Totally true.
One of my neighbors is a police lieutenant here and he always says that (at least in professional jurisdictions, which may not be the case in Sanford) police never, ever let all the facts become public early in the investigative process and often there is something that law enforcement knows and can prove that would change everything if the public knew. Whether that’s the case here, heaven only knows, but we already have had two of the major broadcast news networks publish as “fact” things that were completely untrue, as well as celebrities spreading malicious misinformation. If that doesn’t give someone pause, that person needs to find something more productive to occupy his time.</p>
<p>“I agree with Zoosermom on the issue of hold tight and let the system work through this.”</p>
<p>Now that the system has decided to actually work a bit, I agree. As to the issue that I’ve tried and convicted Z, that’s totally erroneous. What I’ve said consistently is that the whole episode screams “DO AN INVESTIGATION!”</p>
<p>I take it that CT does not have a gun “carry” law? In my state, Texas, you have to assume everyone is carrying. And, yes, those who have a carry permit usually are armed whenever they leave their house or apartment. </p>
<p>"…and 6 (?) witnesses, and examining the scene and 911 calls."</p>
<p>And five hours later Z is out checking GunsAmerica for a replacement piece. A thorough investigation indeed. “No need to identify the victim. We know he was legally killed. Heh, heh.”</p>
<p>07DAD - Does TX have a big problem with citizens disregarding police instructions? No, didn’t think so. A big problem with citizens shooting unarmed teens? No, didn’t think so. A big problem with violence on The Day of the Lord? No, didn’t think so. </p>
<p>I’m not condemning firearms. I’m condemning bad judgement … and police departments who are condone it. (Surely you’re not suggesting Z used good judgment during this episode.)</p>
<p>I have a question, if anyone might have insight. With his prior run-ins with the law, was there any impediment to Zimmerman receiving a gun permit?</p>
I didn’t say it mattered in this case, so please don’t attribute to me that point of view. I asked a question because I was curious as to how gun laws work in Florida and thought someone might know.</p>
<p>Ah yes, Godwin’s law. Given enough time any online conversation will play the H or N@#I card. This is done by a contributor who is backed into a corner and has no reasonable response. To everyone’s credit, it takes a very long time (if ever) for most CC’ers to resort to this tactic.</p>
<p>From bring-your-guns-to-work laws to all-out bans on local gun restrictions, Florida has become a haven for Second Amendment enthusiasts. Statistics show the pro-gun agenda has triggered more gun sales, more permits and a sharp rise in justifiable homicides. </p>
<p>Florida has about 900,000 licensed concealed weapons carriers, far more than any other state and nearly twice as many as Texas. </p>
<p>The number of annual applications for concealed gun licenses has grown from 26,800 to 123,000 since 1998. (February was a record month for application requests, with 53,835.) </p>
<p>The number of “justifiable homicides” — typically shooting deaths deemed legal under stand your ground — has tripled in the last seven years. </p>
<p>However, murders by firearm have increased 45 percent since 1999, despite an overall dropoff in violent crime, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. </p>
<p>Zimmerman was licensed to have the gun despite a prior arrest on a charge of assault on a law enforcement officer, which was dropped and domestic battery complaints. Unlike states that allow police to deny license applications based on personal character and arrest history, in Florida almost anyone who hasn’t been convicted of a violent crime can qualify for a weapons license.</p>
<p>Not that I understand why you asked, but consider that within the last 3 or 4 years:</p>
<p>Austin: police shot and killed a 20year old 4 times with a shot gun, once in the back of the head</p>
<p>San Antonio:-police shot and killed unarmed 14 year old Derek Lopez</p>
<p>Dallas: (Oak Cliff) police shot and killed 2 people (one 25 years old) within 9 days. Both unarmed. One was shot 23 times for “refusing to show his hands.” In the other shooting a police bullet also hit a 11 year old </p>
<p>Bellaire: (sub of Houston) unarmed 23 year old shot and killed by police in his family’s front yard</p>
<p>Addison (sub of Dallas): unarmed male shot and killed by police</p>
<p>Orange: Black cop shot and killed unarmed white male</p>
<p>Each event involved an assertion that police fired only after deceased failed to follow some warning/instruction.</p>
<p>^ curious 07Dad, you only list the race of the case where a Black cop shot and killed an unarmed white male. Was that accidental? What were the races of the other cases you cite?</p>
<p>07DAD - Sorry I asked. The most we do here in CT is shooting a suspect in the back of the head while holding him down with a foot between the shoulder blades. (Officer was convicted of manslaughter … FWIW.)</p>
<p>17 years old is still legally a child. It’s a tough go when ones child hits age 18 as at that point, the legal system will consider him/her an adult. But as tall as Trayvon was, he was a child. Whatever ends up happening with this case, Zimmerman will have it on his head that he shot a child.</p>
<p>Also Zimmerman has not been convicted of a crime. Arrested yes, but again, our system is based on an “innocent until proven guilty in a court of law”. To judge a case publically like this is wrong. So much wrong information given, as well. And people are reading it, and often not catching the corrections. </p>
<p>We may never know what happened here. Z has his account, and if the facts line up with it, then I don’t see what can be done. </p>
<p>Personally, and this is totally just my opinion, I think that Trayvon did confront him, as a young man of that age would do if he should suspect somone is following him. Some scuffle ensued–no way to ever tell who started it, no sense even trying to guess, and Z shot the child when it happened. </p>
<p>Z was totally out of line to be following anyone. Calling the 911, and staying out of the picture is what he should have done. Yes, when one sees ANYONE strange in a neighborhood where there have been issues, one should call 911. But whether any law was broken by Z is a whole other matter, and it has to be determined fairly, not by public opinion.</p>
<p>Some events I found online had photos of the person shot. The Bellaire deceased was black from the photo. I guess Derek Lopez was hispanic from the name (no photo). The 11 year old that was wounded was black from the photo. The race of the policeman or police officers weren’t mentioned in any but the black on white shooting in Orange. </p>
<p>You do realize that “white” is a minority in Texas when compared with black and hispanic, right? The Dallas Chief of Police and District Attorney are black. The Chief justice of the Texas Supreme court is black. </p>
<p>The Orange Texas shooting had the same outrage as the Trayvon case (at least locally). There was some evidence that the deceased used the N-word with the cop. However, it was not claimed to be accidental. Cop was no-billed in Orange–and in every other one of these instances as far as I can tell.</p>
<p>National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012 introduced in U.S. Senate
by Nra-Ila on MARCH 14, 2012 in NATIONAL FIREARM NEWS, NEWS</p>
<p>National Right to Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012 introduced in U.S. Senate
Today, March 13, U.S. Senators<em>Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) introduced S. 2188, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2012.</em><em>The bill is the Senate companion to</em>H. R. 822,which was<em>approved by the U. S. House last November</em>by a vote of 272-154.</p>
<p>S. 2188, like H.R. 822, would allow any person with a valid state-issued concealed firearm permit to carry a concealed handgun in any other state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms for lawful purposes. A states laws governing where concealed handguns may be carried would apply within its borders.</p>
<p>The “Federal Assault Weapons Ban” passed under Clinton’s administration was not renewed by Congress when it expired. Parts of the “Brady Bill” passed under Clinton was also ruled against by SCOTUS (related to 5 day waiting period before buying a gun that existed elsewhere, supposedly).</p>
<p>People need to set aside their anger and bias about guns when evaluating this case. A man cannot be condemned for engaging in lawful activity. It was not unlawful for Z to carry his gun that night, nor was it unlawful for him to follow a stranger in his gated community for 3 minutes, nor was it unlawful for him to proceed despite a comment made by a non-sworn employee of the PD.</p>