazy ass white cracker that was watching him.." when he started to assult Zimmerman. Proof Martin initiated it.....

If the police were everywhere..then we wouldn't have to do their job in their absence...but then we aren't in a police state...and I'd rather it be that way.

Maybe if people like Martin lived in fear of the people they have been preying on all these years...they would think twice about causing trouble.

I wouldn't lose a seconds sleep if ever on of the Treyvon Martins of the world got killed tomorrow.

Because the rest of us could sleep better when the crime rate drops significantly as a result.

And its NOT about martin being black..its about him being a criminal with no respect for anything or anyone.

Yes, you saw and heard the trial I was following. What part of trespassing is not understood? The same as illegal aliens can't seem to be understood? When Zimmerman was on the cell ph. and Martin calls out,as to why are you following me "Homey"? If he was allowed to be where he was, he would not have been confrontational. Ever run across a trespasser? They either make up some lame excuse or they may honestly and without making a confrontation that they are lost and ask directions out of there. They don't start popping of slurs to you.

Discretion and consequences are an important point and powerful truth, but is there any situation that someone couldn't come up with the requirement for training in advance. Literally, there're probably some who would require George to train on the Weber if this whole thing were about him grilling in the back yard.

I take offense at the accusation that members of this forum are "racists" and are waiting for the chance to cap some dumb thug wannabe. Again, there are acts of violence and murder every day in this country involving people of all races; why is this particular incident the center of so much divisiveness and name-calling? Because the media has so much influence over people's opinions! The statements in my previous post about no law being broken were also the opinion of a highly regarded former prosecutor of my acquaintance who stated that Zimmerman broke no law following and observing Martin and indeed Martin committed assault when he struck Zimmerman. These are the facts under law and a case can only be tried on facts, not opinion, heresay, or emotional rhetoric. I have worked with the local sheriff's department and assure you a dispatcher has ZERO authority to give any orders because they are not certified law enforcement officers. The 911 dispatcher gave advice to Zimmerman, not a lawful order. It shouldn't have even come up in court, but the prosecution tried this case on emotion, politics, and race; not facts. My only question now is, how long before the IRS audits the 6 women on the jury?

Training also means having the mind set to see a problem and pick the most effective way of dealing with it.Lots of people are competent with firearms on the range but being able to deal with ccw and appreciating the responsibility and your limitations is something else again. Lots of people don't want to "back off" when that would be the most appropriate action.Trayvon wasn't committing any crime when he came under Zimmerman's scrutiny and Zimmerman should have remembered the "watch" part of neighborhood watch.

Wow, bonehead, I musta struck a nerve! I rated several quotes and several responses! The point, if you care to follow it, is that I don't believe Martin was poking around anyone's yard, nor was he peeking in anyone's windows. And yes, given the activity Zimmerman observed, the right thing for Zimmerman to do was to call it in and wait for the cops.

You don't believe it..but the fact is Martin was NOT on the sidewalk..he was walking in the yards close to the houses...nosing around. That fact has been established....and confirmed by the police.

When it rains the ground is soft and footprints are left in the ground.

I have absolutely no use for the criminal element....and I for one would not hesitate to kill anyone who was assaulting me.

How do I know I would do it....? Because I've been there before....I put one of that kind in intensive care for an month one time....I'd have killed him in a matter of 3 more seconds had I not been wrestled off the guy by the neighbor man.

I was straddling the guy with a 3 foot breaker bar ina two hand grip over my head starting the downmward swing the instant I was wrestled to the ground.

He was down with all three bone on his one arm broken...three vertebra broken in his back..and a serous skull fracture from that same bar moments earlier.

And I was in a state of absolute focus and wanted nothing more in the world to take him out of it at that moment.

Yes..HE was in MY neighborhood...not his own...I never got charged even though the state police were there.

Yes..this is a subject really dear to me...

If I find someone in my back yard or even front yard at night...he's going to get the very same treatment. And even less mercy.

Great. Some poor slob has a few too many and ends up in some guys yard and is beat to death.Not in the same league as someone who is attacked without provocation and is defending himself.I would say someone with a skull fracture is beyond being a threat any longer but if you want to kill someone bad enough I guess it doesn't make any difference.

Long before the Hate Crimes Act of 2009 was passed, in Sept. 1985, KKK members were charged with Civil Rights violations for engaging in shootings and cross burnings meant to intimidate blacks. I think GLS is correct in saying that only politically posturing blowhards would pursue federal charges, for the blowhard Obama DOJ is still investigating this case, and blowhard NAACP lawyers and officials are pressuring the Obama administration to charge Zimmerman with Civil Rights violations as well.

On a related note, I just saw an interview with Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who literally ripped prosecutor Angela Corey for bringing this case to trial. He recounted how she withheld critical evidence from the judge in order to file second degree murder charges, and said she should be disbarred, and that she is the one who should be facing violation of Civil Rights charges for the series of laws she broke in order to try to hang George Zimmerman. He said that Ms. Corey has a long history of over-charging defendants in Florida, and please recall that she was brought in to replace another prosecutor who refused to file charges against Zimmerman for lack of evidence.

Also, very predictably, Obama is using this case as another excuse to restrict guns and concealed carry laws in this country. Some of our very Liberal friends like Fin2Feather are dishonestly referring to Zimmerman as a vigilante when the evidence shows that Zimmerman never drew his weapon until after he was assaulted. Yes, he could have just stayed in his car. And we could say the same about any woman who is raped in a dark parking garage, and lay the blame on her if she managed to shoot her attacker. We could also say the homeowner who shoots a home invader could have installed better locks and better lighting. Leave it to a Libtard to make excuses for the criminal and blame the victim. Fin2Feather questions those who want to label Martin as a thug. Well... he did have a criminal record, inadmissable as evidence and withheld from us by the Libtard media, and his last act on this earth was racial slurs followed by criminal assault. Hmmmm. And speaking of women, where is the Great King Brown with his frequent references to Republican mysogeny now that Reverend Al Sharpton is crowing about having only women on the jury? I guess it's OK for Rev. Al to denounce women as being incapable of rendering a fair and lawful decision in a Court case, but inexcusable for Mitt Romney to have womens' resumes in "binders", and inexcusable to attempt to limit abortions after a fetus is capable of feeling pain. Rev. Al, the professional race-baiter is lucky he isn't a Republican, or King would be on him like stink on shit. Fair and balanced!

He gave that right up when he attacked me.....end of story...don't like it...then too bad. My rights exceded his. He had ZERO rights to assult anyone...for any reason....and being under the influence or mentally ill doesn't change that either.
And incidently that dumbass wasn't drunk..he was stone sober...and he was a lot bigger and stronger than I was....If I didn't have some matial arts training...I would have been the one in the hospital or dead...not him.

And yeah... I knew who they were and where they lived. And there were a lot of witnesses....ALL of them backed me except for the one person who participated in the attack...he was smart enough to get out of dodge when I kicked his butt first....I put the second guy in the hospital....so don't give me some sob story about how I reacted excessively.

That was who called the State Police.....he was a real pussy.....since they started it...Police refused to do anything to me.....when they got the real story...and they asked if I wanted to press charges against them...which I had drafted up and with that police report...I had a period of time to pursue that....THe police told them if I even thought they were looking at me wrong they would be back to arrest them both.

My reputation was made that day...and theirs was forever ruined (they were well known as the local troublemakers that liked intimidating people).....as there were nearly 70 people that saw it....never got crap from anyone ever again around there. Because they knew I played for keeps.

I have ZERO sympathy for thugs anywhere.....if they are a mean drunk...then they need to stop drinking. Or they better man up and take the responsibility for whatever happens to them.

What is it that everyone says......Payback is a [censored]?

I agree...one of my cousins works as a 911 operator and has for years...she's a civilian who couldn't get a job with the police even if she was the only person that applied for the opening. And thats right...they offer advice of what to do...and its just that, advice...and nothing more. They have ZERO legal authority.

I think we have a perfect example here with the people tring to lynch Zimmerman....

To use this as proof to the Hispanic Community that the Democrats are NOT their friends...that they (the left) hold hispanics as second or third class citizens....

And why they SHOULD be voting Republican.

I wasn't contending that Zimmerman's exiting of the car and then following Martin on foot was bad judgement because he wasn't taking the dispatcher's advice. I contend it was bad was bad judgement for the reasons I previously listed.

If my neighbors saw someone screwing around my house at night when I wasn't there or asleep...I hope they would take action and not just let them continue.....hoping the police might get there and actually catch them in time. Odds are they would see the police and be gone before they even got out of their cars.

IT was Zimmermans back yard effectively...it wasn't Martins.

Crime is allowed to flourish in too many areas because of the "its not my problem" mindset....where they don't even bother to call the police...who rarely ever get there in time to prevent a crime...but usually after teh crime is already committed.

Besides...everyone says what if Zimmerman had walked away.....well, where are people saying why didn't Treyvon walk away? If Treyvon had simply told Zmmerman why he was walking there instead of attacking him....he would still be alive.

I believe,after listening to the Fla.lawyer talking heads,that the reason they didn't go for a "stand your ground" hearing was that if a judge found in his favor,he would still be subject to a civil suit. On the other hand, if a jury found him not guilty,under the self defense law,he wouldn't be subject to it.
Mike

This is PRIME evidence to use the next several elections to remind the Latino community why they should NOT vote Democrat.

Zimmerman was found not guilty of second degree murder and not guilty of manslaughter. I agree with that verdict. I also believe that Martin started the fight. I believe Zimmerman shot him in self defense.

Martin was a guest of a resident of that community. He had a right to be in that community. He had a right to walk through that community.

Zimmerman had a right to follow Martin on foot, in the dark, in the rain, alone. That doesn't mean it was a good idea for Zimmerman to do that. If I were Zimmerman I think I would now regret that decision.

Different states have different laws, but getting acquitted of murder charges doesn't prevent a civil suit in most jurisdictions. Ask OJ. Unless something is peculiar to Florida law, he could still be most likely sued for wrongful death. Under Ga. law because of the different standards of proof of civil versus criminal, acquital in criminal does not bar civil suits for the same conduct. In civil, it's a preponderance or greater weight of evidence. In criminal, it's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The verdict in Zimmerman was not guilty. The jury made no specific finding why he was acquited. If the lawyers said that the stand your ground hearing was avoided because of an attempt to avoid civil liability, I think that's a smokescreen for the real reason and makes little sense because if he was justified in using deadly force, then the same defense would apply in a civil suit in most jurisdictions. They didn't want him to open his mouth anymore than he had. He had already made statements that they wish he hadn't made. If they thought he had a clear shot of immunity they would have pursued it. Lawyers don't(or shouldn't) jeopardize a client's freedom for the sake of avoiding a judgment that could never be enforced. "You can't get blood out of a turnip, but you can put the turnip in jail" as an old judge around here used to say as he sent deadbeat fathers to jail for failing to support their children. The quote was directed to lawyers who used the "can't get blood out of a turnip" argument. Gil

Mike I read somewhere that it was vice-versa. If the "stand your ground hearing" had occurred and been favorable to Zimmerman that would have protected him from both civil and criminal action. As it stands now he can be sued by Trayvon Martin's family. The talking heads say Martin's family is planning a civil suit.

I doubt if Zimmerman has any net worth left after lawer fees and court costs, interrupted earnings, etc... If so there is not much to fear from a civil judgement. The bankruptcy code will cancel the judgement once Zimmerman declares bankruptcy.

Any civil suit against Zimmerman by Martin's family would be a waste of money and time and done only for publicity or for spite. There is not a red cent to be made out of such nonsense even if the judgment was for a gazillion dollars. It still has to come from somewhere. I'm sure there must be an idiot lawyer who would do it for the publicity, but most lawyers are governed by the three legged stool approach to taking a damages suit: liability, damages and ability to pay a judgment. This stool would collapse with one or two missing legs of the stool.

Except he wasn't walking on the sidewalk...he was walking on private property next to the houses...in the dark...in the rain.

The sidewalk might have been common area...but the yards near the houses weren't. I think its disgusting how the lefties are so eager to violate Zimmermans civil rights to do what is effectively a lynching...its really no different than putting a rope around his neck and stringing him up on a tree or dragging him behind a truck. But then..these are the same people that created the KKK....and that mindset has never left them. Only who they choose to target.

The left wants him dead because he's not black..and heaven forbid anyone ever lay a hand on a black who is assulting them.

No there isn't a nice middle ground here...if Treyvon had killed him it would have still been a lynching..and thats exactly where it was going.

Just another poorly educated Black thug with a bad attitude, and an entitlement mentality. Nothing that happened justified Treyvon assulting Zimmerman. And the fact he did..is proof that Treyvon was actually up to no good...and not doing what it was claimed.

I have stated three times that Zimmerman had the right to follow Travon Martin by car or on foot. And three times I have said that Zimmerman's on-foot trailing of Martin did not give Martin the right to assault Zimmerman and that such an assault would be a crime by Martin.

I have seen nothing in your arguments that persuade me that it was not bad judgement when Zimmerman made the decision to exit his car and follow Martin on foot, at night, in the dark and alone.

Going to have to agree to disagree on that point. I'm assuming you was diecting that my way.

He was on neighborhood watch...he was legally armed...if a neighborhood watch group runs home the instant something might be up...then what good is it. And we all know how long it takes the poilice to show up after a crime is commited...and the likelyhood they will show up before one actually does. Particularly in a high crime area.

I wasn't aware of this. I can't recall any resident coming forward vouching for Martin and his guest status. It's unclear to me, but there are some reports that it's a gated community with accompanying no trespass signs. In any event, I thought supporters said he was just passing through on his way home.

I think it is note worthy that an IT employee was fired after the jury started deliberating. He claims ethical and probably unlawful with holding of evidence from the defense. Seems like Martin indicated clear access to illegal handguns, drugs, and was suspended from school for possessing stolen property and the tools for home break ins.

Again he had the right to follow Trayvon Martin. If he hadn't been a member of the neighborhood watch he had that right. Will you accept that I believe he had the right to follow Trayvon Martin? Will you accept that I believe that he had a right to carry his concealed weapon? Will you accept that I believe he shot Martin after Martin started assaulting him?

But the outcome of Zimmerman's decision has been financial ruin for him. He has spent significant time in jail. Until he was found innocent he lived under the cloud of a possible substantial state prison term. He is currently under the cloud of a possible Federal criminal indictment. He will have a target on his back for a long time. Martin's family has said they are going to sue him. Other possible outcomes of his decision; If Martin had been armed then Zimmerman could have been killed, The cops could have accidentally shot Zimmerman, Martin could have taken Zimmerman's gun in the assault and shot Zimmerman-Zimmerman was by himself and he said Martin was able to sneak up on him and jump him, Zimmerman could have been convicted of 2nd degree murder. If OJ was found innocent in that double murder then Zimmerman could have been found guilty in this shooting.

The purpose of neigborhood watch is to alert the police and the hope is that the presence of active involved watchers will deter criminals. It is not arrest, detainment, or street fighting with a suspicious person by the neighborhood watchmen.

The only way that Zimmerman's decision to follow Martin on-foot could be considered good judgement would be if his goal was to shoot a black teenager he found suspicious and then avoid conviction on state murder charges and the subsequent imprisonment.

I don't believe that was his intent. I think he was trying to contribute to the quality of life in his community. I think he just made a bad decision.

"The fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman took place on the night of February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, United States. Martin was a 17-year-old African American high school student. George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old multi-racial Hispanic American,[Note 1] was the neighborhood watch coordinator for the gated community where Martin was temporarily staying and where the shooting took place."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin




Have you got a link? Thanks!

He was a resident of that gated community...and was legitimately part of the neighborhood watch....he wasn't visiting or passing through....

Therefor I don't think it was bad judgement he did what he did. His was the actions of a good and concerned citizen and resident.

I'd be proud to have more neighbors like him.

Martin was also legitimately in that neighborhood. Residents of gated communities are allowed to have guests. Those guests are allowed to walk in the community. The outcome of this trial was a vindication of the jury system and the right of a citizen to defend himself. There is no need to spin any of the facts.

So?...but not to be walking through peoples yards at night..in the dark and rain, THats called tresspassing. Visiting doesn't trump renting or owning there....none of which he did....he was a guest there...not the Mayor, he got thrown out of school over weapons and drugs....or he wouldn't even be there.

He was legally required to NOT assult someone who asked a simple legitimate question to someone sneaking around in the dark....

If Martin had two functioning brain cells he would have simply answered the question....but no..he had to be a big tough thug and heaven forbid someone ask him anything....so he makes a racist comment to his girlfriend and then proceded to assult Zimmerman.

If he was truly a guest, why did Martin become confrontational? He is like he was picking for a fight. He only had to say that he was visiting his friend so and so. If that was true, why didn't his friend come to his defense in either the "hood" or the court room? IMHO, he was caught where he knew he was in trouble and he was caught with a fight or flight reflex. He chose the wrong response.

There are only two that know what was going through Zimmerman's head on that night.....Zimmerman and God. We are neither one.
A jury of his peers found him not guilty; end of argument.

If Martin was walking through people's yards that would indeed be trespassing. I haven't seen a map of the route Martin took and do not know where he walked. But apparently he jumped Zimmerman on the sidewalk.

The outcome of the trial vindicated the jury system and confirmed the right of a citizen to defend himself. As far as him being in the neighborhood Martin was there legitimately. There is no need to spin any of the facts.

As I understand Zimmerman's story, Martin lost him and then waited in "ambush" back at the car. My best guess is that Martin was pissed off at Zimmerman for following him and intended to give him an ass whipping to teach him a lesson. That is, Martin planned and carried out criminal felony assault.

It came up at some point that he was walking near the homes..not the sidewalk and thats why it was suspicious.

I wasn't spinning any facts...Zimmerman had a right and a legal and legitimate reason to be doing what he was doing. They had a spike in crime in that neighborhood and they were taking legal legitimate steps to deal with it.

I thought you were arguing that Martin wasn't legitimately in the gated community. Sorry, I misunderstood.

For the fifth or sixth time, I believe Zimmerman had the right to walk behind and follow Martin. I believe Martin criminally assaulted Zimmerman. I believe Zimmerman defended himself when he shot Martin. I believe Zimmerman was genuinely suspicious of Martin.

It was bad judgement on Zimmerman's part to follow Martin on foot, at night, in the rain, by himself. If you don't think so I suggest you consider his life since he stepped out of his car to follow Martin.

If its that or sit back while you and your neighbors get robbed by thugs from the nearby projects....I'd do the very same thing.

What happened to Zimmerman was wrong and is wrong..and shows the true racists are alive and well...and they aren't the old southern white guys that have always been maligned forever for this.

Zimmerman never claimed he saw Martin burglarizing his neighbors. I have never heard or read any claims that Martin had burgled Zimmerman's neighbors.

I certainly wouldn't sit back while my neighbors got burgled. I would immediately call the police and make notes about what I saw. Perhaps take pictures if light allowed.

Now if a home invader breaks into my house I will certainly put up an armed response if I am able. I will know that he is a dangerous criminal because he busted in knowing I was there. I will know he is not supposed to be there. Everything is clear and clearly covered by castle-law and stand-your-ground law.

And what difference does it make if the burglar is from the nearby projects? If it is the meth-head son from three blocks down robbing your across-the-street neighbor wouldn't you still respond the same?

perhaps this will provide some insight...


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/videos/37/51246/zimmerman_trayvon_and_manliness#!/37/51246/Zimmerman,-Trayvon,-and-Manliness

I'd do a link if I knew how Mike, easy to find though, the fellows name is Ben Kruidbos. Paints a different picture of Martin the person and his intentions. Supposedly, illegal guns, drug use, bragging of one punch knock outs of other kids, and on and on. This whistle blower knew it would likely mean his job, but felt it was the right thing to do anyway.

Thanks for the link about Martin's 'guest' status. Sure he was temporarily there, but even the prosecutors framed it as all he was doing was passing through to get home. One defense attorney showed a time line of over four minutes, where a strapping young lad like Martin could have easily walked back to his hosts place or high tailed it to his old man's place. At that point, Martin was not shot yet, but proven to by on top of George punching away.

Agreed, there are consequences to bad judgement, but there are many victims of many violent crimes who it could be said just shouldn't have been there and it never would have happened.

Here is a link to that story....one of them anyway.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/c...after-testimony

Thanks Craig. Here are a few:

http://www.inquisitr.com/846743/george-z...uns-cell-phone/

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/c...after-testimony

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justice/zimmerman-it-firing/index.html

Sure looks like misbehavior by the prosecutor to me.

Edit - Sorry Doc, duplicated your link as I hadn't seen your post. Thanks,

No problem just Google the guys name...you will find PAGES of links.

I tried to post a link to the Google search but the URL thing doesn't work for HTTPS addresses.

For years I worked with a variety of blacks all from different upbringing....trust me they are all racists and think that anyone white is out to get them.

I recall one instance where I 'walked into' a conversation four blacks were having about white people being racists...truth is none of the four could offer one real example of anyone being racist to them.

Our debate ended after I told them that "I owed them nothing" and "truth is they should all get down on their hands and knees and worship the white man for if not for us they'd still be living in grass huts and eating grub worms in Africa".

This fiasco by the NAACP just confirms that blacks are the racists and the ones behind this should be tried for hate crimes and civil rights violations against Zimmerman.

The NAACP is the KKK of today. No different except nobody is wearing sheets or burning crosses. But the lynching continues.

They are wearing hoodies now...

http://www.zerohedge.com/print/476403

I didn't think of it that way...a hood is still a hood....

The Fla law is different than Ga.law, that is why I made a point of it being Fla.lawyer.He said it was written into the selfdefense section of the law. I understand the Martin family has recieved $1,000,000 from the home owners assn.,I wonder if that would limit their right to sue Zimmerman, since he would have been a member and the family would have signed some kind of consent agreement to recieve the money. I don't know that and I don't know the Fla.law either.
Mike

"Its better to be judged by 12....than to be carried by 6"

A smart settlement would have a clause in it.....a well drafted one.

A $1,000,000 settlement will buy a LOT of Malt liqueur.

It will also disqualify them from receiving welfare if I'm not mistaking. And get them tossed from the projects. But they could afford it.

I stand corrected.

Martin's parents each received a $1,000,000 settlement from the homeowners assoc. That's $2 million total for his divorced parents. You would not know that they're divorced because they were always portrayed as being together by the white publicist they hired right after the shooting. The same publicist also "managed" Trayvon's image with the cooperation of the Liberal media. That's why he was always shown using pictures from when he was 12 or 14 years old, and referred to as a child. This child lived with his aunt since he was 14, and began a slide toward a life of crime when he was 15. He had several juvenile run ins with the law and was absent from school 54 days in his last year. He also reportedly had disciplinary problems at school including some that he could have been arrested for had the school pressed charges. He also reportedly was found in possession of stolen school property and burglary tools. It's not a stretch to say he'd probably have been in prison or dead before he was 25.

But none of that matters. What matters is that this whole story is being blown out of porportion by race hustlers and Libtards who completely ignore the fact that there are thousands of black neighborhoods where none of us could safely walk at any hour simply because we are white. There is a whole lot more black on black crime than white on black. And there is a whole lot of violent black on white crime that just doesn't seem to bother Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Barack Hussein Obama in the least. A group of blacks has reportedly beat a Hispanic man in Baltimore saying, "This is for Trayvon."

Homeless jOe has it right. An entire generation of blacks has, to a large degreee, been housed, clothed, fed, schooled, and otherwise subsidized by us... but they still hate us. I don't have any black guilt that prompts me to make lame excuses or vote for Socialist anti-gun community organizers. There is no racial profiling against oriental students simply because they generally don't do anything to warrant it. I'd like to send some of the guys who are always spouting off about racism here on a walk through certain Detroit neighborhoods, and then ask for a second opinion... if they came out alive... But I really doubt if they'd come out alive. Their Obama bumper stickers wouldn't cut any ice.

Why did the homeowner's association pay? What was their liability?

I'm curious too.....thats pretty big for a calm the natives and get them to shut up bribe.

My wife emailed me this map. I don't know the original source or if it is really the neighborhood the tragedy occurred in. It may be complete bullshit.

Haven't seen that before anywhere myself.

It's likely their insurance would have paid to avoid a court case, which could cost more.They may have a different opinion if they had the knowledge that Zimmerman would be found not guilty. Mike

I think the following synopsis appearing on The American Conservative website is probably the best analysis of the entire fiasco. The entire article can be seen at http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...rreactions.html

Slate’s William Saletan says the frenzy of righteous commentary in the wake of George Zimmerman’s acquittal reveals a big problem with our society. Excerpts:


Everywhere you look, people feel vindicated in their bitter assumptions. They want action.


But that’s how Martin ended up dead. It’s how Zimmerman ended up with a bulletproof vest he might have to wear for the rest of his life. It’s how activists and the media embarrassed themselves with bogus reports. The problem at the core of this case wasn’t race or guns. The problem was assumption, misperception, and overreaction. And that cycle hasn’t ended with the verdict. It has escalated.


I almost joined the frenzy. Yesterday I was going to write that Zimmerman pursued Martin against police instructions and illustrated the perils of racial profiling. But I hadn’t followed the case in detail. So I sat down and watched the closing arguments: nearly seven hours of video in which the prosecution and defense went point by point through the evidence as it had been hashed out at the trial. Based on what I learned from the videos, I did some further reading.


It turned out I had been wrong about many things. The initial portrait of Zimmerman as a racist wasn’t just exaggerated. It was completely unsubstantiated. It’s a case study in how the same kind of bias that causes racism can cause unwarranted allegations of racism. Some of the people Zimmerman had reported as suspicious were black men, so he was a racist. Members of his family seemed racist, so he was a racist. Everybody knew he was a racist, so his recorded words were misheard as racial slurs, proving again that he was a racist.


Saletan goes on to say the evidence shows that the 911 dispatcher didn’t tell Zimmerman to stay in his car. The wounds, blood evidence, and DNA didn’t match Zimmerman’s story of being a total punching bag, but it also didn’t back up the story of Martin as a “sweet-tempered child.” He calls Zimmerman a “reckless fool,” but not a murderer. And he attacks hotheads who are ignoring the complexity of what happened that night — for example, Martin’s suspicion that Zimmerman was a potential gay rapist — to make an ideological point. More:



They’re oversimplifying a tragedy that was caused by oversimplification. … [The killing] happened because two people—their minds clouded by stereotypes that went well beyond race—assumed the worst about one another and acted in haste. If you want to prevent the next Trayvon Martin tragedy, learn from their mistakes. Don’t paint the world in black and white. Don’t declare the whole justice system racist, or blame every gun death on guns, or confuse acquittal with vindication. And the next time you see somebody who looks like a punk or a pervert, hold your fire.

That makes a lot of sense.

I might also guess that the liability insurance folks said do it our way or you're not covered. The parents would've had to sign on the bottom line though. That kid and the community might have really appreciated their enthusiasm if it was focused on good parenting.

I agree with almost everything you wrote cpa, and I respect you for it considering that much of it conflicts with what the ultra liberals are saying. Knowing that you typically lean left, that takes guts.

What I disagree with is this: Acquittal should mean vindication for Zimmerman. When O.J. was acquitted, he was generally free and able to resume his life. He travelled and golfed and socialized without any assaults even though a great number of people are sure he was guilty. But Zimmerman, as you say, may have to stay secluded and wear a bulletproof vest for the rest of his life. Sports celebrities and race hustlers are openly calling for retribution. While I'm sure some white racists had the same to say about O.J., I think we all know who would be more at risk, assuming O.J. wasn't safely in prison on another felonious charge. Already, we are seeing some protests and damage and "this is for Trayvon" retribution beatings being investigated. There were no similar incidents of rage and retribution for Nicole Simpson and Rob Goldman. Enraged blacks are engaging in the very same behavior that the KKK used in the 1950's. Black hoodies have replaced white hoods, and burning stores and cars has replaced burning crosses. Second, Zimmerman did see someone he thought was a suspicious punk... and he did hold his fire... until after he was being assaulted. That was the game changer, and I'm still not going to blame the victim for using poor judgement. Many women I know have a can of pepper mace in the bottom of their purse. They don't have it in their hands when necessarily or unnecessarily alone in a dark area. This is poor judgement because a rapist is unlikely to wait while they dig in their purse for it for it. So are the rapist and the victim equally wrong?

But if those mace carrying women are white and they midnight-walked down those dangerous-to-whites sections of Detroit that you mentioned in another post and they knew the reputation of that section and they left their mace in the bottom of their purse they would be exercising bad judgement. If they got raped their attacker would be guilty of rape under the law. Their rapist would morally guilty of rape. The victim of the rape wouldn't be guilty of the rape. The victim, never the less, used bad judgement.

I suppose Blacks have some imaginary civil right to rape women too...and rob houses...apparently they think they have the right to assault and attempt to kill people at will.

I suppose some Blacks, some Whites, some Orientals, some Eskimos, and some Hispanics think they have the right to do those things. Have seen no evidence that all Blacks think that. Several of my friends are black and I have seen no indication that they believe that have those rights. Some of my employees are black and they have never indicated that they believe they had those rights. One of them has worked for me for two decades and since our employees might go into homes state law requires us to do criminal background checks. My black employees have always passed. My wife is an avid reader of the docket in the local paper. She has never seen my black friends or black employees in the docket for rape, robbery, assault or murder, or for any other reason for that matter.

I don't think the Black race thinks they have those rights.

Not all...but MOST...big difference there. I'd never even imply ALL thought that. Even the ones not protesting think that Treyvon had the right to assault and almost beat someone to death....and not have the victim fight back.

Look at the protestors....Mostly blacks...and other punks that look kike they are unemployable.

None of them grasp the concept of the law apparently.

Apparently they think a woman being raped would not have the right to kill her rapist either, if he's black that is.

The Hispanics seem to think This is THEIR land and have the right to come here if they want...however they want....but most of them aren't committing violent crimes.


They complain about how unfair so many black men end up in jail......well the answer to that is simple....don't make breaking the law a way of life and they won't end up in jail.

I don't think most.

There is no denying that a much higher percentage of black males have been convicted of felonies than whites. But it is not anything like the majority of them.

I have it in my mind that blacks make up about 9% of the population and I think the population is about 300 million. So say 27 million black citizens. I didn't see anything that looked like even half of those citizens (13 million) were out protesting. The numbers I last saw were 200 here and 300 there. There is no doubt that the lefty media, the Democratic politicians, and the black leaders are misinforming the black population though. So much misinformation on the tube about the law, the facts, the sequences, and the participants. What is not outright wrong is spun severely or completely left out of the reporting.

Yes, and some of their leadership is arguing that the drug laws are designed specifically to put blacks in prison so the prisons can continue to employee guards and staff and so the private prisons can make money. If they believe that why don't they quit taking drugs and dealing drugs. That would starve the prison industry out. Just like the blacks did with the Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott back in the fifties? Would starve the neighborhood gangs out too.

Again I argue just some Hispanics want to return the Southwest to the Mexican nation.

My poll was unscientific and not a huge sample...but I've noticed over 80% think Treyvon had the right to attack and Kill Zimmerman...and his rights were violated by Zimmerman having the gall to fight back.

But then I am in DC...where the employment rate is so low except in the black community where Baggy pants is considered formal wear...and over 70% never finsih public school....and they sit around moaning how nobody have given them high paying jobs.....

Despite a lack of ANY work skills or even a diploma much less College Degree. Most of them think entry level jobs or something that requires manual labor is below them.


No that aren't all like that....I've work with some for years that are not at all like that. However they do share that same attitude that its not racists for a black man to assault a White or Hispanic man...but its racist for a white or Hispanic man to fight back.....particularly if they win.

If they want to go down this road....every black that commits a crime against a non-black should be charged with a hate crime.

They have no right to the southwest....if history serves me right....the Spanish took that land off the Native Indians...after killing most of them off for quite a ways south.....and there is NO historical evidence even the Aztec Nation that was there before the Spanish arrived extended that far north.

Exactly Mike, and that's the point I was trying to make to those who felt Zimmerman deserves some punishment when he did nothing illegal... however dumb he may have been. Trayvon made the dumber choice however, when he chose to beat up a guy he didn't know would shoot him. The outcome of this shooting and subsequent trial may save many lives and prevent many crimes just because it publicizes to potential attackers that there are folks out there with CC permits who will kill you if you attack them. This is apparently a big reason that violent crime goes down in CC states, despite anti-gunner claims that our streets will turn into the wild west.

But of course, Eric Holder and many leading Democrats are using this now in an attempt to reverse CC, Castle Doctrine, and Stand Your Ground laws. The lives of thugs and criminals are more important than yours.

Don't blame me for this. I voted for Romney.

Someones child was walking to place he was staying with baggie of groceries. He was racially profiled, confronted and executed by physically un-challened 28 year old male. I feel awful and do not wish to comment on this matter any further.

Where exactly did THAT happen? I'm curious.

Because its not the situation we were talking about.

Treyvon wasn't a "Child" carrying a bag of groceries....he was 17 year old 6 foot 1 inch tall football payer in his physical prime and in good shape...who was thrown out of school over drugs and weapons not to mention fights....he confronted and assulted Zimmerman unprovoked...and he got rightfully shot and died as a result.

Treyvon wasn't an innocent child for a lot of years. He was stupid...not mentally challenged...(big difference there) Zimmerman was older..smaller and NOT an athlete....

Typical case of a black thug preying on someone smaller than he was.

And yes Zimmerman was found not guilty...because here in the USA...we still have the right to defend ourselves against the criminal element.

And I would not want to live in a place where only the criminals had any rights. If I did I would keep plenty of Lime, and shovels handy to bury the body.

I'm sorry I thought we were discussing case of GA vs. Alistair Williams. Mr. Zimmerman acted in self-defense as he has always stated was found NOT guilty and can get his gun back upon asking. Thank you for pointing out my grave error.

Maybe we were and I got it wrong....I wasn't familiar with that other case or any of its details.

I'm on some other boards where we have people that INSIST on clinging to some fictitious version of the facts....so I tend to have a hair trigger on that topic.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

"Then he said he saw Trayvon mark up a door with 'W.T.F' — an acronym for “what the f---.” The officer said he found Trayvon the next day and went through his book bag in search of the graffiti marker.

Instead the officer reported he found women's jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a 'burglary tool,' according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald. Word of the incident came as the family’s lawyer acknowledged that the boy was suspended in February for getting caught with an empty bag with traces of marijuana, which he called 'irrelevant' and an attempt to demonize a victim."

Another article described the confiscated jewelry cache as including eighteen women's wedding rings.

There has been a big increase in burglaries in Zimmerman's neighborhood. Zimmerman thought Martin was behaving suspiciously. He called 911 and followed Martin. Zimmerman quit following Martin when the dispatcher suggested that he quit. When Zimmerman was returning to his car Martin jumped him and Martin was observed astraddle of Zimmerman who was on his back on the ground. The eye witness described and then testified at trial what Martin was doing to Zimmerman as a Mixed Martial Arts style "ground and pound". Zimmerman shot Martin at that time.

An information technician in the prosecutor's office found pictures and texts on Martin's phone that had been "deleted". One picture showed a pile of jewelry on a bed. The technician also found texts inquiring about buying a pistol. Martin had been suspended three times from school. Once for the graffiti incident in the article I posted, once for marijuana, and the third time for truancy.

Martin and Zimmerman, at the time of the tragedy, weighed within ten pounds of each other, Zimmerman being the heaviest and, to my eyes, having a higher fat to body mass ratio.

Any way we look at it, Mike, the tragedy is that it's another spike to the indomitable curse of racism. I doubt there's anyone here who doesn't remember how short the years since the civil rights struggle, Birmingham and Oxford, Washington and Los Angeles, voter registration etc after 200 years of slavery.

I think Obama lifted hearts throughout the world when the most powerful, dynamic nation on earth turned to a person of colour, with strong portents of more presidents of colour to come, but making an X on a ballot for whatever reason is easier than finding more compassion and generosity in our hearts.

Obama raised notions of possibilities because all countries share the burden of racism, exclusivity and entitlement. He has been a disappointment in many ways. But to me, with JFK when he won the Wisconsin primary indicating acceptance he wouldn't be taking orders from the pope, Obama was another sign that we may be wising up about religion, colour and minorities.

Just my opinion, Mike, from a wayward board member. I'm indebted forever to the United States for giving me hope.

Problem is we have seen nothing but racism from Obama and his administration.

Two black men whining about the fact Zimmerman won in the court of allw...so obviously it was racist...so they in effect call for a public lynching by insisting Zimmerman won't be allowed to roam free despit his being found innocent in the court of law. And this by Obama, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton..(there are far more than these four).all black men who have no respect for the law.

Proof positive its not the whites practicing racism in recent decades...its the Blacks themselves...

I just got to know, the group of Martin supporters are now talking of a "Martin Law". Just what in the heck could that be? How can these people support a law that puts their racial cause in a bad light? Anyone watch Dr. Drew? How is this African/American Queen who wants to outshout everyone to talk about how her race was wronged from the beginning of time? What did do to create this illusion? How can her half baked rants, improve our look on her imagined blight?

I propose we buy every person that thinks they are mistreated here a one way ticket to Africa..and $1,000 with the stipulation be they never return and their citizenship be stripped effective the time they get on the airplane.

I bet there will be very few takers. People in Africa don't collect welfare....you work or you starve.

I suppose it would be a national law that makes it illegal to shoot someone while one is being assaulted with just hands and/or feet. Charles Blow, on one of the talking-heads shows, argued that since a seventeen year old Martin could not own and carry a gun and Zimmerman could the difference in power was unfair. I can't see why Blow can't see that if Martin hadn't assaulted Zimmerman the imbalance of force wouldn't matter. It is illegal to physically assault someone. Martin was killed while he was assaulting Zimmerman - that is during his assault on Zimmerman. The victim of Martin's assault defended himself with his firearm. Not while Zimmerman was under the fear of assault (stand your ground) but while he was under actual assault (self defense).

And can he not see that when the imbalance of power is the other way around, that is a 6-4, 250 pound, 25 year old man considering giving a 5-8, 160 pound, 70 year old man an ass whipping that the young man might think about the fact that the 70 year old might be carrying. That the concealed carry laws have deterrence value to fist assault on the elderly, women, handicapped and other less-than-physically-imposing citizens?

Sometimes citizens here are mistreated. Zimmerman was mistreated by the state of Florida when he was charged and tried for murder. He was mistreated by the Liberal news media. Just because a citizen feels he has been mistreated doesn't mean he needs to be offered a ticket to Africa and refusal of said ticket does not mean he was not mistreated.

Imbalance of force should NEVER play a part in self defence. It ONLY serves to protect the criminal committing the crime.

Balanced response is a liberal concept that has never worked.

Korea, and VIETNAM are only two examples.

THe victim of an assault SHOULD be allowed to use any means at their disposal to defend themselves agaisn their assailants.

If thats a rock...a chunk of wood. or metal...knife...or a gun.

Racism is racism, regardless who's stoking it, doc. It's not particular of colour, where it finds those who hate and discriminate, shoot, tear at each other because of real or imagined grievances. It's an abiding, soul-searing curse.

I agree.

And I never implied otherwise. I'm 52.....and most of the actual racism I have seen has been practiced by the same people that use it as an excuse for everything when its not going their way. Sometimes its the Blacks..othertimes it the hispanics, and yes to a MUCH smaller degree even the Native Americans.

Not pointing a finger at anyone. Been careful to address it as a common abiding burden. I agree totally with your view; it seems we all look for spaces to take others down, to look down our noses at differences from our own. Agree on indigenous with whom I work.Thanks.

'Not pointing a finger at anyone'? Maybe just a bit warm out and doing a little fanning. You seem to value intelligent civil discussion. Quite a lot to conclude from the verdict.

Why do you insist that the color of skin is more important than the content of character. That a person of color 'has been a disappointment in many ways' seems to be a buried disclaimer, not a call for a better country or world. Another excuse?

Please read it again, craig. 1. I'm not insisting on anything. I'm expressing my opinion. 2. Nowhere do I say or imply colour is more important than character. 3. You may see a buried disclaimer where there is none. That's you, not me.

Obama has been a disappointment to many of his followers---he's no FDR---but he raised hope and enormous respect for the US throughout the world. A Canadian poll showed preference for Obama over their current prime minister!

King:

I do believe that a substantial chunk of the population of the U.S. would trade you Obama for Harper in a nanosecond.

Rem

King, maybe a closer look. I notice many references to 'colour', but not character which is the point I brought up. Again, it seems to me that racism is your focal point, not what the man has done or could do to improve the situation. Does disappointment mean he has worsened racial tensions, but you're bound by pc etiquette to sugar coat.

We'll even throw in Biden, Holder, Clinton, Kerry, Mayor Bloomberg, and a whole slew of Libtard Democrat Senators to boot. But you have to keep them. Don't come whining to us when Canada becomes a welfare state trillions in debt.

And in breaking news, a poll of first graders indicated a marked preference for Santa Claus over spinach.

How meaningless, King!

A poll of ill-informed foreigners misled by an ill-informed yet fawning Canadian media, has a preference for Obama over Harper. So what!

What you are failing to say when you talk about Obama inspiring hope and aspiration for change around the world, was that was before he gained the reins of power. That was before inauguration. That was 5 years ago. No Hope and Change these days.

Since he took office, by any rational measure, he has been a dramatic disappointment to his supporters and likely, through his deceipt and incompetence, set back the aspirations of other black American politicians by many years.

I would have loved to watch Obama try to govern, as Harper did for five years, in our system with a minority government. His government wouldn't have lasted six months.

Obama is an incompetent boob, with dictatorial tendencies, who has been invested with attributes he does not possess by a segment of the American people who really are desperate for hope. He is a charlatan of the highest order.

For sure, if this board is any indication, Rem!

The voters gave him the reins of power---twice. And with a second-time margin that didn't keep us up all night.

Only after getting more votes than existed adults that were even eligible to vote in dozens of precincts.

Of course that is true King, but it hardly refutes my point. Nor does it address what originally prompted me to post.... the idea that a poll of Canadians on who they like better, Obama or Harper, is somehow salient to any discussion taking place here. It's a throwaway, designed to bolster your point with anyone not paying attention.

So five years on, where is the hope and change?

I thought electing Harper would ensure some measure of fiscal responsibility combined with a concerted effort to reduce both the actual size of government as well as the areas of life it felt compelled to involve itself in. I can admit I was clearly wrong about that.

Why are you still pretending that Obama offers any sense of hope or change any more? He is not the man his supporters thought they were electing five years ago. He has accomplished none of what he promised first go around. In fact, many would say race relations and the relations between left and right have been substantially worsened by his administration. He is hardly the saviour, bringing Americans together, so many hopeful people envisioned five years ago.

Uhh the voters-13 Million FEWER the 2008,also voted to keep the balance of power-the house firmly in the R's control,the same.

some other facts you seem to omit;

Surprisingly, President Obama's 2012 vote total -- 59.8 million -- was 100,000 less than the 59.9 million John McCain received in 2008.

131 million voters cast their ballots in the 2008 election in which Barack Obama defeated John McCain by a 53% to 46% margin. Obama received 69.4 million votes, while McCain received 59.9 million.

In 2012, Obama defeated Romney by a 50% to 48% margin. Obama received 59.8 million votes, and Romney received 57.1 million votes -- 2.7 million fewer than Obama in 2012, but also 2.8 million fewer than McCain in 2008.

Despite losing the popular vote 51% to 48%--not a landslide for Obama by any means, but on the other hand not the “neck and neck” outcome many predicted--Mitt Romney would be President today if he had secured 333,908 more votes in four key swing states.

of course new voter id laws in many states that were not in place-due to libtard instance on allowing voter fraud,will be in force in the mid terms.

Right now, the voter I.D. law in Pennsylvania is being argued in the courts. The plaintiffs, including the NAACP of course, have produced an "expert" witness who is testifying that comparisons of voter registration lists to PennDOT motor vehicle registration and drivers licensing records would leave over half a million people without voter I.D.

The state dissected much of his methodology which conveniently ignores the fact that other forms of I.D. are legal, and getting a free and legal I.D. card from PennDOT is easier than getting welfare, food stamps, medicaid, or an ObamaPhone, and much cheaper than crack cocaine. Still, the plaintiffs and Democrat Libtards everywhere are whining about disenfranchisement when all they are really concerned with is anything that would make it more difficult for unregistered people, illegal aliens, and dead and comatose people to vote Democrat... sometimes multiple times. There is nothing stopping these frauds from excercising the same energy they used in get out the vote efforts to make sure every registered voter got the proper I.D. But this is all about perpetuating fraud, and the outcome will depend on whether the judge who eventually decides it is a Democrat or not.

As DaveK notes, the Obama re-election was hardly a landslide. And if you take away voter fraud, it was probably not even a victory. But King could watch the national news interview with the black female Hamilton County, Ohio Board of Elections worker who admitted voting for Obama six times and still tell us with a straight face that there is no voter fraud in the U.S. He could look at all of the precincts that had over 100% voter turnout, and very large urban precincts where not even one vote went for Romney, even though that's where illiteracy is highest, but still whine about voters who supposedly mistakenly voted for Bush on third grade level butterfly ballots when they really meant to vote for Al Gore. He can conveniently ignore the complaints from voters in Virginia and elsewhere who voted for Romney and saw their vote tabulated for Obama on electronic voting machines.

How do you respect this feigned ignorance and tolerance of fraud? Well, you don't. The guy who pretends to ignore me because of "bad manners" lies to us on a regular basis. What a joke. Dishonesty is not, and never will be civility.

I'd love to know how all these people that claim they are too poor to get an ID...manage to apply for and collect their Welfare and food stamps without an ID

I'll try to reply to you and craig this way:

Obama's popularity in Canada is "salient" in context of how his election was viewed throughout the world. Voters rarely get what they vote for because of pragmatism and balances in the system. Polls indicate the electorate's high disapproval of Congress for its stultifying partisanship.

There is no pretence in my saying that I'm indebted to the United States for giving me hope. Craig wanted me to comment on Obama's character but that's not the point. Obama preached hope and change. The American people who gave him successive majorities galvanized new possibilities everywhere.

Without minimizing this extraordinary political development, I see Obama as an agent. Endorsement of his hope and change came from the American people, for the second time only eight months ago at a time of crushing unemployment and their soldiers fighting and dying overseas.

What a country! With a white candidate, it would have been only two more of the same.

Keep smoking that hopium, you old bolshevik.

All true, Dave. I don't think most of us were counting votes that night but were off to bed early, even before those last "must-win" states were tallied for the Electoral College.

King, thanks for replying.

My point is that the hope and change train left the station five years ago and no one has seen it since. We get that during his initial campaign his supporters around the world felt his election would usher in a new day.

But it didn't! And no one is arguing that.

I too, while I never would have voted for him, in the aftermath of the American decision to elect him in 2008, 70 million to 60 million, had hope his election might be a watershed moment in American race relations. A casting off of a heavy yoke. Sadly King we are all aware that has not been the case.

So my question is still, why are you talking about Obama inspiring hope when he has a proven track record of not being able to do anything to justify that hope? He is no longer a rookie.

I hope I win the lottery whenever I buy a ticket. I also know, by examining the historical record and the science of probability, that it is exceedingly unlikely my hope will result in anything tangible. But I do it because the occasional ticket allows me to day dream about the 10 million dollar SxS collection I might acquire.

Is that what you are doing, happily daydreaming about possible events exceedingly unlikely to occur?

I think specifically what I have difficulty with King is that you talk about the "hope" that emanates from the Obama election as though it is a current thing. And while it may have been there five years ago, that hope has evaporated.

King, I'd like to thank you for replying too!

Oops, my mistake... you didn't reply to me because I sometimes have bad manners... especially when I am talking about dishonest deceitful liars.

James, go out and buy that lottery ticket. You have a better chance of winning than getting an honest answer to your question.

I think it's an interesting reply King, but is there any possibility to consider results over feelings. I can't see any facts there, but that's not the point. In several different ways, you have confirmed that there should be prejudice based solely on skin color (colour?).

Hope-n-change was a campaign slogan, not what was preached. Quite a bit more was read from the teleprompter. I'd mention world respect since you believe 'possibilities have galvanised everywhere', and the glaring darkness when the sun was supposed to shine.

One more thing, King. Like you, the United States gives me hope.

Hope for a future world where ingenuity and hard work will always win out over laziness and entitlement. Where all are able to speak their minds. Where rule of law is universally acknowledged, especially by the ruling elites. Where the transition of power from one government to the next is regularly conducted in peace and with honour.

Sadly, the longer Obama is in power, the more my hope is diminished.

That narrows it; thanks. There must have been something---if not hope, what?---for the electorate to buy in at that critical juncture in the country's affairs. The pundits said it was the GOP's to lose. What did he have going for him other than expectations for something better? Which is a definition of hope to me.

I believe there was a lot more to sticking with Obama than measured triumphs in social welfare, stick-handling through the meltdown, pulling back outposts of an unwanted empire, telling allies they'll have to start pulling their weight---it's over for Americans dying and paying the bills as the world's policeman.

Using your lottery ticket analogy, what's wrong with a dream if the above is a tangible part of it, a promise of something better, a different way of looking at things? I kept faith in the US getting it right over time from years of reporting the good and the bad there. Electing Obama will last me all my life.

King, in 2012 Obama received 10 million fewer votes than he did in 2008.

In 2012 Obama received 2.7 million more votes than Romney, a 2 % advantage.

50% to 48% of votes cast according to the numbers DaveK posted above.

It's certainly enough to win the presidency but it hardly points to a consensus or even a strong majority of public opinion.

When I think of the facts I just noted above, it does not suggest to me that Obama is continuing to inspire in any but the most obtuse with hope for change. 15 percent of his own voters in 2008 just couldn't be bothered to go to the polling station just 4 years later. Where is the hope there? It's not like they switched their vote. They just didn't bother!

I know you are trying to think positively about a nation you admire, as I do. It strikes me that you are seeing that which you wish to see, rather than that which is.

I too think they got it right electing Obama over McCain in 2008. It could have been the start of something very good. The problem is, having made the monumental step of electing a black man President, they choose the wrong man. And instead, it could have been the start of something very bad.

King, for someone who's been everywhere and seen everything, you sure have low standards.

Canvasback, I told you that you had virtually no chance of getting an answer to your question, because King is still acting like a teenage girl at an Elvis concert in 1960. Elvis had a lot more substance than Obama though.

King asks what Obama had going for him other than expectations for something better? The answer to that would be Chicago style voter fraud. Outside of the black community which claims it is not racially biased, you'd have a hard time finding many people who will admit to voting for Obama.

'Other than expectations', I thought we were just (literally) told he had the colour of his skin going for him?

Tangible? Are these accomplishments that can be 'touched', or still just promises.

Between the hopium for old Bolsheviks and squealing girls at an Elvis concert I can hardly stop laughing long enough to write something coherent!

I've had my say, craig. We have different opinions. The tangibles of better lives for millions of Americans are mentioned in my second paragraph. Millions received better in health care, economic and gender equality, withdrawal from foreign entanglements, greater respect throughout the world.

Imagine the triumphant changes I see in the American human spirit from the civil rights struggle of barely 50 years ago, of cities burning, when America's finest troops with fixed bayonets forced the law, when a question for voter registration was "How many bubbles are there in a bar of soap?"

I was there through it all, and that's why I believe in the United States, and why the election of Obama to the presidency seems a miracle to me. (Knowing Fox is wondering about which soldiers, they were of the 82nd and 101st at Ole Miss; the night bayonet charge in Oxford's town square. Mostly black.)

Compare that to the United States of today. Fifty years ago Americans said being a Catholic shouldn't exclude from the presidency. I was there, too, when JFK broke through in the Wisconsin primary and then took next mostly Protestant West Virginia. Then, almost unbelievably, Obama six years ago.

My take is that at least half of all voting Americans are either ignorant,racist,don't know what "leader" really means,vote their own narrow interest(s),vote the party and not the man or a combination of the above.I still think we haven't had a "leader" in the office since Eisenhower.I wouldn't follow the last 3 clowns we have had in office out of a burning building.Wit,charm,looks and a gift of the gab are not what I am looking for in a POTUS.

King, sorry to strike a little nerve, and I feel like a real chump for not walking away, but not a one of your betterments have actually happened to this point. As a courtesy, I'll watch for signs over the next three years.

Your historical perspective is interesting, but possibly not related to job performance.

Agree- Wit, charm and the gift of gab (and glad-handing) were the only attributes(??) old Warren G. Harding brought to the table in 1920- and the ladies voted for him because he "looked so presidential"-- Two lessons to be learned from this bit of history from the now-gone 20th Century-- all IMO of course-- (1) The best Presidents are not dressed like Adolph Menjou or look like Gray Cooper or Cary Grant-- I am thinking about Harry S. Truman and Dwight Eisenhower and Gerald R. Ford-- they have True Grit and substance-- (2) When women got the right to vote, our Country started down the slow and slippery slope to PITA meddling Liberalism (Eleanor Roosevelt, Gloria Steinheim, the broads who burned their bras and thought that ERA was NOT a baseball term hallowed and revered since Abner Doubleday's era)- and now we are paying that price- just as my Granddad predicted to me when I was 12--Damn shame too!!!

I think you may be on to something,Fox.

Fox, for every bra burning feminist there is some [censored] man doing his best to screw things up as well. IMO you couldn't be more wrong about the problem being that we gave women the vote.

What we did, men more often than women, is forget what courage, hard work and determination will bring the individual and the country. Instead we have generations of both men and women, poorly educated in the way to be successful in life, who expect government to solve their problems. That, and only that, is the problem.

And just as many men contributed to it as women.

In the inner city it is the women who are raising the men and together they are screwing things up with their selfish,ignorant interests guiding their vote.

Not one betterment? How about Obama listing his unprecedented health reform benefits at the White House today? Does that count?

Did those women get pregnant by themselves? With each other? Didn't think so.

In every case there is some guy who doesn't have the mental or ethical wherewithal to understand his responsibility towards a woman he impregnates and the resulting child. That didn't have anything to do with women voting.

It is the women who have the power over the men.All they have to do is withhold/give sex and they can make the ignorant man do their bidding.I think you'll find the women are the ones that see the importance of voting and they're the ones that manipulate the system to keep the families going in the absence of a male bread winner.Even a ghetto queen's mothering instinct will get her to do whatever to raise her child.Look at all the sports stars that thank their mothers for their success when interviewed.

Sorry King, even if we could take him at his word, which you have assured us is not possible. The can so to speak has been kicked down the election road so as to not bite the hand that prints the ponzi money. To this point, there are no, let's say tangible, benefits to ocare other than the obliging press.

Now, if you were actually preparing for the coming ocare hope-n-change, you may find as dem max 'the document drafter' baucus says, it's a train wreck. On this issue of ocare, you might consider (?) tucking your feel goods aside and actually look at what's happening. Then let me know if you would plop a loved one into this system as it stands after he read the prompter today.

You and Fox remind me of all the 60 to 80 year old white men I have met in Canada who complain about the immigrants and multiculturalism and conveniently forget they were the fools who got swept up idolizing our worst Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau and voted him and his Liberal party again and again for most of my life. Not that you actually did it, but you are giving the men who take no responsibility a free pass.

Are you for real? The women have all the power just as long as they withhold sex? Maybe you are a slave to your dick, but I'm not and I know plenty of men who are not. It is an insult to even begin to put that argument forward.

One would think that you'd recognize Obama as a liar and charlatan since you're two of a kind. The law was passed in mid-2008 and they have purposely delayed implementation because they know that what's in it would assure a Dumbocrat slaughter in 2014.

A doctor friend in Calif. who has a private practice and does hospice and palliative visits to elderly and terminally ill patients recently told me that when ObamaCare kicks in, he would leave his office and drive perhaps 20-30 min. to see a patient... then spend perhaps 20-30 minutes examining, diagnosing, and prescribing treatment... then spend another 20-30 min. driving back to his office... and his reimbursement from the Gov't under ObamaCare would be $5.40. He asked me, who in their right mind would continue to provide that care? It wouldn't even cover gas money. Early indications are that ObamaCare will be an enormously costly boondoggle that reduces care for the elderly, will incur huge non-compliance due to loopholes for favored groups, have further non-compliance from the young who would rather pay the penalties than the individual mandate insurance premium, and still leave tens of millions without health insurance. It is wealth redistribution and bureaucracy... something a Socialist like you dreams about. Cut the crap and tell the truth for once.

King, we all know you are enamored with the black man, and you are too dishonest to admit to all of Obama's many flaws. You know the economy of the U.S. is still a mess despite adding more trillions to the debt than any other president. Detroit filed bankruptcy yesterday and many other cities and states aren't far behind. Obama's foreign policy has been a disaster with the Arab Spring losses to radical Islam, Egypt a mess, Tunisia also falling under radical Islam rule, Iran on the verge of nukes, Iraq being lost to the mullahs, Afghanistan being handed over to the Taliban after so much blood and treasure consumed, Snowden and Putin... along with China, Ecuador, Venezuela, Cuba, etc. showing none of the respect you claim we've earned. Puny crowds greeting Obama in Europe, Unemployment still very high but his priorities are expensive taxpayer funded vacations and attacking the Constitutional Rights of gun owners.

You see all of this and tell us it gives you Hope, and that things are better. If your nose grew every time you told a lie, you could use it to plant the Canadian flag on the moon. And as for your Hope... if you Hope in one hand and Shit in the other, guess which will fill up faster?

Has nothing to do with sex or sexual intercourse, lad- Women are not emotionally set to make rational choices under stress as are men- dis-regarding the monthly visits from Auntie Flo-- which also mucks up things like from who laid de rail--

Perhapsd "Kingy" is ambi-dextrous?? Or as the late "Dizzy Dean" from St. Louis said in a radio cast of a 1930's Cards game- "Hey, he can throw with either hand, he's an amphibian-- and King, follow Mrs. Abner Doubleday's advice to her hubby in 1903- "Now, don't take the World Serious"--

"Race hustlers and poverty pimps "

Trayvon was a Thug !

I listen to Mrs. Abner, Fox. Misfires is entertainment, a perfect mirror of the generosity, spite, ignorance of the world; a daily smile.

Canvasback,ghetto men are slaves to their dicks in in disproportionate numbers. I think the number of illegitimate children born to black and hispanic women bears this out.

If Misfires is a microcosm of the world, I think you would represent a Kim Jung Il level of dishonesty and deceit. An idealology that would rather see children starve than admit it's own failures. And maybe even a pathological degeneracy that causes you to be in denial of it.

I don't know about the percentage but demographers know to the minute when whites will not be a majority in North America.

There goes the neighborhood. All along, I thought it was about civility, not the inflexible stereotyping of an elite. March on to your better world, but don't get testy when folks question. Remember you're far superior.

Thanks Fox. At 55 years of age, it's been a while since someone called me lad. Made my day.

While I disagree with you, perhaps I wasn't clear enough about who I was talking to while referencing sex.

In that portion of my post I was specifically responding to RDH45 assertion that large numbers of men have no control over their behaviour in the presence of women.

That part sounded suspiciously like the BS put forward by Islamists and the Taliban as the rational for wrapping women in black bags, beating the shit out of them when they don't behave, charging them with crimes for being raped, killing them for dishonouring the family etc.

I suspect you are more likely to subscribe to the idea of woman as the vessel of temptation and evil as propagated by the RC church for the last several millennia.

You are correct- exception being the Virgin Mary of course.

The reason for much of the famous little head doing the thinking instead of the big head.

Gee, all you have to do is be under 30 and hang around the road houses,honkey tonks, inner city bars,dance halls or anywhere else young,white collar black,white, hispanic or any other color young men and women hang out and see the power that young women have over young men.Used to be there myself and was part of it.I remember a bar in Atikoken,Ontario that used to be a perfect place to see that power too.

RDH45, although its around 900 miles from where I am now, I've spent a little time in Atikoken myself.

My double gun collecting Taliban friends. You have missed my point. It's not that the interest isn't there. It's that MEN forgot that teaching their SONS how to think, how to behave, how to take responsibility, is important. For it is from men that boys learn how to be a man.

It's not women's fault several generations of men, the boomers, propagated a society more interested in the "if it feels good, do it" zeitgeist of sixties and seventies. It is the liberal men who did this. Who have created the dysfunction that we see all around us today.

I agree...and the problem is 70% of blacks are born to and raised by single moms these days....I would think most of them have no idea who their father is.

To a less degree the Hispanics. and even less whites...

And this has followed the trend of having kids out of wedlock...with less thought then is put into what new tv they are going to buy.

hopefully, by now you guys have exhausted all of your venom re the race, crime and social issues, which have little or nothing to do with this tragedy to begin with...

martin was a dumb 17 year old kid, who made a fatal mistake when he repeatedly assaulted a stranger in a strange place, without regard to the possible consequences. zimmermann was a young zealous adult, who should have stayed in his car and waited for the cops to appear. and he should have not been carrying a hand gun on his way to the grocery store. by doing so, he created the scenario that played out to its tragic end.

In my opinion, sometimes ed enters his second childhood here. In this post he acts like a twelve year old boy that runs a stick down his neighbor's fence so their dogs will bark. Y'all can bark if you want to. I am just going to ignore this post.

Hey Ed, you can never have enough venom. Take juror B29, the bomb thrower, for instance. She admits, and luckily so, she followed the law, but she has to mix in he's guilty of murder. What's that got to do with the tragedy, other than she wants in on the pot stirring talk circuit.

Missed that the other day, good post craigd ,its not that the liberals are so condescending and forcing their views on other,they are superior and we should all just sit back and obey !

sum times we cant see da woods fur da trees!

This cuts through the B.S. that this guy was some kind of innocent teenager. The crap that you see or hear coming from the 'mainstream news media" is just that CRAP! It should be clear here to anyone that this guy was from a typically dysfunctional Black "family" of the type that infests every big American city Ghetto. What should or could be done with these people to make them into useful citizens is anyone's guess.
Jim


"How a Miami School Crime Cover-Up Policy Led to Trayvon Martin’s Death
American Spectator, by Robert Stacy McCain – Thanks JK of AK
The February 2012 shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin might never have happened if school officials in Miami-Dade County had not instituted an unofficial policy of treating crimes as school disciplinary infractions.

Martin was not arrested when caught at school with stolen jewelry in October 2011 or with marijuana in February 2012. Instead, the teenager was suspended from school, the last time just days before he was shot dead.

Trayvon Martin was not from Sanford. Martin was from Miami Gardens, more than 200 miles away, and had come to Sanford to stay with his father's girlfriend ** Brandy Green at her home in the townhouse community where Zimmerman was in charge of the neighborhood watch. Trayvon was staying with Green after he had been suspended for the second time in six months from Krop High School in Miami-Dade County, where both his father, Tracy Martin, and mother, Sybrina Fulton, lived.

Both of Trayvon’s suspensions during his junior year at Krop High involved crimes that could have led to his prosecution as a juvenile offender. However, Chief Charles Hurley of the Miami-Dade School Police Department (MDSPD) in 2010 had implemented a policy that reduced the number of criminal reports, manipulating statistics to create the appearance of a reduction in crime within the school system. Less than two weeks before Martin’s death, the school system commended Chief Hurley for “decreasing school-related juvenile delinquency by an impressive 60 percent for the last six months of 2011.” What was actually happening was that crimes were not being reported."
***

**I added the Bold.

Oh and BTW: I'm waiting for comments from the "NO Bullshit Zone" as a parody of that idiot O'Reilly. If anyone on this forum can refute the statements posted above with FACTs feel free to do so.

Anytime I go to the grocery store, gas station, or even walk out of the house I am armed. What the hell's the use of having a CHL if you shouldn't be carrying when you go to the store? Geeez!

gary: too bad about your paranoia...consider that if you were not armed, then you would be less likely to put yourself in a position where you felt you had to shoot someone...course, the violent crime rate in texas is much higher than here in nh. perhaps you have good reason to be paranoid?

I live in NH and carry a gun everywhere I go too Gary.Not paranoid just prepared,if ed wants to go unarmed fine with me but don't criticize me or others for carrying one.
About what I expect from a crooked gun dealer like ed (feel free to add me and I bet most of the others on here to your do not bid on my auctions list btw eddy!)!
This is from the town very near to to ed's ( Francestown).If he wants to keep his head in the sand fine with me

http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local...-home-invasion/
Clown's like this murderer walking around in NH too !

The problem isn't paranoia when there ARE criminals around that ARE armed illegally and have no morals and think nothing of injuring or killing someone over $10.

Since the Owebama administration adn the Justice department really has no desire to do anything to get the criminal element off the streets permanently (they are more busy screwing the White man over some imagined transgression) ...we the citizens have to protect ourselves.

http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130702-905033.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Florida State's Attorney Angela Corey has been indicted by a citizens' grand jury, convening in Ocala, Florida, over the alleged falsification of the arrest warrant and complaint that lead to George Zimmerman being charged with the second degree murder of African-American teenager Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida.

The indictment of Corey, which was handed down last week (see www.citizensgrandjury.com), charges Corey with intentionally withholding photographic evidence of the injuries to George Zimmerman's head in the warrant she allegedly rushed to issue under oath, in an effort to boost her reelection prospects. At the outset of this case, black activists such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who whipped up wrath against Zimmerman, demanded that he be charged with murder, after local police had thus far declined to arrest him pending investigation.

Following Corey's criminal complaint charging Zimmerman, legal experts such as Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz condemned her for falsely signing an arrest affidavit under oath, which intentionally omitted exculpatory evidence consisting of the photographs showing the injuries Zimmerman sustained, and rushing to charge him with second degree murder under political pressure. Dershowitz called her actions unethical and themselves crimes (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge- article-1.1080161).

Thank goodness SOMEONE is being called to task over that witch hunt.

Dunno what the heck a "citizens" grand jury is but I'm pretty sure no Court will prosecute their so called indictment...Geo

If the Demcrat party intends to legalize lynching...then there is no reason to not jump on the bandwagon and take a few of them lefties down.

Or do they think they alone get to do the lynching?

well the KKK did start in the Democratic party-and they now are just keep the blacks in a different plantation then they supported before !

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2309727/posts

The original targets of the Ku Klux Klan were Republicans, both black and white, according to a new television program and book, which describe how the Democrats started the KKK and for decades harassed the GOP with lynchings and threats.

An estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites died at the end of KKK ropes from 1882 to 1964.

The documentation has been assembled by David Barton of Wallbu More..ilders and published in his book "Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White," which reveals that not only did the Democrats work hand-in-glove with the Ku Klux Klan for generations, they started the KKK and endorsed its mayhem.

"Of all forms of violent intimidation, lynchings were by far the most effective," Barton said in his book. "Republicans often led the efforts to pass federal anti-lynching laws and their platforms consistently called for a ban on lynching. Democrats successfully blocked those bills and their platforms never did condemn lynchings."

Further, the first grand wizard of the KKK was honored at the 1868 Democratic National Convention, no Democrats voted for the 14th Amendment to grant citizenship to former slaves and, to this day, the party website ignores those decades of racism, he said.

"Although it is relatively unreported today, historical documents are unequivocal that the Klan was established by Democrats and that the Klan played a prominent role in the Democratic Party," Barton writes in his book. "In fact, a 13-volume set of congressional investigations from 1872 conclusively and irrefutably documents that fact.

As a parting shot to this whole Zimmerman fiasco; here's how blacks tend to look at the Martin situation as explained by a Black Pastor. From my own experiences dealing with Blacks he is 100% right in his assessment. My apologies if this has been posted previously as I have not been reading the threads here on a regular basis.
Jim
Oh and I can about guarantee you WON'T see this video replayed on the evening "news"!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/07/...our-black-eyes/

We don't hear enough from guys like that......only from the Sharpton / Jackson blowhards.

That because the "mainstream news media" doesn't want you to know the truth.
Jim

One of my close relatives was a Klan member in the 20's and hated republicans his whole life.He was very kind and took in a homeless child and raised him as his own and the guy told me that he still reveres him.I never heard him speak against anyone because of their color but he sure hated republicans.

Glad that you live in a crime-free state; however paranoia has nothing to do with it, and insinuations about my personality and my state will not change my opinion about being able to defend myself and family which is the right of every U.S. citizen. You may do as you like concerning defense of self and family and I will not judge you; the flip side of that coin is you have no right to judge or denigrate me because I have a different view. I have had two experiences when traveling in which being armed stopped a situation from getting worse and I didn't have to shoot anyone either time. But then, I obviously don't live in the protective bubble you do, New Hampshire being a helluva long ways from the Mexican border.

Gee, if we compare violent crime rates in NewHampshire in 1968 when Liberal Democrats passed the Gun Control Act of 1968, we see that there were only 10 murders, 19 forcible rapes, 72 robberies, and 178 aggravated assaults.

The numbers in 2011 were: Murders 17, forcible rape 429, robbery 474, and aggravated assault 1558.

Looks like New Hampshire isn't immune to violent crime, and leaving oneself and ones family defenseless in order to prove a point might instead prove dangerous or even fatal.

This bit of info would make for some very good political adds.

keith: your numbers seem to indicate a significant increase in the rate of violent crimes in the state of nh since 1968. however, without including the increase in population in nh since 1968, your statistics are meaningless. we have more people here now than we did in 1968. it stands to reason that we are going to have more violent crimes as well. for your numbers to have merit, you need to include the total population increase to provide a true picture of whats going on here.

and, if you compare nh violent crime statistics per capita with the rest of the country, you will find nh is one of the safest places to live in the country. if I am wrong, please let us know, so we can consider moving there.

and, take a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

Here's a much more unbiased view of murder by race:
Jim



Murder Most Swedish
American Thinker, by Randall Hoven
How is the U.S. like Sweden? In its low murder rate. That is, if you include in the statistics only non-blacks in the U.S. legally.

In 2011, the latest year for which the FBI has published statistics, there were 14,612 cases of "murder and non-negligent manslaughter "in the U.S. That equates to a rate of 4.7 per 100,000 inhabitants. That rate of 4.7 is about average over all countries in the world, but it is high for advanced countries such as those of northern and western Europe. The most recent rates for the UK and France, for examples, are 1.2 and 1.1, respectively.

The U.S. rate of 4.7 is what makes so many people think of the U.S. as a violent place full of guns and gun-crazy cowboys. (Venezuela's rate, by contrast, is 45 per 100,000. It must be those vaqueros.)

The FBI also has some data on the demographics of who commits these murders. The race of the "offender" was known in 10,471 cases. Blacks accounted for 5,486 of them, or 52%.

The statistics are harder to come by for illegal aliens, but in 2011 the Government Accountability Office estimated that 25,064 criminal aliens (interesting choice of words) had been arrested for murder. There are two things we don't know about that number: (1) over how many years, and (2) how many murders were committed by criminal aliens who were not arrested for it? (And (3) was it the murder that made them criminal aliens or were they criminal aliens because they were here illegally?)

Via World Net Daily, "Twelve Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens, according to statistics released by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa."** That amounts to 4,380 per year. That number is not out of line with the GAO's number, given that not all murderers are arrested and given that the arrests reported by the GAO occurred over a number of years.

So let's do the arithmetic: of the 14,612 murders in the U.S. in 2011, about 7,656 were committed by blacks and another 4,380 were committed by illegal aliens. That leaves 2,576 committed by non-black people who are here legally.

In round numbers, there are about 250 million non-blacks in the U.S. legally. So their murder rate is about 1.0 per 100,000, or the same as Sweden's.

It's not the "cowboys" who are doing the killing. In fact, Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming have murder rates significantly lower than the U.S. average. Texas itself is close to average. Illinois, the last state to allow concealed carry and the only state to require a special ID to purchase either guns or ammunition, has an above average rate. (One suspects Chicago’s rate is above Venezuela’s.)

By the way, the statistics say that 99.98% of blacks did not commit murder in 2011. (It’d be interesting to know what the percentage of the 100,000 murders by legal-non-blacks is by leftists.)
If this world did not have professional racists, people would get along a whole lot better
What Do George Zimmerman and Roderick Scott Have

**I guess the idiots in Congress believe that making them legal will somehow reduce this murder rate!!!

ed, the statistics I quoted did include the population of New Hampshire over that time period. All of the violent crimes I cited exceeded the growth of the population. Some, like aggravated assault grew many times overall population growth. That's the one that prompted Zimmerman to pop Trayvon. You are not immune.

I do also know that New Hampshire is one of our lower crime states. And I have stated many times in the past that violent crime in the U.S has dropped in recent years... most likely due to mandatory sentencing laws that keep violent offender behind bars, and concealed carry laws. Do you think that New Hampshire's low crime rate is due to the clean air, or perhaps the make-up of the populace?

keith: according to the link posted above, northern new england, including maine, vermont and nh have the lowest violent crime rates in the country, along with nd. I don't know why. maybe its the cold weather? maybe it is the relatively low rates of poverty that we experience? maybe it is the minimum of densely populated areas? what else could it be? I am glad I do not live in md, sc of fl, which are the states with the highest violent crime rates in the country.

From one of our own!
Jim

Nugent Blasts Stevie Wonder’s ‘Brain-Dead’ Boycott
Clash Daily, by Doug Giles – Thanks Audrey
(Giles cites Puffington Host): Ted Nugent provided a predictably unhinged response to Stevie Wonder’s decision to not perform in Florida after the George Zimmerman verdict. (So we’re gonna correct it): Ted Nugent provided a response to Stevie Wonder’s predictably unhinged decision not to perform in Florida after the George Zimmerman verdict. (There. Isn’t that better?)
“So 700 black people, mostly young children and young people were slaughtered in Chicago last year by black people, and not a peep out of Stevie Wonder. Are you kidding me? What is this, ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’? How brain-dead do you have to be? How strangled by denial, how dishonest, how cheap do you have to be to focus on a clear-cut case where all the evidence, from the DOJ, from the FBI, from the army of investigative specialists in Florida determined that George Zimmerman acted in self-defense against a life-threatening attack by hoodlum, dope-smoking Trayvon Martin?”
Nugent also said that he would pray for “Stevie Wonder and all these other numbnuts who think that Trayvon Martin’s life is more important than the tens of thousands of slaughtered blacks at the hands of blacks.” (For Stevie and all those other numbnuts to come to their senses would be a miracle which, if I’m not mistaken, would qualify Nugent for sainthood.)

Stevie Wonder really is brain dead....let him boycott away....I'd boycott him first....and thats easy....I have no desire to listen to ANY of his shit...on or off the stage.

hey guys, didn't you get the memo? race is over. that's so last week. now its about obs vision for the economy...

WORLD MURDER STATISTICS
From the World Health Organization
The latest Murder Statistics for the world today: Murders per 100,000 citizens.

Honduras 91.6
El Salvador 69.2
Cote d'lvoire 56.9
Jamaica 52.2
Venezuela 45.1
Belize 41.4
US Virgin Islands 39.2
Guatemala 38.5
Saint Kits and Nevis 38.2
Zambia 38.0
Uganda 36.3
Malawi 36.0
Lesotho 35.2
Trinidad and Tobago 35.2
Colombia 33.4
South Africa 31.8
Congo 30.8
Central African Republic 29.3
Bahamas 27.4
Puerto Rico 26.2
Saint Lucia 25.2
Dominican Republic 25.0
Tanzania 24.5
Sudan 24.2
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 22.9
Ethiopia 22.5
Guinea 22.5
Dominica 22.1
Burundi 21.7
Democratic Republic of the Congo 21.7
Panama 21.6
Brazil 21.0
Equatorial Guinea 20.7
Guinea-Bissau 20.2
Kenya 20.1
Kyrgyzstan 20.1
Cameroon 19.7
Montserrat 19.7
Greenland 19.2
Angola 19.0
Guyana 18.6
Burkina Faso 18.0
Eritrea 17.8
Namibia 17.2
Rwanda 17.1
Mexico 16.9
Chad 15.8
Ghana 15.7
Ecuador 15.2
North Korea 15.2
Benin 15.1
Sierra Leone 14.9
Mauritania 14.7
Botswana 14.5
Zimbabwe 14.3
Gabon 13.8
Nicaragua 13.6
French Guiana 13.3
Papua New Guinea 13.0
Swaziland 12.9
Bermuda 12.3
Comoros 12.2
Nigeria 12.2
Cape Verde 11.6
Grenada 11.5
Paraguay 11.5
Barbados 11.3
Togo 10.9
Gambia 10.8
Peru 10.8
Myanmar 10.2
Russia 10.2
Liberia 10.1
Costa Rica 10.0
Nauru 9.8
Bolivia 8.9
Mozambique 8.8
Kazakhstan 8.8
Senegal 8.7
Turks and Caicos Islands 8.7
Mongolia 8.7
British Virgin Islands 8.6
Cayman Islands 8.4
Seychelles 8.3
Madagascar 8.1
Indonesia 8.1
Mali 8.0
Pakistan 7.8
Moldova 7.5
Kiribati 7.3
Guadeloupe 7.0
Haiti 6.9
Timor-Leste 6.9
Anguilla 6.8
Antigua and Barbuda 6.8
Lithuania 6.6
Uruguay 5.9
Philippines 5.4
Ukraine 5.2
Estonia 5.2
Cuba 5.0
Belarus 4.9
Thailand 4.8
Suriname 4.6
Laos 4.6
Georgia 4.3
Martinique 4.2
And ...................

The United States 4.2% !!!!

ALL the countries above America have 100% gun bans.

It might be of interest to note that
SWITZERLAND (not shown on this list)
also has ... NO MURDER OCCURRENCE!
However, SWITZERLAND'S law requires that EVERYONE....

1) Own a gun
2) Maintain Marksman qualifications....regularly
3) "Carry"........a Weapon.

You never hear about this!
GO ON YOU TUBE...ENTER
SWITZERLAND GUN LAWS OR
ANY INFORMATION RELATING TO
SWITZERLAND AND GUNS.

This AMAZING, VERY SMART, GUN POLICY, has been in effect since before Hitler's reign of terror in Europe.
Hitler never considered an attack on
SWITZERLAND soil because of their GUN OWNERSHIPLAWS. He knew the SWISS would defeat his evil, cowardly tactics.

aye chi wa wa...ah don wana liv en ondurous!

ware zacky is cote d'livore? wana make sure ah don go der neder.

Libtards don't have any use for things like facts.....

You are getting more annoying than the Libtard idiots who infest this forum. However in your case there may be mitigating circumstances. Too many hits on the propane torch fumes is believed to cause dementia.

muy possible...

cote d'livore: aka the ivory coast.

ed I wish you would quit snorting methane sewer gas. Your posts were much easier and more enjoyable to read when you were lightly sniffing premium acetylene.

intesting thing I just noticed about the world murder rate statistics: the hotter and more tropical the climate, the higher the murder rate...does this mean that air conditioning saves lives?

would be interesting to know the per capita use of air conditioners in martinique vs say the ivory coast...

Oh and BTW: I keep wondering when the White people in Colorado are going to start rioting over this murder? I'm also awaiting the "outrage" on the part of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton over this probable racially motivated killing. When is E Holder going to start a Federal investigation to see if Mike's civil rights were violated?
This one struck close to home as I personally knew Mike Pinkus.
Jim

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/201..._killing_26.php

Probably not going to happen. Those that are truly upset are too civilized to riot. Many also have no need to loot either.

Don't tell the demo'rats they'll be making us pay for free air conditioners in Ch'icargo to go along with the free cell phones.

They're too high on pot to riot...

jOe is a prophet.

Or an unknowing fan of the late John Denver.

Colorado is now the embodiment of "Rocky Mountain High."