TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... 7520120319" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I know there've been other threads about this Zimmerman/Martin thing, but lost in the debate over whether Zimmerman was justified is the potential effect this could have.

Antis are openly calling for repeal of Stand Your Ground laws.

Are we up to the call to stand up for Stand Your Ground, even if it means defending somebody who looks bad right now?

...Zimmerman was in no way conceivable "standing his ground"...he was playing police...and pursued the boy even after being told not to...he does not represent most responsible CHLers and we have no moral or ethical responsibility to support him...
...as to the fight to preserve "Stand your ground"-type laws...certainly...

Stand your ground is my right. I do not retreat. If I am jailed is still better than dead. BGs do not retreat they attack with no regard to your life or theirs or the law for that matter.

I won't defend the guy. I believe the citation of "Stand your ground" is incorrect. The guy pursued a child who was apparently doing nothing wrong. As stated previously if anyone had a right to stand their ground it was the child who got shot.

If he tried to detain the young man, then he is in real trouble. If the young kid attacked the one who was trying to follow him, then it is a totally different story. Man, this case is nasty!

PracticalTactical wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... 7520120319

I know there've been other threads about this Zimmerman/Martin thing, but lost in the debate over whether Zimmerman was justified is the potential effect this could have.

Antis are openly calling for repeal of Stand Your Ground laws.

Are we up to the call to stand up for Stand Your Ground, even if it means defending somebody who looks bad right now?

While your take on things is surely practical, living up to your moniker, surely either defending or attacking Zimmerman should be based on how you feel about the facts of the case, not any potential future repercussions it may or may not have when it comes to possibly changing the law but probably not. Let's judge a case on its merits, especially one as tragic as this one.

From what I’ve read of the law I see nothing wrong with it as it stands. I do have a problem with the way it is being applied. It doesn’t read to me that you can instigate a fight and claim self defense. I am no lawyer though.


Jusster

PracticalTactical wrote: Antis are openly calling for repeal of Stand Your Ground laws.

They openly call for the banning of guns too. Let them have their temper tantrums.

edit: fixed the broken quote

matriculated wrote:

PracticalTactical wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... 7520120319

I know there've been other threads about this Zimmerman/Martin thing, but lost in the debate over whether Zimmerman was justified is the potential effect this could have.

Antis are openly calling for repeal of Stand Your Ground laws.

Are we up to the call to stand up for Stand Your Ground, even if it means defending somebody who looks bad right now?

While your take on things is surely practical, living up to your moniker, surely either defending or attacking Zimmerman should be based on how you feel about the facts of the case, not any potential future repercussions it may or may not have when it comes to possibly changing the law but probably not. Let's judge a case on its merits, especially one as tragic as this one.

What I think about the facts of the case, such as I know them, has led me to defend CHL/stand-your-ground policies on a few non-gun discussion boards, using Zimmerman as a good example of how not to be. The anti's will milk and manipulate the tragedy of this case for all it's worth.

J.R.@A&M wrote: What I think about the facts of the case, such as I know them, has led me to defend CHL/stand-your-ground policies on a few non-gun discussion boards, using Zimmerman as a good example of how not to be. The anti's will milk and manipulate the tragedy of this case for all it's worth.

It's a known fact that they will take a single data point and call it a "trend." Fortunately, most intelligent people can spot the lipstick on that pig pretty fast.

Old Cannon has it right.

Antis will decry every event even tangentially related to guns or CHLs as more "proof" that guns are bad, mmmmkkaay.

I doubt the stand your ground laws will be repealed because of this.

There is nothing wrong with the stand your ground law, just doesn't apply in this case.
Zimmerman should be arrested in my opinion, from what I heard of the 911 calls, one ended with "and he's black" he had no business following him or engaging him, that's the law's job. All he needed to do was call and watch and wait.

Just one old guy's opinion.

This case is being played out in the press and personally I will reserve judgement until I hear that the shooter was indicted and found guilty, everything I am reading I consider hearsay and will wait for the actual facts.........

Was this Zimmerman person a Florida CHL holder? I'm trying to figure out what the connection is between CHL and Zimmerman, if any. Maybe all CHL'ers should demand his arrest.

tomtexan wrote:Was this Zimmerman person a Florida CHL holder? I'm trying to figure out what the connection is between CHL and Zimmerman, if any. Maybe all CHL'ers should demand his arrest.

According to thus far unchallenged media reports, "Yes."

Jim