Stand your ground law in Florida

mrskjun(9)July 17, 2013

"African Americans benefit from Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law at a rate far out of proportion to their presence in the state’s population, despite an assertion by Attorney General Eric Holder that repealing “Stand Your Ground” would help African Americans."

Here is a link that might be useful: link

Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Is this thread really necessary?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:57AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

if you don't like the thread...easy...bow out gracefully.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:01AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Why not pidge? Isn't the stand your ground law part of the discussion on several threads right now? The call for repealing it? Are you not interested in who benefits the most from the law? Of course there is scroll on by.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:02AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
tobr24u(z6 RI)

This thread is definitely worthy of consideration as the debate goes forward across the nation...

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:36AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

It does not matter who "benefits" from a bad law. A bad law is a bad law. This law promotes and protects lawlessness therefore it should be repealed.

People who step over the line in moments of stress or fear should be judged on the individual merits of the case at hand.

This nation is a nation founded on law but we would be better off if politicians did not feel they have to continuously craft new laws particularly when there are already laws in place to govern a particular circumstance. .

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 8:01AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

".... whose 20-year-old African-American client Earl Jackson was found not guilty of murder but was convicted on lesser charges after a 2009 gang shootout in a Tallahassee parking lot that left an innocent bystander dead.

Then-19-year-old African American Tony Hayward of Palm Beach County also benefited from the “Stand Your Ground” defense when he was acquitted in the shooting death of 22-year old Jyron Miles.

“Besides the shooter’s word and a grainy surveillance video, jurors had little to go on when deciding if Tony Hayward was defending his life when he shot and killed Jyron Miles, 22. Hayward, then 19, and his father were delivering newspapers when Miles appeared at about 3 a.m., according to newspaper reports. They said Miles aggressively demanded ‘is you straight?’ a phrase sometimes used to see if someone has drugs,” according to the Tampa Bay Times database. “The father and son said Miles then reached for what they thought was a gun, so the teen fired. The video did not show whether Miles had a gun, but police did not find one when they arrived…At his second trial in early 2011, Hayward was acquitted. His public defender argued that Hayward was standing his ground during the confrontation.”

The best known African American associated with Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law is Marissa Alexander, who was prevented from invoking the law after firing a warning shot to protect herself from her abusive ex-husband. Alexander, who had no prior criminal record, was sentenced to 20 years in prison, and her case has become an important cause for supporters of the law. Alexander was prosecuted by Angela Corey, the same state attorney who lost the Zimmerman case."

So, we have a gang-banger shoot out, and since the one left standing felt his life was in danger, he walks. Next case, we have a guy who shoots someone asking for drugs, w/o a gun, just because he's afraid. No problem.

But the lady who fired a warning shot got 20 years. Now, if she'd just shot the guy, she'd be ok.

Yes, those African Americans sure are benefiting from a great law.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 10:27AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

It's a "get out of jail free" card, in my opinion... a ticket to murder at your discretion... as described in the thread already responding to this ludicrous law. See link below.

The law has no real merit as there are already laws in play that deal with self defense and murder.

"...we would be better off if politicians did not feel they have to continuously craft new laws particularly when there are already laws in place to govern a particular circumstance."

It would be time better spent if politicians tackled the problems we already face, instead of constantly trying to add ridiculous notions to the roll call of laws already in effect.

Here is a link that might be useful: SYG - A Ticket to Murder at Your Discretion

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 1:07PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

So, Mrskj, it's your thoughtfully composed subject - what do YOU think about it? I am very curious to hear your thoughts on this, if you offer them of course.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 1:52PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

The studies I have seen that compare homicide rates before and after SYG were enacted , suggest otherwise. Common sense suggests otherwise. More guns means more death.

We don't need more people carrying weapons and we certainly do not need to empower them with immunity for being trigger happy.

This post was edited by heri_cles on Wed, Jul 17, 13 at 13:57

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 1:56PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

mylab, what I do know is thirty states have the stand your ground law. As far as I know, up until the Zimmerman case, it has not been in question. I would question why it is now, since it was never part of the defense in this case.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:02PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

Thats a pretty broad definition of 'stand your ground' laws and what they have in Florida.

Thirty states have passed legislation that say you don't first have a duty to try and flee.

Florida says that all you have to do is "reasonably" think your life is in danger, and then you can shoot. Like the guy approached at night by an unarmed drug addict in your OP link. Boom. Okey dokey. Off ya go. Or two gang bangers shooting it out. Okey dokey, off ya go.

Colorado has a "make my day" law, where if someone has broken into your house, or is in the process of breaking into your house, you can shoot 'em.

And what happens more often than not in these cases is some drunk gets the wrong street, starts pounding on the door of what he thinks is his place, breaks a window, and gets shot. Or my favorite, the cops get the wrong address, start to break down the door, get shot at, then shoot the home owner. Win win all around.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:12PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I'm not against the gun carry... just the idea that people can use them with impunity.

Not to bring up another subject, but I really do wish that all 50 states carried the same laws with regard to firearm ownership and use.

Not everyone is a good candidate to be carrying a concealed weapon, and I think that, sadly, SYG laws show us just how many people fit that category.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:16PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

As far as I know

That's a really big qualifier, and makes any discussion purely conjecture in the absence of solid facts.

Also necessary for a meaningful discussion is the similarities and differences of the state laws -- as David has illustrated above.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:18PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

From Wiki

"More than half of the states in the United States have adopted the Castle doctrine, stating that a person has no duty to retreat when their home is attacked. Some states go a step further, removing the duty of retreat from other locations. "Stand Your Ground", "Line in the Sand" or "No Duty to Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. Under such laws, there is no duty to retreat from anywhere the defender may legally be.[1] Other restrictions may still exist; such as when in public, a person must be carrying firearms in a legal manner, whether concealed or openly."

okey dokey?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:50PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

" Stand Your Ground", "Line in the Sand" or "No Duty to Retreat" laws thus state that a person has no duty or other requirement to abandon a place in which he has a right to be, or to give up ground to an assailant. "

Too bad Trayvon wasn't granted that same privilege when he confronted his aggressor.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:52PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Brings us back to Pidge's original this thread necessary? Since SYG is already being discussed on many other threads, including it's own, what differentiates this thread from them? Mrsk, tell us what is your intetention, motivation and your opinion (not just a cut and paste from the internet) so we will know what you want to discuss that makes it need its own thread.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 2:52PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Sorry epi, you couldn't read the OP, or you just didn't understand it?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:05PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

Because the op article is about how this helps blacks - more than even whites!!!

Which I find patently absurd. What is the OP article about, laundry detergent?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:08PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Because YOU find it patently absurd david, would certainly refute the claims I'm sure.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:12PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Too bad Trayvon wasn't granted that same privilege when he confronted his aggressor.

Isn't that the truth. Chances are had he been white he would have been given the same privilege.

Why would anyone with a chance to retreat from what they perceive to be a dangerous situation, choose to stand their ground and shoot someone? What kind of person decides that they would rather kill than walk away?


    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:20PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

That question could also be asked of Trayvon ann. He was almost home. Why didn't he just go home. Why did he wait and confront Zimmerman? I don't think Zimmerman had the chance to retreat when someone was sitting on his chest banging his head on the cement. It was a terrible tragedy, no one has ever said it wasn't. But none of us know what we would have done in the same situation.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:27PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

A voice of intelligent reason...thank you Chase.

Some people can be trusted to use sound judgement when carrying a concealed (or unconcealed) weapon. It is not possible to test for this incredibly important trait. But the back history can often lead to a logical conclusion. Too bad the angry, self appointed neighborhood cop - Zimmerman - wasnt more carefully examined for a history demonstrating sound reaction, calm demeanor and good judgement because that careful background check would have had him armed with exactly the weapon necessary for his own safety if he was intent upon arming up and going on a hunt for punk criminals wearing a hoodie while buying candy.

Pepper spray.

Of course, if Z had shot Travon Martin in the face with it for "looking suspicious" and Martin's parents sued Z on behalf of their innocent minor child, that would have been an interesting case- much more winnable.
But shooting that same child to death? - Not so much.

Parents living anywhere near Z: keep your teen appearing kids indoors.
Z is out, was given back his gun and feels himself actually innocent of any wrong doing. An appalling number of citizens in this country agree with him, giving him even more confidence and self assurance that he is needed as a self appointed and armed up neighborhood 'cop'.
Of course, as far as all of those faceless citizens are aware, he isnt armed up and trolling for suspicious punks in THEIR neighborhood.
So there's that.

However- They better hope that no local neighborhood Z wannabe has been watching CNN non stop. A lot of Z supporters with teens and teen grand kids better hope not, either.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:27PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Why didn't he just go home.

I've always heard that if you're being followed you should not let the stalker know where you live.

Why is this advice being turned on its head now?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:35PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Mrsk, you keep missing the fact that Trayvon was innocently walking home from the store with his can of ice tea and his bag of skittles. Had Zimmerman minded his own business, that young man would be alive today. Like the juror, you bought into Zimmerman's story. The fact that you want to keep blaming the real victim speaks volumes.


    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:45PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Why didn't he just go home

Did you ever stop to think that maybe Martin was standing HIS ground? Here's some crazy looking person stalking him and he has no idea what to do. For all we know, he may have tried to run away and Zimmerman decided not to let him. Remember his phrase "they always get away".

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 3:54PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

For all we know Zimmerman jumped Martin from behind. The back of Martin's head smack Zimmerman in the nose as Martin tried to recover from being jumped, Zimmerman fell backwards, slamming his own head into cement.

Then Zimmerman lost the fight and so resorted to murdering Martin.

It is the most plausible scenario given Zimmerman's history of violence ( attacking a police officer, getting an order of protection against him, being fired for being to rough as a bouncer)

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:06PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Sorry epi, you couldn't read the OP, or you just didn't understand it?

More unneccessary snark and addtitional cut and paste but little else. You seem to know little about your own topic except from what you can copy. My questions remain as do others that are still unanswered.

I don't think Zimmerman had the chance to retreat when someone was sitting on his chest banging his head on the cement.

Zimmerman had the chance to retreat long before this. He was already following Martin for quite a while and the police had already been contacted not to mention JZ's point about JZ's right to stand his ground..

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

You know what I think. I think we don't need a judicial system. Everyone can just grab their little white hoods and mete out the justice they think someone deserves.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:20PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

As long as Florida is a Stand Your Ground state, all visitors should be issued temporary permits and pistols for the duration of their stay in the Sunshine State.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:25PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Embothrium(USDA 8 Sunset 5 WA)

Known loose cannon chases after kid despite being told not to by police and blows him away. Doesn't matter what details of encounter were, other than the fact that the unarmed party was shot and killed by the armed party.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:26PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
david52 Zone 6

Bu bu but 55 % of black people where able to successfully use the SYG defense, compared to 53% of whites!

So its all good, amitrite?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:34PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
kimka(Zone 6B)

Here's the basic fact: You can SAY anything you want to anyone. They can SAY anything they want back at you. That's called free speech. The first one to make a physical move opens themself up to the other person citing SYG law and retaliating with as much violence as they feel necessary.

Then the prosecution has to prove it was not a fearsome threat.

This is why Zimmerman was not convicted. The prosecution could not prove Zimmerman made the first physical contact. And in this country presumption of innocence goes to the defendent, pretty much. This would have appled even without SYG. With SYG, the jury got it right, no matter how distasteful you find it personally or how you "feel" about Zimmerman's motives.

Like it or not, Zimmerman had as much right to walk behind Martin and say anything he wanted. That is not where the legal burden lies or laid.

Good law, good trial...NOT. But that's the way the court system works. I'm not sure I'd want to change it, although I think SYG needs to amended..

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:36PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

States you do not want to visit.

States that Already Have Stand Your Ground Laws (31)

◾North Carolina
◾North Dakota
◾New Hampshire
◾Rhode Island
◾South Carolina
◾South Dakota
◾West Virginia

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:42PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Stand your ground, or The Castle Doctrine states a person may justifiably use force in self defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat without an obligation to retreat first. This concept is also exists in common law and statutory law. I read it to apply to one who is on his own property, or his place of safety? His place of safety could be about anyplace he may be present? If Martin had not attacked Zman, he would be alive today. He made the made bad judgement of attacking Zman, evidence shows that.
Before the Castle law, I would be required to retreat to the furthest place of my home before using deadly force. So, while I hide in the attic, the creep sets fire to my home and I die but he goes home with my loot? I am not a fan of Zman but he was protecting his own life as he was given the right to do by his creator, and by law.
Obviuosly, the kid was NOT standing his ground, he was the attacker. Zman too made bad choices and he will pay forever for them.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:50PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

MsK, your statement - 31 states have stand-your-ground laws - seems to be contradicted by your cut-and-paste from wiki regarding 'castle doctrine' and other variations of 'no duty to retreat.'

While you are classifying all 31 as 'stand your ground' your previous source makes a distinction between 'castle doctrine' and 'stand your ground.'

This is but one example of how any meaningful discussion of a topic is sabotaged by the need for a put down.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 4:58PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

no one likes to admit using wiki, Nancy
and the castle doctrine is highly different than "stand your ground".

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 5:05PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Obviously, the kid was NOT standing his ground, he was the attacker.

And you know this HOW?


    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 5:09PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Mrskjun said:

I would question why it (SYG) is now, since it was never part of the defense in this case.

You must not have followed this case at all, or maybe you should straighten out Juror B37 on that.

And given that fact that you do not know what this case was about, why are you injecting race into SYG considerations? The racial issue that was of concern to people was the racial profiling that allegedly occurred when Zimmerman decided to follow , pursue, and confront a person for no reason other than:

1.) he looked like he was on drugs or something, up to no good. (not a legitimate reason on its face and interstingly, never questioned by the police dispatcher , attn. Eric Holder)
2.) the color of his skin

You should also check on the homicide rates since the various States passed SYG. Guess what? In Florida as in most other States it looks to me like the homicides have gone up.

Here is a link that might be useful: SYG , Mrskjun and Juror B37

This post was edited by heri_cles on Wed, Jul 17, 13 at 17:27

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 5:18PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

the castle doctrine is highly different than "stand your ground"

Let's hope that MsKjun sees your post; that's three disputing her conflating 'castle doctrine' with 'stand your ground.'

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 5:21PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

It is not clear mrskjun, that blacks benefit from SYG or, for that matter , that anyone benefits from it other than gun slingers.
Do you think Trayvon Martin or his mother benefited from the law?

Here is a link that might be useful: Blacks DO NOT benefit from SYG

This post was edited by heri_cles on Wed, Jul 17, 13 at 17:40

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 5:39PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

The list says states with "stand your ground" laws nancy. Refute it if you choose.

But Zimmerman's defense didn't rely on Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law in court and instead simply argued that Zimmerman killed 17-year-0ld Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

Here is a link that might be useful: link

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:08PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

that's not where the list came from. that link had no list, and names 22 states , not the 31 you listed earlier.

that's really pathetic

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:16PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Stupid law needs to be changed. As long as you KILL someone and there are no witnesses, you can claim you were protecting yourself.

Of course it helps if the police *presume* you are innocent; do not preserve the crime scene; remember how it went the last time they charged the judge's son.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:21PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Refute it if you choose.

You already refuted your second cut-and-paste with your first cut-and-paste from wiki.

Or are we to assume that you didn't read what you copied from wiki? That would be the logical explanation as to why you are contradicting yourself.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Not contradicting myself nancy. I read the first this morning...and then later today when people were talking about not going to states with stand your ground laws, I went looking for a list of those states, and that's what I found. Would you like for me to put on a hair shirt?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 6:46PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Would you like for me to put on a hair shirt?

Please check your sources and information - perhaps even read what you intend to post before hitting 'submit.'

It's not as if this hasn't happened before.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:04PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

And it's not as if it might not happen again. Ms. Perfect title is held by those who feel as if they can castigate others.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:08PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

That's the adult thing to do when your caught either lying or making a mistake is to apologize. Most everyone who makes an honest mistake apologizes for it.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:14PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Ms. Perfect title is held by those who feel as if they can castigate others.

Not that I am perfect nor are the others that note the contradictions in what you post. For myself it's simply that I embarrass easier than you do. I would be mortified if I posted some of the bloopers that I see here, so I try to be diligent in checking various sources, etc.

You know that you did invite the castigation -- I'd call it advice, especially if would like others to take your comments seriously -- with your snark instead of simply admitting that the two cut-and-pastes that you chose contradicted each other.

I'm off this merry-go-round as well.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:16PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Roughseas, since you want to jump in here, let me explain. What I posted this morning was in regards to how blacks were affected by the stand your ground law in Florida. Nothing at all to do with the number of states who have the law. I only posted the link to show where I got the OP from. Later today I looked for a list of states that have the stand your ground law, which is what I posted. So, I have nothing to apologize for. But if you want to pile on and join in the false allegations, have at it.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:24PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

castle law is common law and speaks of self defense in the castle(home). SYG law removes common law requirements to retreat outside of your home when there is reasonable belief you are going to be attacked or fell upon.
What is not sane and sensible about that? I always have the right to protect myself, that right is from no government and no government can remove that most basic right. However, if you choose to not defend yourself, that is also your right. Zman is proof its better to be judged by 6 than carried by 6.

The trial tells me that Martin was the aggressor.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:40PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

no it doesn't . By florida law if zimmerman started the fight, but felt his life was at risk, he had the right to murder the unarmed teen.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:42PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Well heck Roughseas, you can choose not to visit 22 states or 31 states. Whatever floats your boat. I actually found a site that said 8 more states have legislation going forward to enact the stand your ground law. omg...that's different too...I'm so embarrassed.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 7:52PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

These Statistics show that African Americans do not benefit more from SYG laws.

In fact there is a substantial difference.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 8:58PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

mrskjun said:
But Zimmerman's defense didn't rely on Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law in court and instead simply argued that Zimmerman killed 17-year-0ld Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

First of all, even before trial, Zimmerman was allowed to go free for 6 weeks because of SYG law. The Police dropped the ball on investigating this case and potentially lost evidence while Zimmerman honed his syg defense.

SYG law was argued by OMeara, namely that Zimmerman had the right to shoot to kill but no duty to retreat before killing (as would have been his duty under pre SYG self defense law)

The Juror stated very plainly how she and other jurors decided the case. Read her interview with Anderson Cooper at the link.

If you still believe that SYG was not necessary that is your prerogative, but that is not what happened after his arrest, during the trial, with the jury instructions or with this verdict.
The Prosecution could not argue that Zimmerman had a duty to retreat instead of to just shoot to kill because under SYG law, he didn't. THAT is the main difference in self defense and SYG self defense. Kapish?

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 9:11PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

why should Zimmerman have retreated to begin with? He was on his own turf. Martin had moved away towards his fathers but decided to go back and confront Zimmerman and get into a physical altercation which resulted in Zimmerman being forced to defend himself. Where were the civil rights of martin abused? He was the attacker. Wouldn't any reasonable person see fit to protect himself? That is the natural instinct of any animal including humans.

I believe I read that blacks, by percentage, do benefit most from syg laws in Fla. The court cases involving the law are the proof.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 9:25PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

No, he did not live there....and didn't even know the names of the three streets.

Nobody here has said Martin's civil rights were "abused."
He was killed by a wannabe cop who had no justification for tracking him along the street in his car, getting out of his car and pursuing him. If you choose to believe that Martin attacked him that/s fine but there was zero evidence about who first attacked whom. Zimmerman's self serving narrative prevailed over, well nothing.

I believe I read that blacks, by percentage, do benefit most from syg laws in Fla.

I bet you have because there is a huge push back by the NRA and pro-gun groups now to try to maintain SYG laws. So, don't believe everything you read. Same goes to mrskjun.
The notion that anyone is benefited from a law that permits someone to execute another based on their own internal fear (or rather, their claim of fear) without a duty to consider any alternative to killing, is plainly ridiculous.

Pro-life / Pro Gun people are caught once again in their enduring hypocrisy about the value of human life.

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 11:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Does anyone really believe that Zimmerman had absolutely no alternative but to shoot Trayvon in the heart at point blank range? Do you believe he ever identified himself as he was in the car driving next to him and staring Trayvon down or at any other time? Trayvon saw him so what was the point of not identifying himself when he was in his car? Why did he pursue Trayvon on foot. What crime did Zimmerman see him commit as Trayvon walked down the sidewalk? The ONLY answer to that seems to be that he was a black teen and Zimmerman therefore concluded that "these azzholes always get away"? It was that racial profile and that alone that cause d Zimmerman to begin an armed pursuit on foot.

How much of Zimmerman's bulsh1t fairy tale can you swallow in one helping? Wait, Zimmerman followed him but you know, for some unstated reason he just decided to go back to his car and gave up the pursuit when Trayvon attacked him. Do you really believe Trayvon grabbed for his gun while he had it holstered and , according to Zimmerman's tale told him "something like you're gonna die tonight m-fer"?
Oh right, then Zimmerman wrestled the gun free but still being under attack and fearing for his life, well he just had to shoot Trayvon through the heart.

The verdict was a travesty of justice, a snow job by a little pip squeak cop wannabe. His tall tale of self defense is so unbelievable that it is ludicrous.

This post was edited by heri_cles on Thu, Jul 18, 13 at 0:02

    Bookmark   July 17, 2013 at 11:19PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I believe his self defense mechanism was real, he did fear for his life. The whole event was a cluster flop which could have been prevented at several points. Zimmerman should be held accountable but not for murder. And he will pay a price for his poor decision making forever.
But the bottom line is people do have a right and responsibility for self preservation. Some will always turn the other cheek and may pay for that with their life. others will use their instincts for self preservation. The strong and the weak will prevent the gene pool from going too far in either direction .

    Bookmark   July 18, 2013 at 10:42AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Follow the money trail in legislation, and it all becomes obvious... link at bottom of post.

Or, this one...,_Prisons,_Crime,_and_Immigration

Or, any number of other links easily searched that tell the story of how Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground laws were instituted, where the influence and/or funding originates, and who wants to push such changes through our legislative system into law.

Are SYG laws the newest "racist institution"?

There's a lot of evidence out there suggesting that Stand Your Ground laws are not beneficial to society in any way, shape, or form.

Here is a link that might be useful: The Unholy Trinity

    Bookmark   July 18, 2013 at 10:46AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Zimmerman was diagnosed with some malady and was prescribed Adderall and was taking it according to the medical report that accompanied the examination of his nose a few weeks, I think, after the shooting.

Perhaps there should be a law which requires temporary suspension of a gun license before certain medications (including anti-depressant drugs) are dispensed.

I think Zimmerman may not have been mentally stable based on the strange decision he made to break off a trip to target to follow a kid for no reason other than his color and if not that what? Also recall Zimmerman conniving with his wife to take money in violation of a Court Order, all done from a prison phone. Then consider his utter lack of remorse and the strange demeanor he maintained through the trial and earlier during the Hannity interview.
Is it normal for a 27 year old to be a volunteer neighborhood watchmen outside his own neighborhood?
He was not authorized to act in that capacity by that neighborhood association, was he ?

This post was edited by heri_cles on Sat, Jul 20, 13 at 15:31

    Bookmark   July 18, 2013 at 2:58PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I 100% agree with the medication thing. But I guess we know what that would entail when the govt and beurocracy become involved. How to make it workable w/o tramping on the rights of others. There just seems to be too many variables and unworkable situations when political correctness and rights are involved. Yeh, I don't think Zman is a total package. But he was obviously normal enuff to get a carry permit?

    Bookmark   July 18, 2013 at 5:46PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

mrskjun, if I stand my ground and die as a result, the benefit to me is doubtful - to say the least!
To my mind, the SYG law heavily favors the survivor.
In a recently concluded case, the SYG, Gated Community and Neighborhood Watch, all of which are in place for the protection of those within, came together in a terrible tragedy.

    Bookmark   July 18, 2013 at 6:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I agree, Fancifowl... except I wonder how difficult or how easy it is to get carry permits in different states?

Illinois has fairly strict laws compared to laws elsewhere.

Perhaps persons who do take certain medications should be required to renew permits more often? Might that be helpful?

    Bookmark   July 19, 2013 at 12:41PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

My legal right to drive a car changes with a change in my eyesight and so does my right to drive while taking certain medications-I cant drive 'under the influence" in other words. Crafting laws to cover the same sort of situations with the right to carry a gun would be easy.

    Bookmark   July 19, 2013 at 2:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Not only easy, but much safer for the general population... though, there are already laws in place that speak to firearm use while under the influence... plus, it's not always those who are legally able to carry guns that do carry them, and those guns are not always legal.

Let's go back for second and ask why Zimmerman failed in becoming the one thing he wanted to be, a police officer? Did he fail the psychological part of the exam? And if so, why was he granted a permit to carry concealed?

Here we have a person who failed the tests necessary to become a police officer, took on the position of neighborhood watch, overrides police authority, and plays out some law enforcement fantasy scenario in stalking, and eventually shooting his prey.

Something is definitely not quite right...

And to add insult to injury, as it were, it sure looks mighty odd that a Rick Scott appointed special prosecutor, with a questionable record, does not use all the evidence at her disposal to prove the case... while purely circumstantial evidence is used to sway the jurors decision.

And the first juror to go on record post-trial lets us know exactly why the jury decided as it did.

As far as I can tell, quite a few things don't add up...

    Bookmark   July 19, 2013 at 6:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I don't think it would be so easy. Rights are not privileges, and autos are not weapons, normally. I am legally blind and on pain meds, as needed. I still can drive but limited. I am not as proficient at driving as I was but my shooting capabilities are as good as ever.
This whole affair is not about the shooting, it is another quest to limit the rights of gun owners.
My state, PA, is a shall issue state as are many. In others words we live by the rule that we are innocent until proven guilty. Not a perfect system but the way it should be.

    Bookmark   July 19, 2013 at 10:21PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

"Rights are not privileges, and autos are not weapons..."

That is true.

I believe certain laws do already address being "under the influence" in public, and though I don't know what the actual charge would be, I can't imagine it's legal to operate a firearm while "under the influence", whether alcohol or drugs.

Personally, I don't have a problem with certain firearm related laws. I just wish that all 50 states were on the same page.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 7:33AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

" I am legally blind and on pain meds, as needed."

Yet you drive? You are able to shoot a firearm as well as you ever did? All, legally?
Please explain those two situations: legally blind but yet a good, licensed driver, a good and safe shot. If you already have in the past, I missed it.
I dont understand the complexities underscored within that statement.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 1:34PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Sure would scare the heck out of me if I was driving on the same road as you are, ff, and I can't imagine being near you and one of your beloved firearms.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 3:13PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

It's my contention that many people do not fully understand chronic pain, nor do they understand the effects of the many medications that help control it.

Most people who live with intense chronic pain are more or less forced to take some sort of medication in order to live a somewhat normal life. These persons do not get high from their medications. In fact, in many cases, most medications do not even adequately mask the pain.

Most people immediately think of the effect a low dose narcotic medicine has on them, one that they are not used to taking. This is not the same effect.

My husband has a perfect driving record and has been a chronic pain patient for over two decades. He is in no way impaired by the use of his prescribed medications.

I suspect Fancifowl is much the same...

My husband is also completely colorblind, yet he drives and shoots with ease, and has no restrictions.

Do we even know what the label of "legally blind" means? I would assume it makes Fancifowl a more conscientious and careful driver than many others on the roadways. I'm actually more ill at ease with those who drive while texting.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 3:56PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Jodi, I'm not criticizing ff for needing pain meds--I know folks in the same boat as you and perhaps him as well.

But no one I know who is legally blind drives without some restrictions and I really would not want to be around a legally blind person who had a firearm. Actually, I don't want to be around people who carry firearms, period.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 4:10PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

My low peripheral vision plus no sight in the right eye makes be legally blind. I nebver drive near dusk, never on major hiways . Had an accident when I was 16, 50 years ago.
Shooting is an whole other ballgame. I do not hunt except on my own property and do most shooting on the range. When my vision was very bad I could still shoot as good as most. but that was different. I learned to point shoot revolvers at target. Some times I couldn't really see the target but could still hit it 9 out of 10 times. This was not shooting for accuracy as I now do. I was very happy to be able to continue my favorite hobby/sport. A lot of disabled people must give up their hobbies.
Yeh, my pain meds don always kick the pain and I don't get stoned. I don't take them every day either. I know when to do things and when not. As a conservative, I have common sense. lacking in a hell of a lot of people.

I knocked off 9 wood chucks so far this week, 1 shot, 1 kill. There is one wily devil Ive missed now 4 times. Hes a wise bugger, never feeds without his eyes towards the barn, but Ive got a good plan for him! Its hard to hit em on a dead run while Im using 1 shot in the magazine.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 5:05PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

"Legally blind" means that your corrected vision is 20/200 in your better eye.
I have to say that I would not be comfortable riding in a car going down the road at 65mph with someone who is legally blind.
I also know what it is like. My right eye is 20/250. My left eye, however, is 20/20.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 5:14PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Jodi, although I realize I confused my question by including the quote re pain medication, that actually had nothing to do with my question to ff - the question had to do with being legally blind but self assured of being safe while using a firearm. That question has now been answered by him.

Do I recall correctly ff that you have stated in the past that you sometimes also carry a handgun along with the license giving you the right to do so? Perhaps I remember incorrectly?

This is an interesting situation. I cant imagine that any thinking person would agree that ff would be safe using any firearm with vision which renders him to be legally blind, but because I realize Im not fair any longer regarding this subject since the Sandyhook murders of small children and the resulting reaction of gun owners - so what I think I will do is pose the situation to the group we often barbeque with and socialize with.

All are conservatives, all are gun owners, hunters, some collectors and all who own a firearm also for the purposes of home protection. I think it could be assumed Id get a reasonable response from them concerning safety with the handling of firearms while considered legally blind, especially since I will print this out and allow them to read it rather than quote, probably incorrectly, from memory.

It will be interesting, regardless the response especially if the group dont have a problem with it.

I will get back to this thread with the responses but it might be several weeks since many are on their holiday right now. Ill bookmark this thread so I wont have to start a brand new one and will report the consensus of conservatives who are hunters, gun owners and don't have a dog in the hot topics forum of the various personalities and conflicts.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 7:15PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Frank, from 1974 until aboyut 1993-4 my left eye was 20/200 corrected while the right was 20/20. Then the problems(retinal) began in the right which was eventually lost totally. That was a bummer for sure. its when I began to learn to point shoot with a spotter. It was no fun. Then, the docs were able to remove a worsening cataract in the left, an implant was inserted and , 20/40 now. I don't require any magnification when shooting handguns, I do use a red/green dot scope tho. I do have to use magnification for rifle shooting, normally 12 to 24 power with a large objective. The down side is, I haven't used my point shoot skills so they are not up to par. I shoot with several visually impaired shooters, all are crack shots. Handling guns over a life time hones skills that some, especially here it seems, don't u8nderstand and would prefer to just condemn from ignorance, I guess?

Its a very rare circumstance that I carry a weapon for protection but rest assure, I am well qualified and able to use it, and I know what it would take for me to even think about its use. Not having side vision is not the handicap a non shooter might understand. I speed shoot(handguns) where targets are located to both sides and quick, accurate action is required. I don't excel at it but do hold my own.

Hey, do your little survey of your friends, some might be more that the casual deer whackers who shoot maybe 3-5 rounds per year?? I shoot , I dunno, sometimes 100 per week sometimes. I spend a lot of time developing loads for different rifles/revolvers. That requires a lot of testing different bullets, powders and loads for each weapon and each use of that weapon.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 9:00PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Ff, I assure you they are proficient in several sorts of hunting firearms and hunting weapons - and all Im aware of reload their own bullets and belong to shooting clubs with both indoor and outdoor ranges, along with competitions in and out of state. As are most hunters I have ever known.
I will cut the last remarks you made out of the print out in order for them to be more willing to give their honest take rather than altogether dismissive remarks regarding one self acknowledged legally blind weapons owner and carrier who still considers himself fully capable of safely firing weapons.

Mostly because Im actually, worriedly interested in how they really think regarding your situation - without their perceptions naturally colored by your own latest remarks.

Unless you want them to see the remarks and think them pertinent, in which case Ill gladly print out the whole thing for a fully comprehensive evaluation of who's personality and eyesight is behind the trigger finger.

But, Id rather not.

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 9:32PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

You are blowin smoke . I kinda thought ya were, now I am positive. Have fun with yer little caper! Feel free to show these imaginary folks anything ya want!! You have totally discredited any thing you've ever written or ever will. Heck, this aint my 1st turkey shoot!

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 10:47PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

BILL MOYERS: I heard you say earlier that the real winners in the Florida tragedy are the NRA and the gun industry. How so?

TOM DIAZ: Well, for two reasons, I think. One, it, in their eyes validates the whole concept of this, what they call Stand Your Ground law. Look, Zimmerman stood his ground and nothing bad happened to him, so that validates the idea that you're going to need these things to protect yourself. Secondly, it increases the market which is what ultimately this is all about. Now they have a case to say, don't you wish you had one of these things in your pocket if some guy was beating your head in the sidewalk? So, one hand reinforces the other.

BILL MOYERS: The conservatives are claiming that Stand Your Ground was not a factor in this case. The "National Review Online” says the media is quote, "inventing reasons to blame the verdict on Florida's gun laws,” when in fact the Stand Your Ground law wasn't even used in Zimmerman's defense.

TOM DIAZ: It wasn't used technically, that I would agree with. But the Stand Your Ground law changed the circumstances in Florida, under which a person might go about armed as did Zimmerman. And so that even if the lawyers, I think quite wisely the defense lawyers, chose not to make this an issue, it encouraged the kind of carrying of weapons and the thought that, well, I can use this. The law of self-defense which goes back to ancient times to the Talmud, it's absolutely clear that a person who's being threatened, whose own life is being threatened as the right, the moral, ethical, legal right to if necessary kill a person trying to kill them, that's not a question.

What we did develop though in our common law were restraints about when you might use that. One had a duty to retreat generally, avoid violence if you can. Why take another human life if there's a way out of the conflict? There was an exception to that, and that was in one's own home. This is the so-called Castle doctrine. That's where the word, the phrase, stand your ground, came into legal significance.

If you're in your own home and I come in and clearly are going to do you harm, you have no duty to retreat. If necessary you can take my life. What's happened here is that the NRA, Marion Hammer, and the people in Florida and gun advocates generally have twisted this language so that now they've taken this concept of stand your ground into the public space. And they've tried to say, well, the law hasn't changed. In fact the law has changed. It was very carefully crafted to reduce mayhem, to reduce the chance that somebody's going to be killed and now turned into a situation that practically begs for someone to be killed if I feel threatened.

BILL MOYERS: Do you think this is what happened to George Zimmerman?

TOM DIAZ: Yes, I have to say I don't think George Zimmerman is a victim, I think he was a tool.


TOM DIAZ: He was the perfect marketing target of the gun industry, small handgun carried around, if you're going to buy, no pun intended, at Target, which was apparently his destination, don't you need your gun to protect yourself? This is exactly what the NRA and the gun industry want to do because it increases sales. And there's a whole, within the industry themselves they talk about how wonderful this concealed carry, Stand Your Ground laws are for selling small handguns exactly like Zimmerman had.

BILL MOYERS: But there are dangerous people out there, they will tell you that.

TOM DIAZ: We have known there are dangerous people since medieval times. And we've understood there's a problem. And we've said you can defend yourself when necessary. That hasn't changed one bit. What has changed is the mix so that we now have people going around with more deadly weapons.

It's something that I think that most average Americans simply have no understanding of the mindset of the diminishing number of people who own firearms and who own them specifically to carry out on the street, nevertheless they have a mindset. And that mindset is danger lurks everywhere and you better have your gun to protect yourself.

Goes to the extreme of having, you need a gun in your bathroom because what if you're going to the bathroom and your gun is in the living room. You need a gun in your ankle because suppose your drop your gun that you carry in your waist. This is not an exaggeration. I read regularly the fan magazines of the gun business. And it's, I say it's like reading these bodice-ripper romance novels without any good parts.

The two things they talk about more than anything else are military style assault rifles and handguns for self-defense. Almost every issue of every magazine fuels this feeling that you better have a gun, and hey, here's the greatest new gun in the industry.

BILL MOYERS: You're saying this is a business strategy?

TOM DIAZ: Oh yeah, the gun industry admits it. One of the prolific writers in the industry magazine, this is not fan magazines now. This is a magazine where the industry talks to itself, called it cashing in. Basically, I'm paraphrasing here, but, the exact phrase, but he said if you're not cashing in on concealed carry laws, you're not going to make money.

Article after article in the industry publication says these laws are going to boost your sales of handguns and specific kinds of handguns that are going to bring you out of the slump. And not only that, both in the case of assault rifles and handguns one writer described the customer as a walking cluster, a walking cluster of after-market sales.

You're going to need special holsters. Now they're even saying you're going to need a special coat for the winter or the summer to conceal your gun. So the after-market and accessories are where, and as a matter of fact, it's where, as in a lot of consumer products, it's where the big profits are.

And what it appears to be is that it's not so many new buyers as it is old buyers buying more and more guns. The average number of guns owned by gun owners has gone up and up and up. The average number of households and individuals who say they own guns has been going down. So what we have is fewer and fewer people buying more and more guns.

BILL MOYERS: How do you reconcile what you've just said about fewer and fewer people actually owning guns with the increasing power of the National Rifle Association? You write in your book that the NRA has gone to extreme lengths to draw a veil of secrecy over the facts, the facts surrounding its impact, on our lives.

TOM DIAZ: Well, the gun industry learned a lot from the cigarette industry. When the cigarette industry was sued one of the things, probably the most important thing that people who litigated against the cigarette industry, was the internal papers of the cigarette industry where we found out these guys not only knew they were killing people, they went to lengths to cover up the fact the they were killing people.

The gun industry was terrified when some litigators said, hey, why don't we do to the gun industry what we did to the cigarette industry and other evil industries? So they got Congress to pass a law do away with lawsuits again, it's very hard to sue the gun industry. But there were two other corollaries that led up to that.

One was preventing the Centers for Disease Control which is our public health research arm, the source of almost all of our data about everything from measles to firearms death, they decided, a congressman by the name of Jay Dickey said, hey, we don't want them doing this research on guns. He originally wanted to shut down the whole unit that does all research. And finally they compromised and said, okay, you just can't spend any money on guns.

So we have told the only national public health research agency, you can look at anything else. You can look at measles, you can look at workplace accidents, but don't look at guns. So that's one. Number two, there's an agency a law enforcement agency, a federal law enforcement agency called the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. I'll call it ATF. ATF does something, it’s called tracing crime guns, which means if a gun is used in a crime or is found at a crime scene or illegally possessed, they trace that gun from its manufacturer, because Federal records are, the manufacturers are required to keep records, to the fist point of its public sale.

And then if they can they follow it to the point which it was either found or used in a crime. The value of that in terms of law enforcement is law enforcement investigators can tell was this gun used in another crime or crimes, how did this person get the gun, was it possibly sold by gun traffickers?

From a public health point of view the value of this data, and we're talking about millions upon millions of cases investigated, that is, traced, by ATF, is that we can answer some of the questions that now are just veiled. For example, when I worked in this field people would call me and say, well, how many Glock pistols were used in shootings in the last ten years? And I would say, nobody knows. And we don't know.

We could know if we could access the ATF database. The same thing when the horrible shooting in Newtown, people would say, well, how many of these Bushmaster AR-15 assault rifles have been used in shootings or crimes? We only know anecdotally. But if we could get that ATF data we would know precisely. So it would answer questions about do these designs make a difference? Are specific kinds of guns implicated in crime?

So that's the ATF contribution. If you take those two together, public health, law enforcement, you have a very good picture of what is the impact not only of guns generally in the United States, but of specific types, calibers, manufacturers. The industry is terrified of this.

BILL MOYERS: How is it they've kept Congress from giving us that basic information? How do you explain the power of the industry over our political process? They own our political process now.

TOM DIAZ: Well, I think there are two answers to that. And it doesn't give me any joy to say it. One, the, one of the things the NRA has a program called Refuse To Be A Victim. The American, certainly the American national, and I'll say liberal, progressive, whatever you want to say, political establishment has chosen to be a victim.

They have given up on guns. They've bought into a thing called the third way which is somehow there's this mythical common ground we can reach with the NRA or the gun industry, and let's not talk about gun control. They call it the third rail of politics, so you have a victim here. On the other hand it must be said that the National Rifle Association has what every politician wishes they had, that is they have somebody in every congressional district.

Even if it's only one or two people they have somebody. When Wayne LaPierre in his palatial headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia pushes the button, the talking points go out, the phones or the emails arrive in Congress. The other side is not that organized. People who are gun control advocates have typically been small groups in Los Angeles, Washington, New York. They can't respond to that. That I hope, I think is changing.

BILL MOYERS: Somebody has referred to Florida as the gun-shine state. Is that justified, that mockery?

TOM DIAZ: I do believe it is for a specific reason. The NRA has used Florida as what I call sort of a test tube. Florida was the first of the major states to change the law about concealed carry itself. Used to be if you wanted to carry a gun about, concealed, you had to ask for permission. It was called a May-issue. The authority might or might not give you the gun. Florida was one of the first states to change to what's called a Shall-issue state. Later on it led to this whole concept of Stand Your Ground mixed up with the Castle doctrine. So yeah, Florida is the Petri dish and then the bacillus has spread through American Legislative Exchange Council and other media to the rest of the country.

BILL MOYERS: So this is how Florida's concealed law, concealed gun law plays into the Trayvon Martin tragedy?

TOM DIAZ: Yes, I think it's a mindset thing, number one. And I think it's, the number of concealed carry licenses for people like Zimmerman just by order of magnitude increased after these laws. So yeah, I think it's like pollution, it seeps out into the society.

BILL MOYERS: Have you been able to measure the impact of the law in these states that have passed them?

TOM DIAZ: I personally have not, although there have been studies that others have done.

BILL MOYERS: What do they show?

TOM DIAZ: Well, they show that the incidence of what are called justifiable homicides goes up. Now, because you use the word justifiable, that simply means somebody died, you killed them, but we're not going to prosecute you for murder, second-degree murder, what have you. It doesn't mean that that homicide would not have happened but for these laws. And I think that's clear, that more guns means more shootings and it means more deaths.

BILL MOYERS: So is the dramatic change you write about in The Last Gun essentially the militarization of the gun industry?

TOM DIAZ: Yeah, the common denominator is, and that's precisely, the gun industry is marketing both in handguns and long guns, designs that were essentially military based, the common denominator is something called the high capacity magazine. You think back to the wild west, the revolver, the old six-shooters, six rounds of ammunition, relatively cumbersome to load. Bolt action rifles, cumbersome to load. Even the M1 Garand from the Second World War was eight rounds, little difficult to load.

The high capacity magazine can carry 20, 40, even more than 100 in the drum form of, that's militarization, those are designed for the modern battlefield. The same thing happened in handguns in the 1930s and increasingly in the 1980s when Beretta first sold its version to the United States Army. Both of these provide the individual shooter with lots of rounds of ammunition, and they're increasingly easy to shoot.

You could go get modern semiautomatic pistol today and probably in ten minutes if you've never shot before you could do fairly well shooting. Because they're almost like shooting a child's toy. They're lightweight, the ammunition's easy to load and they shoot very quickly.

The gun industry is like any other business. If you look at your, say your mobile phone, or you look at your car, or even look at your microwave, they're all different. Innovation is what sells consumer products. The gun industry is no different than any other industry, so they know that. And in the last several decades their innovation has been in the direction of enhanced lethality--

BILL MOYERS: Enhanced what?

TOM DIAZ: --lethality, killing power--

BILL MOYERS: Deadliness?

TOM DIAZ: Killing power. So you've got more bullets, you can fire faster and easier and they're bigger, increases the chance of someone being hit and someone dying. So the gun industry has moved in the direction of selling greater firepower whether it's the military style assault rifle or it's the high capacity semiautomatic handgun, that's the two branches of marketing that the gun industry has relentlessly pursued, not only the domestic gun industry incidentally. We are the target of the world, we're the last great market.

As unlikely a jurisdiction is the United Arab Emirates now, I noticed an ad within a month or so, is now selling a concealed carry handgun in the United States they manufacture. Now, why are they doing that? Because this is the only market--

BILL MOYERS: The United States?

TOM DIAZ: Yes, they're, this gun is being pushed in the current round of gun consumer magazines. But it's not, that's not unusual. You, in most countries in the world you could not possibly get away with selling the kinds of guns that are sold in the United States to civilians and you couldn't do it as easily. You couldn't just go to some gun show or even a gun store and say, I feel the need to carry a gun around in my pocket. Can you sell me one?

Even in Israel which the gun people like to cite as an example, completely wrong, Israel has very strong gun control laws. It's believed that, well, Israel says you can carry a gun because they're suffering from terrorism. That's absolutely not true. And I've talked to many Israelis, I've talked to Israeli diplomats. It's just not true. A society that's under threat of terrorism still restricts access of to firearms.

BILL MOYERS: Why are we such a great market?

TOM DIAZ: Well, unlike most other countries we do have the second amendment which does embody a right which according to the Supreme Court is a personal right, you have it, I have it, every single individual have it, has it. So that's different. And it's complex. I wouldn't dismiss that part of the problem as easily solved.

But we also have a kind of imaginary history. We've conquered the West, the frontier, we're a nation of these independent stalwart people and we overthrew a bad government when we took care of King George III. The gun industry knows that these things resonate with the American people. So their advertising and marketing is all aimed at this kind of, you've got a right, you're an individual American, by gosh, you should have a gun.

BILL MOYERS: Why the title, The Last Gun?

TOM DIAZ: Well, I think the logic of the title, it's that until they sell the last gun the gun industry will continue to do the kinds of things that I describe in the book. They're not giving up. They, I write, I describe, have you ever seen a wounded snake on a highway where they're just dangerous because they're lashing about? And that's the way the gun industry is. It's, over the long term in bad health, it's got public opinion, I think, in a large extent are weighed against the industry. And they're going to keep doing what they do until they absolutely cannot any longer. The gun people like to say there are law abiding people and there are bad people and we want the law abiding people to have guns. I don't think humanity is that simple. Humanity is a complex of all kinds of people. Good people do bad things when they have access to guns. ...."

Here is a link that might be useful: Link

    Bookmark   July 20, 2013 at 11:42PM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
nancy_in_venice_ca Sunset 24 z10

Alex, thanks for the Moyers interview; scary stuff and a portrait of an industry that makes profits off the destruction / militarization of our civil society.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 2:14AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Interesting interview, Alex, thanks for providing the transcript. What I find most interesting is that the number of gun-owners is dropping, while at the same time those who choose to own guns are buying more of them. Seems like another division in an already divided country.

mylab, I did not think you were blowing smoke but looking for information and answers from people you know who own guns. But I am unclear as to why you don't want them to know that ff is legally blind. That seems like an important issue. Or maybe I misundertand you.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 6:50AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Being legally blind does not mean a person cannot see. Sometimes peripheral vision is impaired yet the person can see perfectly looking straight ahead. We tend to compensate in other ways for our limitations.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 7:25AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I do know that, mrsk, and hope I was not implying otherwise. Ff posts here all the time and thus I know he can see a keyboard and read a message. But as you say, being legally blind is a limitation and I think that needs to be considered when driving a car or shooting a gun.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 7:54AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I understand, Pidge, Mylab... and this is why it's important to know exactly what is meant by "legally blind", and to explain the effects of the medications most chronic pain patients take... because I don't think many people have an accurate perception of these things. Some people might, but most have never experienced such things on a personal basis.

And now we know that we're talking about peripheral vision and the loss of one eye, which wouldn't be as much of an impairment as I think many people would imagine. One would have to be more alert to one's surroundings, but it certainly wouldn't make driving impossible, or necessarily dangerous.

And peripheral vision, and having sight in only one eye, would not be an impairment when aiming at a target and shooting, either... depending on how good the sight is in the working eye.

I actually know an older gentleman who only has vision in one eye. He drives. He's not one to go over the speed limit, and he usually picks the slower right lane on a 4 lane highway, but he drives just fine, if not a bit more cautious. He also happens to be a gun collector, and he target shoots occasionally. I've never heard him complain about his sight affecting anything.

When it comes to pain medications, I think a lot of people compare the knowledge they have... which is most often just the occasional use of a mild narcotic, such as Vicodin or something similar, and the effect it has on them, taken for a temporary low level pain. They may be given the drug for a broken bone, after surgery, or for some other pain that isn't chronic. It may make them tired, give them a sense of being dizzy or woozy... but that's because it's not something they experience on a daily basis, and they're not used its effects.

Many chronic pain patients are prescribed much stronger narcotics, or other similar drugs or derivatives, because they experience high level pain on a never-ending, perpetual basis. They become so used to taking it that it doesn't affect them in the same way it would affect an occasional user. They are able to fully function as any other normal person, and in fact, it's because of those medications that they are able to fully function, at all.

In many cases, like my own, the medication doesn't actually cut through the pain. It only masks it enough to take the edge off. I always know pain. It's not a very good feeling, but it is what it is... and I live with it.

I only explain this in more depth because I don't think everyone realizes the difference between acute and chronic, low level and high level pain. Most will never experience chronic pain... and this is a good thing... but it doesn't give them any sort of comparison values by which to judge the effects of various medicines, or what it truly feels like. They only have their own impressions by which to make any comparisons.

It's nothing negative... just a fact that we don't normally discuss in any detail. By qualifying such things, we can gain better perspective of what it's really like to live with chronic pain, or to only have limited vision.

As for firearms... I still own the same number of guns I've always had. I have no plans to acquire any new ones, or different ones. There's no reason to stockpile like a maniac.

Some people may play into the NRA ideal... but personally, I think they're a pompous, ridiculous bunch of bloviating idiots. They no longer represent the average gun owner, and I'd never join their ranks or listen to what they have to say.

I also think the SYG laws, or Castle doctrine, are more like "get out of jail free" laws, or barely disguised legal means by which to murder and get away with it. I think they should be struck down. There are already laws that cover things like self defense, murder, etc...

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 9:58AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Pidge, I DO want them to know he is legally blind as that is the point of the question I will pose when all we barbeque with are back in town. I was going to leave out ff's insulting remarks about what kind of hunters and frequency of shooters they are. I wonder if ff himself hunts as anyone who does spends the months inbetween rifle season practicing their shot while they participate in other sorts of there's that. I think I still will leave it off because I still am interested in their take on that specific situation as posed to them. A temper would play into it and I dont want that to be a part of the equation.

I would hope that any person who wants their firearms rights to remain status quo would also want reasonable restrictions apply as do with all our rights, so I confess to being a little worried about what the general take will be, which is why Im going to ask, including his choice to carry, another situation which truly causes pause. I wonder if states all have different restrictions on this. Its interesting, at any rate.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 10:33AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

I find it a bit odd that an outspoken anti gun person's friends mostly consist of conservatives who all belong to sports clubs and are such practiced, dedicated shooters in the off season? How odd? Most hunters, and I know hundreds are not regular shooters, do not belong to a sportsman club, nor the NRA. I am active in the shooting sports and owned a gun shop in PA which fields just under 1 million hunters.In fact, the vast majority of hunters may not even shoot a full box(20) of ammo in a year. They go off to the woods and wait for something to come to them, their idrea of shooting practice is hitting a beer can off a fence post at maybe 50 yards. They fling lead like its confetti and scare the hell out of me and others.
The numbers of new gun owners is growing dauily, despite the anto gun people trying to say otherwise, I mean, look at the stats! Women are the largest growing demographic group of new owners/shooters. The shooting sports in general is a growth industry. This administration is directly responsible for the majority of the growth. The left can sling their slime in any direction they desire but the facts are not with them.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 11:20AM
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo

Well, there's also a big gap between just owning firearms, using them for sport or hunting... and the person who carries concealed.

I think it's a no-brainer that there are more restrictions on those persons permitted to carry a concealed weapon. These persons are armed while walking around within the general public.

As well, we can't classify all medications as being the same. Pain medicines are not in the same class as medications taken for depression, for ADD or ADHD, for bipolar disease, for schizophrenia, or for other psychological disorders... and there's a need to separate them and regulate accordingly.

On the off season, a hunter is either practicing, or he's out in the woods or fields, making note of animal trails, rubs, where their food sources are, where they bed down, which way they travel and when, how often they are in the territory the hunter has access to, how many animals are in a herd, etc... he's studying the patterns of his quarry. He's thinking about the best place to hunt from, and what will offer him the most success.

Some hunters hunt from a stand, while others hunt on the ground. Some prefer a bow, while others prefer firearms. Some even hunt with black powder weapons. Some hunt with a pistol, some with a rifle or shotgun. It depends on the state's laws.

In Illinois, there is no high powered rifle season. The state is too densely populated. Illinois has enough problems with poachers, with people who aren't that proficient, amateur hunters and "city slickers" sticking arrows into houses, not taking enough time, shooting at the first thing that moves and mistaking other hunters for prey in their zeal to bag an 8-12 pointer, mistaking livestock and other animals for prey, or accidentally shooting each other in crossfire situations. Hunting land is precious.

In a less populated state, such as Alaska, things are a little different.

    Bookmark   July 21, 2013 at 11:57AM
Sign Up to comment
More Discussions
Opinions? Anyone?? Everyone???
Let me say how much I enjoyed the discussion on the...
George Zimmerman is a loose cannon!
Years ago, I wondered whether this might have been...
Indiana - just plain old discrimination
Indiana House OKs controversial religious freedom bill And...
Top Trending Topic on Twitter Come on, Vgkg! This is...
Oil Rises as Gulf Allies Strike Yemen
Should Yemen be any part of the Nuclear negotiations...
Sponsored Products
Marine Blue Dimensional Roses 22 x 22 Pillow
$79.80 | Bellacor
Oversized Ladder Style Teak Plant Stand
Signature Hardware
Light Blue Toilet Brush Holder
Aiden Coffee Table
Cost Plus World Market
Contemporary Indoor/Outdoor Area Rug: LR Resources Rugs Contemporary Cream and
Home Depot
4-Tiered Open Pedestal Stand
$299.99 | Dot & Bo
LaPalma | Panco Table Side Leg
'Life Is Better With Grandkids' Canvas Photo Clip
$27.99 | zulily
People viewed this after searching for:
© 2015 Houzz Inc. Houzz® The new way to design your home™