Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by JTJ, Jan 26, 2013.
It is sad how stupid the left is.
So recommending training is akin to vigilantism? There's no hope for these people.
Sherriff clarke is pretty good and he constantly voices out aboutthe idiocy ofdemocrats like mayor tom barret and milwaukkee commissioner chris abele and board members of the common council.
He also runs for office as a democrat.
The people of the area here love him because he tells it like it is. He had to lay off 48 deputies so chris abele and tom barett can build a choochoo train around a 6 block area of mostly uninhabited abandoned buildings in downtown milwaukee. The funding is also going to keep splash pads open that only get used 3 months of the year and even then only by a very few people.
I really wish the law was sympathetic to "defending yourself" from these anti-violence morons. I mean, technically, their policies are putting people in harms way.
And another thing...before my ****ing blood pressure blows sky high......
I am so sick...and...tired... of this "take the law into your own hands"....crap, these morons spew.
Defending yourself, with a gun...is NOT taking the law into your own hands. It is obeying the law, which grants you the right to defend yourself...with a gun.
When I apply the brakes in my car, to bring myself to a lower speed.... I am "taking the law into my own hands."
When I get into my vehicle, and put on my seat belt.... I am taking the law into my own hands.
When I see trash on the beach, and stop to pick it up...I am taking the law into my own hands.
The sheriff speaking out in favor of citizen carry is good, it probably makes the spincter pucker on all the Milwaukee Police execs. They still going on with that stupid train Jon? I know it was a big issue in the elections but I thought they eventually canned the idea?
I think that was the most responsible thing a county sheriff could say. If he is understaffed and can't have deputies everywhere all the time and he js concerned about the safety of the community, that js super responsible. He isn't telling people to go out and start shooting people. He is saying if that's what you choose to do, be smart about it and learn all you can learn to protect yourself. It's irresponsible for anyone to say that having the citizens of the coy th armed and not trained is the best route. Kudos to the sheriff for wanting people to be knowledgeable about the proper way to handle a firearm in a self defense situation.
Those hoplophobes always find a way to bring up Zimmerman. Oh he shot an unarmed teen. I guess it doesn't make a diff that that teen was bashing his head on the ground. Zimmerman should have used kind words and a smile, not a dirty gun. Kudos to the Sheriff.
Good For That Sheriff!
If the Democrats are so bad, then why is it that it is THE REPUBLICAN PARTY is suddenly known as the DUMB PARTY? I am not a member of either one BTW.
I'm confused ^ are you actually saying that Zimmerman acted in self defense?
Are you saying he didn't act in self defense? If so what do you base this on? I have not followed it too closely.
according to whom?
that is Zimmerman's position ... that he acted in self defense. Do you have information to the contrary?
You know guys, it's getting to the point that we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. I don't know about you, but I'm getting sick and tired of all the idiots who spout off what they think is best for us. If that's not bad enough, we have our own government who wants to do away with the Constitution and take away every right that our forefathers fought and died for which is the reason they left England where they were persecuted.
Every state and county LE are understaffed and underfunded to the point where the Sheriff of the Wisconsin county tells it like it is, and the female idiot's response is... "I feel like this is such an irresponsible thing for our chief public safety officer of a county to do," Bonavia said. "I think he owes this community an apology. And if he really believes that he's not capable of providing for our public safety he should get a different job." Really??? It's people like her who are wearing blinders with what is going on today and what is coming.
Whatever you do don't take responsibility for your own safety, someone may get hurt like the poor, misunderstood attacker.
This is a sheriff who "gets it". Thank God it seems like more and more of them these days are. If they all only realized what their constitutional power was, we'd have a lot more like him. They are all beholden to their local constituents, not the federal government. It is the citizens of their own county they are sworn to protect and serve. Being honest with the people is a BIG way to serve them.
Bobby Jindal the governor of Louisiana actually called it the "Stupid Party," not the dumb party.
Michael Steele former RNC Chairman is another one.
Well nothing's considered facts until the case is decided in court by a jury, but evidence seems to point that Zimmerman racially profiled Mr Martin. He called police even though he had no real evidence that Martin was involved in any criminal activity. The police told him explicitly not to engage the (I use the term lightly in this case) "suspect" and they would investigate it further. Zimmerman who was armed actively pursued Martin against police wishes.
What it is that actually happened after that is open for debate and we will have to see what the court decides. This police call recording of someone pleading for their life will become key evidence if either the persecution or defense can create reasonable belief or doubt as to who the voice belongs too.
Personally I think that the prosecution has a much stronger case towards negligent homicide or voluntary manslaughter. He aggravated the circumstances surrounding Mr Martins death considerably by engaging in vigilante justice. He was told by police to wait and he ignored. Hell he could have followed from a distance and watched, but instead he chose to initiate contact personally.
The defense is throwing up all these lawsuits against CNN and whatever because their good lawyers and to deflect attention from themselves; and create a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury as too the facts surrounding the case. It's what I'd do in their position.
Regardless of who started what self defense laws dictate that you must met force with equal force (no more than required to fight off you attacker) unless in your own home or "castle". Even if he was attacked Mr Zimmerman was a large full grown adult male against a 16yr old boy. He should have been more than able to successfully fight off his attacker ( if he was infant attacked).
Florida's stand your ground laws are ridiculous. By extending the laws to include public places its giving its citizens a non verbal "go ahead" to settle all disputes with the use of a deadly weapon, when in fact this isn't the case.
Hell going even more off subject I took a CCDW class in which the instructor told me it was fine for me to shoot someone for stealing something off my property while not physically in my house or posing a threat to me. This most definitely is not the case in the major majority of the states (specifically the one I live in). The suspect must be in your home and must create reasonable suspicion in the mind of the owner that they are their to cause harm to either the individual or residents of the house hold. That being said someone could be driving away with your tractor on the back of their trailer (please excuse the... Redneckishness of this example, i reside in Kentucky and it was the one used in my class) and unless they basically point a pistol at your face when you try to stop them a good prosecutor will charge you with imperfect self defense and win 99 percent of the time.
Just to be clear so no one gets the wrong idea I am in full support of citizens carrying open or concealed. Also I am completely in favor of acting in self defense, I just feel that a large portion of people get the wrong impressions about the laws surrounding it. This gives people a false sense of when it's appropriate to act self defense.
Courts look at all facts surrounding a case where self defense was used. Who was the initial aggressor? Did the aggressor back off and try to "uninitiate" the confrontation? What is the physical build and sex of both parties involved? Was their adequate time and space for the defender to retreat successfully? If so why didn't they? What is the time frame around the act? I can go on all day.
I just don't someone twisting what I said previously as being "for gun control of any kind". I'm completely and whole heartedly against it. Just wanted to raise the point that there is considerable room for improvement in terms of firearm safety and use for Americas general population. I feel like it is the responsibility of all gun owners to have a firm grasp of the laws pertaining to their firearms.