word-for-word.

Zimmerman tell him? Why hasn't he been questioned?

You just don't know WHO you will meet who will armed. Do you expect everyone in this state to carry a gun for self-defenese? I really, really do NOT LIKE that concept. It is one thing keep a gun INSIDE YOUR OWN HOME for your own protection. People walking around the streets with a gun? I don't like that one.

restrictions. We had one proposed a while back to allow people to carry guns in bars.

Boy howdy.

Its been legal to carry a pistol into a bar here(Tenn) for about 18 months.

Knoxville-native and UT grad here.

Now what could possibly go wrong?

Great combination.

But, you have to promise not to drink.

In states that allow handguns in bars. It is a felony that WILL result in your going to prison. I know that in my CCW permit class, we were told that even touching an alcoholic drink (ie passing it to someone else, etc.) was breaking the law.

I do have a problem with people who want laws passed allowing weapons onto college campuses and in college dorms.

We just had a robbery a few stores down from ours. I expect that there are many who carry and am not surprised when I meet anyone who says they do. I reject the idea that everyone else who carries should be punished or condemned or put down because some asshole misused his right to carry. He clearly violated the training that one gets or should get before getting a permit to carry. You can not provoke a confrontation and then shoot someone because they came back at you. That sheriff should be fired and there should be charges brought up. Which charges I don't know but I would think negligent homicide at the least is in order. I resent the blanket anti gun angst. About 50% of DU members have a gun or guns. Police also misuse their guns. Do you feel uncomfortable when you are close to them? Oh yea they are trained more ...well that's a matter of who spends how much time at the range and takes on other training. I am a security guard. If anything the training courses one has to complete to receive a cwp should be more extensive with more law enforcement oversight. No one should take the right to carry lightly. No one should be trying to confront others so as to be able to use their gun.

Oh yea and ...if I were in a 711 and you were there at the counter and robber with a gun came in ...I would shoot him.

and ex-deputy sheriff once said to me, "he'd take that gun out of your hand and shove it up..." before you knew what was happening. Good luck then, Rambo.

Have you even seen someone on meth?

As with someone under the influence of any powerful drug, anything can pop off(so I'm not disputing you--just felt like answering the question you asked someone else). In my experience, in most cases they're cowards. In general(from my experience) when they steal something, they do it when someone isn't looking and if someone is, they take off to avoid a beat down. Two-faced, lie to get what they want rather than be upfront like a real bad ass. Now if someone is generally a violent person sober, that stuff is a scary combination. Just talking about run-of-the-mill users.

Cop, you, my own Mom -- a gun can be pointed right at me as easily as a "bad guy". I do not trust anyone who is so insecure they feel the need to carry all the time -- I have them in the family and they are some of the biggest idiots I know.

To need to carry daily is just one more sign of a sick society, IMHO.

This IS a sick society and anyone who thinks otherwise
is in a state of dangerous delusion.

To carry in this society is self preservation IMO.
A realistic comprehension of just HOW sick our
society is and being prepared to deal with it should it
appear at your door.

Case in point:
This past Christmas there was a news story about a young mother
who shot and killed a man who kicked in her door.

Background details- her husband had recently died of cancer, within
days of Christmas as I recall. Shortly after the funeral a man
appeared in her yard saying he had been a friend of her husband
and wanted to stop by and offer his condolences.
She didn't buy it and quickly retreated back into her house.

A week later, as she sat at home with her newborn infant, she heard
men outside her house trying the windows and doors.
She called 9-11.
She asked the dispatcher what her rights were should the
men succeed in breaking into her house before the police got there.
The dispatcher told her, if they come through the door- shoot them.
They did and she did. She killed the original "visitor" with a single shotgun
blast.
I can just imagine what those men had in mind and I am damned glad
she had a shotgun to protect herself and her baby.

This is a very sick society and I fully comprehend the reasons
people feel the need to be able to protect themselves.

BHN

I have. I was extremely pissed off after it happened, so pissed off in fact that I took off after the dude in my car with the intention of running his ass over. After about 3 seconds of that craziness it dawned on me that he had a gun and I didn't. After a little more reflecting it was apparent to me that if I did have a gun I'd probably have gotten myself shot, as it was I was out 50 bucks. Unless you've ever been in the situation you can't begin to understand how hard it is to control your emotion and act intelligently. Maybe if you have as much constant training as cops you might come out the winner without getting innocent bystanders hurt, but not with just the cursory training most people have.

It's easy to think about how one would respond in a situation like that, because the adrenaline isn't flowing and the brain is working normally. I think somebody with a LOT of training could probably respond in a way we'd all like to think we would, but without a ton of practice I would think the gun hand would be wobbly... even getting the gun out of the holster would be difficult.

It's a lot like calling 911; in theory, it's as easy as pie, but in an emergency situation your hands are trembling, you can't find the phone quickly, your brain can't form words, etc etc.

He appears to just be a volunteer, who appointed himself to the job. I have not heard of any real "employment" Zimmerman has, or had. But I too believe he should be arrested. Aggravated assault and murder works for me.

neighborhood in which he does not live . . . ?

Very strange.

How does he pay for his vehicle? gas? weapon? Cash, under-the-table?

I do not understand.

Now I just read he had been in college: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002457727

He was just a 'volunteer' though, and the neighborhood wasn't registered with the state Neighborhood Watch Association was the report.

crime occurred, or was the gated-community only one part of the larger area of which he WAS a member.

Trying to understand this gated-community aspect here. That usually implies money and I don't associate Z. with money, so did he or did he not live where the crime occurred. Trying to understand WHAT put him there to threaten, and potentially murder, other citizens. Even if it isn't money, I'm just having a hard time understanding how anyone just completely independently starts hanging out at all hours, with a gun, in an area that is worried about that sort of thing, and is not one's residence. How long did he do this? Did he actually apprehend other for real criminals there, anywhere? How many?

Z. did this completely by himself, no feedback, no validation, no other involvement, no support of any kind? Really?

Doesn't add up.

Some gated communities are for the very rich, but most are for regular middle class and bluecollar folks. You generally just have a barcode decal on your car that's read by a scanner, or a card swipe. Some have a main gate with security that allows certain people in, and some just have a gate or two where your visitors, UPS, etc. punch in a code.

HOA fees are usually a few hundred to a $1,500 a year, and pay for things like trash pickup, security, a pool and clubhouse, etc.

Zimmerman declared himself a neighborhood watch, but he wasn't an official one, which are trained and registered with law enforcement. Even residents of the community complained about him.

that was NOT a responsible gun owner? What a bunch of bullshit.

and was sort of raised around guns. It's like being raised in an area where it rains a lot: you learn to respect wet roads. When you're raised around guns, you learn to respect them and realize what they are for, how they should be used, etc.

Others who are not raised that way may not understand this viewpoint of guns. I've pulled a gun on a guy trying to break into my apartment. Had I not had that gun,no telling what would've happened. It's an equalizer, for a woman, who is a sitting duck for any man who decides to do her harm.

I get your point and totally agree. I wouldn't make a long car trip w/o a gun. It's a jungle out there, whether we like it or not. It seems pretty normal to me for normal households to have guns for protection. Of course, they need to learn how to use them.

If you are raised with them and around them, especially in a household where you are taught gun safety and respect for what the guns can do, it's just part of your life. I do understand how people not raised with them feel differently.

I have a CCW permit, and that loaded 9 mm in always tucked between my seat and the center console thing when I drive alone on the interstate. Too many women have gone missing.

Zimmerman had no respect for his weapon and what it could do, nor for his responsibilities as a gun owner. How he ever got a CCW after hitting a LEO is beyond me.

We often play the hero in our imaginations. It's human nature to see ourselves in the best possible light, and to validate ourselves though fictional scenarios-- it's human nature. And sometimes we even believe ourselves...

Thank goodness our imaginations are where it usually stops, else these Zimmerman stories would be increasing exponentially.

We have NO responsibility to answer ANY questions from random people while walking down the street. Even if it's a cop we only have limited responsibility.

And zimm wasn't no cop.

E.X.A.C.T.L.Y!

Would you honestly tell that to your child, if so? I would tell my child that you never know who's gonna do what and so it's best to be respectful to others, even though they might not be talking to you in a l polilte manner.

(By the way, this even applies to criminals who try to steal something from you. As my bf says: "whoever has the gun is the boss." )

down the sidewalk minding our own business?

Last time I checked, this was America and not Communist China.

WTF?

sure knew that his good friend George Zimmerman would never have done anything like this unless the kid was at fault (for walking while black).

The movie got the order wrong, made Defcon 5 the highest level, and Defcon 1 was normal.

To be fair to the moviemakers though, it does make more sense that way.

Military uniforms, for example, can be very close to the real thing but not quite. There always has to be something on them that's not quite right to differentiate it from the real thing.

DefCon levels for example, well, they can show the DefCon system but not the correct order of defense states.

At least this is what my roommate, who was in the Navy for eight years, told me.

said that they just got it wrong. Perhaps it was more highly classified at the time, so they could not find out.

It think it's interesting that you see counting up as more sensible.

Maybe that suggests we aren't so prone to worrying about countdowns to war.

before the Iraq war, CBS news began every broadcast with "Countdown to war".

Well, a countdown is inevitable, inexorable. So CBS news spents months basically telling their viewers "We are going to goto war with Iraq. It's only a matter of time."

For me, it just stands to reason that Defcon 3 would be a higher level of alert than Defcon 1, and that when things got more serious, you would raise the level.

I understand how a bigger number can represent more and so a bigger/increasing number seems more serious.

I also understand how a smaller number can represent less and a smaller/decreasing number means a smaller distance or time from some thing.

The choice of what to use to represent a circumstance is a choice. Everyone concerned would quickly understand which illusion was in play. During the coldwar lots of things were 'countdown' including the Union of Concerned Scientists clock. Many of the guys in my unit had countdown calendars to the day they got to return home from participation in that little scuff-up in Vietnam.

Was that because that generation was conditioned to countdowns in NASA's space program or something else?



Re the Iraq War, considering Cheney's influence and desires, the march to war with Iraq probably WAS inevitable.

but a media framing like that only helps to make it more so. Myself, I went to an anti-war rally hoping to stop the war.

I would say that two other things were true, besides the truth that "Bush is probably going to order the invasion of Iraq".

It was also true that
1. We did not have to do it.
and
2. We should not have done it.

Maybe if CBS news had started each broadcast with "Countdown to Impeachment" they could have made that happen instead.

I totally agree with both 1 and 2.

.....by random people who really have no business or authority to question me.

And I rather doubt most people would be comfortable with a stranger coming up to them and essentially saying "Halt! State your name and your business here!"

That includes anyone who says "If he had just answered in an appropriate manner....".

From my viewpoint, an "appropriate response" as a free citizen to such an inquiry is "None of god-damned business!"

neighborhood watch. This guy says he was "captain" of it, or head of it.

[center]

It was 2 a.m. and I had an upset stomach. So I walked half a mile or so to the grocery store which was open 24/7 and bought some soda. Threw up again in the gutter on my way home. Three blocks later I notice I am being followed by a slow moving vehicle. Kinda relieved when it turned out to be the police and not some thugs looking to jump me. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a thug with a badge. Oh, he got all high and mighty when I asked him "why?" when he asked for ID.

What can I say, it was too close to 1984 and I never heard of any law that says you need ID to walk on the streets, even at 2 a.m.

Still, I am not gonna start a fight with somebody who asks a question or two, or even with somebody who grabs my arm. I apologized to the cop to keep him from beating me up, but still wish I had gotten his badge number. Who knows though, he may have beaten me up if I had asked for it.

Funny thing is, about 9 out of 10 people I have told this story to, took the side of the cop. And these people are supposed to be MY friends.

I would never give my ID to a security guard, either. I would ask them, politely, to call a police officer.

people watching then they should put their money where their mouths are and hire real security, imho.

Why should anyone have to answer anything to a friggin person who has no legal authority?

Mr Taffe sounds just like another scared bigot.

Did you really expect Anderson Cooper, or anybody else on CNN, to challenge this idiot?

His parents are mum on why he had been suspended. Maybe there is something in between "yes suh massa" and lack of cooperation? (By the way, don't you DARE turn this into something where I defend Zimmerman. I am simply addressing YOUR over-the-top remark.)

Under what basis, can you look at someone, and ascertain whether they are or are not an "angel", unless you are racially profiling them?

Where he was walking was not in fact a true gated community, he was on a public transit path and he is not required to answer to any civilian as to what he was doing.

kids who are suspended for being tardy aren't allowed to be out on the street buying candy and ice tea from the local store

Interesting that Zimmerdick was allowed to have a gun permit with his assault record....

Stupid policy.

So a kid is repeatedly tardy to class, missing out on minutes of instruction and his punishment is to be forced to miss even more DAYS of school.

Saturday school or afterschool detention would have been a better consequence.

Thank you for pointing out that this young man was not a behavioral problem as some may have believed.

And he will be missed by his teachers and classmates.

I read somewhere (but didn't try to find the source) that Trayvon's mother drove him to school and it was because of her being late that made him tardy. He was an A and B student - a better punishment would have been for him to tutor other kids or some other constructive project.

Just FUND them then teach those who show up.

Fuck the factory/profit "education" model.

His mother said that. His father said he had been suspended for ten days for being in an "unauthorized area" yet would not elaborate. To be suspended that long either involves something violent (which his father denies), stealing (his father says no)...But why not clear it up? One other possibility is graffiti.

I will post the Miami-Herald one, which contradicts the mother's claim that it was her fault that he was tardy, and that it had nothing to do with tardies at all. Ten-day suspension for being in an unauthorized area and the father won't elaborate. Why? Because it would make Trayvon look bad? Because the lawyer might have said that they cannot allow anything contrary to the image they project of him. I think it's a mistake. If Zimmerman is guilty, then you don't need to make Tray perfect to have Zimmerman indicted.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/22/2708960/trayvon-martin-a-typical-teen.html

Again, the father is not the custodial parent. He may not have the full story.

Enjoy your stay.

defending his murderer. WTF is wrong with you?

I am just not ready to indict Zimmerman, especially when we are hearing conflicting info about Tray's suspension. I suspect it's to make him seem above reproach (like the younger pic used all over) and Zimmerman is sheer evil. That is wrong and let's allow justice to play itself out. I don't want riots, do you?

to depict Trayvon.

There have been several pictures used and the most frequently used one is the one of him in the hoodie which is a recent picture.

The racists, err... I mean the "concerned citizens" who are just busted up that these "younger" pics of Trayvon are used never, EVER seem to have any concern that the pic of Zimmerman is from 2005. I can pretty much guarantee that pic of him is much older than any pics we've seen of Trayvon. But God forbid anyone use a picture of that beautiful boy smiling. I think that is the source of so much "concern" over the older pics of Trayvon being used -- they show that he was a gorgeous boy with a sweet smile, an actual HUMAN BEING and not the figure of fear and loathing that we are constantly being bombarded to think of black men/boys as in this country. Oh Lord no, we can't have that.

His teacher said this about him --

She described Trayvon, a junior, as an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness.

and yes I truly mean INTERNATIONAL, wave of support that he and his family are receiving.

If they can do the "Trayvon was a thug" route (and there are so many simply itching to do this) they honestly believe that this will somehow exonerate not only Zimmerman but the US's reputation as a whole of being a bastion of racism.

I wasn't aware that that means somebody has to the right to just stop me and interrogate me and then when I show some attitude to that they can just shoot me.

I can't believe you even brought this up. Shame on you.

Right. Brilliant Logic.

posited that it had been because he was 1) guilty of murder or 2) guilty of rape or 3) guilty of armed robbery. BTW, the reason he was suspended was for getting to school late. Obviously a hardened, dangerous criminal.

I need to ask you...What authority does Zimmerman have to have Trayvon cooperate with him? Zimmerman is a nobody, no cop, no FBI, no real authority to ask Trayvon for anything. Shit.

You do realize you're blaming the victim by suggesting his lack of cooperation is his problem.

I notice that everyone on here who wants to make sly comments about this kid are new posters with less than 20 post. I guess Stormfront was slow today?

I am a progressive.

When asked about Trayvon's suspension, both the school AND his parents were mum. I don't know where that urban myth began that he was suspended for excessive tardies. His suspension was for TEN days, not five. No one gets a ten-day suspension for simply being late.
Even Tray's own FATHER says in a Miami Herald article I just pulled up (dated 3/22), that the suspension was not anything related to violence but refused to provide further details. Why?! He mentions something about being in an unauthorized area of the school-did he steal something? Again, not that it would deserve the death penalty, but I am getting very tired of the media being one-sided and perhaps painting a racial case where there not be one! Using a younger picture (instead of Tray in a hoodie, which doesn't make him look as non-threatening as in the uniform), whitewashing his suspension...Let the facts play out but don't you DARE misrepresent them!
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/22/2708960/trayvon-martin-a-typical-teen.html

I don't mind hearing the facts, but your tone speaks volume for a poster with 2 post. Then on top of that you're defending and backing up another troll who was banned? Interesting. Regardless...the kid still was not doing anything that bad or involved in bad behavior. Clearly he wasn't stealing if his father said it wasn't a crime. The fact that you needed to tell me you're a progressive first says it all lol

What about his school suspension?

Why should he have been expected to cooperate with a stranger (could have been a robber) or suffer deadly consequences?

Yeah, I just dared. Your move, pain.

this boy was under NO obligation to answer any questions asked by some random stranger he didn't know.