Shooter notes that this thread was started before details of the actual fight are published. Impossible to tell what the fight was about, or to what level of violence it had reached. What we know is, something happened at the Walmart, a disturbance escalated and someone got shot. The one doing the shooting was not arrested. The one getting shot died.

That said, Shooter follows a simple rule.

The guy with the biggest gun decides almost everything.

I mean, you see someone with a gun, and for whatever reason you decide a confrontation is a good idea, and you end up getting shot, I would consider that gene pool filtering.

Even if you don't realize right away that whoever you have confronted has a gun, once you realize the other guy is armed, continuing the confrontation is an invitation to getting shot.

Shooter grabs his bowl of popcorn to watch the fur fly..............

Cmon you pussies, disagree with me!

 

In the spirit of satisfying your desire for conflict I will say fuck you shooter. *Pulling my snubby .38 loaded with Special Plus P rounds and shoots shooter at point blank range 5 times and immediately calls shady lawyer*

 

There is plenty of evidence that Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman from behind as Zimmerman was walking back to his truck.

Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch coordinator for the gated community where he lived. Although Martin was staying with someone who lived in the community, Zimmerman had never seen him before.

There had recently been break ins in the area. It is reasonable to be vigilant about the presence of a young black male you do not know, especially after dark, because young black males really do have an extremely high crime rate.

On a number of occasions I have been questioned about my presence in an area after dark by security guards or police officers. The police officers frisked me, and examined packages I was carrying. Because I responded politely, I was not harmed. If Martin had behaved the way I did he would not have been harmed either.

The mainstream media was irresponsible in the way they initially reported the event. They showed a glowering mug shot of George Zimmerman. No one looks good in a mug shot. Then they showed a smiling, almost angelic photo of Trayvon Martin that showed him about four years younger than he was at the time of the event.

Those who watched the initial news reports on television were invited to believe that a sweet and innocent Trayvon was walking home, perhaps after choir practice, when he was murdered by a brutal racist who shot him just to watch him die.

Whites are attacked and sometimes murdered every day by blacks, but it does not become national news. Many newspapers have policies of not reporting the race of criminal suspects.

 

A predictable post by you in view of your feelings about blacks.

Question: What authority did Zimmerman have to engage with Martin at all? I'll answer for you....NONE. It need go no further. He had absolutely NO legal or moral right to stop the kid. Had he observed and felt the situation was suspicious he had been told by the police in Watch meetings not to approach, just report to police what you see and let them handle the situation. Had he done that it never would have happened.

 

You can do a search and see what the law says about it. They agree with the people. So far they have failed to charge a man for shooting someone that came to his door. He shot through the door, didn't even know who it was.
Another man did the same but he shot through his window
.
Then there was the case of the tax adjuster coming on a man's property. He was pretty fast and the man only had a machete. He got away and tried to press charges. Didn't work.

The crime is bad around here. If the person who gets shot has a criminal record there isn't likely to be any charges for shooting them. Really can't see a drop in crime but a few of the repeat offenders are out of the picture.

 

If this is how you would react to popcorn, you are an irresponsible gun owner and have absolutely no business carrying one.

 

A while back a man was working when two men came up behind him and beat him to death with a pipe. The man was welding and had his face shield on and never knew what happened. The man happened to be white, the murderers were black. People asked why this was not considered a hate crime and were told that it wasn't as the murderers were black.

 

I have no personal knowledge of those cases I only know what the law of your state says.

 

Your opinion. Mine is different. Sometimes I carry more than one.
When a man acts aggressive and gets close enough to grab your popcorn you need to do something. I would much rather be the person doing something than the one something happened to.

 

You have your opinion of what the law says.
The people and the law of Ms. do not agree with your opinion.

 

Just so you know, you'd most definitely be charged. A firearm is not an appropriate response to popcorn. The courts would eat you alive.

The fact that you don't know this and that you seem so eager to take lives makes me question if you truly have a CCW. I know and have known many, and not a single one had a remotely similar attitude. They know that carrying a weapon is for self defense, not offense, and it doesn't give you a license to kill.

 

Where I live you don't need a CCW. It is open carry. There would never even be any charges pressed.
Protecting ones self is not offence.

 

Ahem, Rick old man, this case has been adjudicated in a court of law, in the jurisdiction where the shooting occurred. The man was found "not Guilty" of all counts.

The jury heard all of the evidence that was presented by the prosecutor, they deliberated for 16 hours. On the other hand you only know what was presented by the media and what was discussed in forum such as this one.

But somehow you think that you know better than the justice system in the state of Florida.

When will you stop bringing this shit up?

 

Homosexuals get the same protection from the mainstream media. When Matthew Shepard was murdered it was in the news for months.

About the same time this happened, two adult homosexuals raped and tortured to death a fourteen year old boy. That hardly got any coverage at all. I did not read about it until several years later.

*not_secure_link*www.wnd.com/2002/09/15294/

 

:idea:

 

My feelings about blacks do not matter. What matters is that what I say about them is true.

 

Same concept applies. A firearm is not an appropriate response to popcorn. Or a snowball. Or any other number of essentially harmless objects.

You would be absolutely nailed by the court. If you think no charges would be filed, you're not just an. Irresponsible gun owner.....you're a fool.

 

It's not my opinion of what your Castle law says, it's literally what it does say. The fact that there are some cases where it may or may not have been applied means nothing. It is no different than a traffic law not being enforced. You get stopped doing 65 in a 55 mile zone and the officer decides you are such a nice little fella he won't cite you, doesn't alter the fact there was a law broken. Come on Power you are smarter than this.

 

Laws might be different in your state. Here is Ms. you can protect yourself and use deadly force anytime you think you, another person, or your property is in danger. It just happens that when I am attacked, no matter what the weapon, I protect myself. I would think a person who attacked me without warning, or even with warning, with anything from a cotton ball to a bazooka might follow through with something else.

 

We are talking about laws in different states. I don't know the laws in Arizona or Maryland. I don't live there. I live in Ms. and know what the law does here.
The Castle law was just passed a few years ago. I think it was last year that open carry was allowed. People just got tired of the criminals have the advantage. The law here happens to agree.