A good guy with a gun?

bbam · 23-12-2012 02:33PM

Snickers Man wrote: »

According to the American National Rifle Association's vice president Wayne La Pierre: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

Simple statement. Let's consider a real-world situation.

In February 2012, a teenager called Trayvon Martin was shot dead in Florida by a man called George Zimmerman.

Martin had been staying for a week in a small gated community with his father and his father's partner. He had been on the way back to the house from the local candy store and was engaged in a phone call with his own girlfriend when he was spotted by Zimmerman.

Martin was not walking in any firm direction despite the fact that it was raining. He appeared to be looking around at the local houses. This is behaviour entirely consistent with somebody engrossed in a phone call, but Zimmerman, passing by in his car, concluded Martin was a burglar "casing" the local houses and so, as neighbourhood watch co-ordinator, he called the police.

In the course of the conversation Martin, having spotted Zimmerman's car slowing down and Zimmerman clearly scrutinising him, ran away. Zimmerman left the car to chase him. The police despatcher told him not to.

Shortly afterwards a fight started between Martin and Zimmerman. Martin was getting the better of it when Zimmerman pulled out his gun and shot him dead.

A case against him is pending.

Question: Was George Zimmerman a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun?

I would humbly suggest that if we don't get a unanimous answer to that question, Wayne La Pierre's logic falls flat on its face.

PS Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays

Was he not just another IDIOT with a gun...

Give more people guns and there will be more shootings, more shootings increases the likelihood of innocent people being killed..

The powerful lobby groups in America wanted less gun control, now they are reaping the outcome of that.. Its a bit like kicking a wasps nest, once its done there is no going back.. WHile they may tighten gun control laws they will not ever get the weapons back under control..

I think tighter laws are needed, its just going to lead to many armed stand-offs with crazed gun owners not wanting to surrender their beloved weapons..

Did anyone hear the guy on Mat Cooper during the week, the President of the Independent Firearm Owners Association.. He admitted to owning assault rifles and intimated he would be willing to die to hold onto them..

http://media.todayfm.com/podcast/70015

roadrunner16 · 23-12-2012 02:36PM

Dean09 wrote: »

How many threads do we need on American gun laws?

In answer to your question:
The Zimmerman guy shouldn't have tried to be a hero and chased the kid. He was an idiot.
But also, why did the kid run away if he was doing nothing wrong. Something doesn't add up.

probably because an older man who had driven by him more than once had got out of his car and followed him and started to chase him.

El Guapo! · 23-12-2012 02:43PM

roadrunner16 wrote: »

probably because an older man who had driven by him more than once had got out of his car and followed him and started to chase him.

Like I said, the OP never me toons Zimmerman getting out of his car and chasing him. It just said the kid ran and then Zimmerman chased him.
And again, I'm not saying Zimmerman was right. He's clearly a lunatic. I'm just saying maybe the kid was up to something an wasn't a innocent as hes being made out to be. Still didn't deserve to be shot though.

GreeBo · 23-12-2012 02:56PM

Dean09 wrote: »

Like I said, the OP never me toons Zimmerman getting out of his car and chasing him. It just said the kid ran and then Zimmerman chased him.
And again, I'm not saying Zimmerman was right. He's clearly a lunatic. I'm just saying maybe the kid was up to something an wasn't a innocent as hes being made out to be. Still didn't deserve to be shot though.

Based on this post it wouldnt seem that I twisted anything in your last post.
Your attitude seems to say "well he wouldnt have been shot if he wasnt up to *something*"
I call b0llocks on that. He wouldnt have been shot if every second yank didnt have a gun and their "right" to use it.

Sunnyisland · 23-12-2012 02:59PM

Dean09 wrote: »

Like I said, the OP never me toons Zimmerman getting out of his car and chasing him. It just said the kid ran and then Zimmerman chased him.
And again, I'm not saying Zimmerman was right. He's clearly a lunatic. I'm just saying maybe the kid was up to something an wasn't a innocent as hes being made out to be. Still didn't deserve to be shot though.

How do you make out zimmerman is a lunatic

Pilotdude5 · 23-12-2012 03:02PM

Having spent time in "less-desirable" parts of Florida, if a car slowed down next to me at night I would leg it too.

roadrunner16 · 23-12-2012 03:05PM

realies wrote: »

How do you make out zimmerman is a lunatic

because , he followed a child even though told not to by the police , and then after being over powered by the child , he shot the child.

Conmaicne Mara · 23-12-2012 03:09PM

Dean09 wrote: »

How many threads do we need on American gun laws?

None, they descend into name calling matches. God forbid one should have a different opinion to those who think they know it all, and their followers. It's completely pointless.

Sunnyisland · 23-12-2012 03:15PM

roadrunner16 wrote: »

because , he followed a child even though told not to by the police , and then after being over powered by the child , he shot the child.

Nice bit of child drama there. Anyway you still did not explain how what he did makes him being a lunatic.

El Guapo! · 23-12-2012 03:20PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Based on this post it wouldnt seem that I twisted anything in your last post.
Your attitude seems to say "well he wouldnt have been shot if he wasnt up to *something*"
I call b0llocks on that. He wouldnt have been shot if every second yank didnt have a gun and their "right" to use it.

Nope. Wrong again.
I never said either Zimmerman was right in what he did, or that he wouldn't have been shot if he wasn't up to something.
I'm not sticking up for Zimmerman in the slightest.
All I'm saying is that the kid may not have been as innocent as he's being made out to be.
I also said he didn't deserve to be shot.

And yes, your last post was twisting my post around. I said the kid could have been up to something too, and you said that I probably blame rape on short skirts.
Bit of a ridiculous leap there and totally wrong.

roadrunner16 · 23-12-2012 03:21PM

realies wrote: »

Nice bit of child drama there. Anyway you still did not explain how what he did makes him being a lunatic.

He killed a child. I dunno maybe I'm just weird for not liking the guy because of what he did

Sunnyisland · 23-12-2012 04:11PM

roadrunner16 wrote: »

He killed a child. I dunno maybe I'm just weird for not liking the guy because of what he did

That still does not make him a lunatic,

Does this killing not have to be taken in to context in what was happening in the area at the time,I wonder if the same happened here would there be as much condemnation of the suspect charged with 2nd degree manslaughter.

From January 1, 2011 through February 26, 2012, police were called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times.[70] During the 18 months preceding the February 26 shooting, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police line seven times. On five of those calls, Zimmerman reported suspicious looking men in the area, but never offered the men's race without first being asked by the dispatcher.[103][104][105] Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, and one shooting.[106] Twin Lakes residents said there were dozens of reports of attempted break-ins, which had created an atmosphere of fear in their neighborhood. In one case a woman with an infant hid in an upstairs room until the police arrived and scared away the intruders, who had already entered her home and disconnected the television.[62]
In September 2011, the Twin Lakes residents held an organizational meeting to create a neighborhood watch program. Zimmerman was selected by neighbors as the program's coordinator, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.[5][107] Zimmerman "once caught a thief and an arrest was made...He helped solve a lot of crimes," said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association.[70]
Three weeks prior to the shooting, on February 2, 2012, Zimmerman called police to report a young man peering into the windows of an empty Twin Lakes home. Zimmerman was told a police car was on the way, and he followed protocol, awaiting their arrival. By the time police arrived, the suspect had fled. On February 6, 2012, workers witnessed two young black men lingering in the yard of a Twin Lakes resident around the same time her home was burglarized. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. The next day police discovered the stolen laptop in the backpack of a young black man, which led to his arrest. Zimmerman identified this young man as the same person he had spotted peering into windows on February 2.[62]

Latchy · 23-12-2012 04:17PM

Snickers Man wrote: »

According to the American National Rifle Association's vice president Wayne La Pierre: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

You can be pretty sure that many of those good guys are quite capable of turning into the bad guy because of some grievance or slight , real or imagined , is going to blow his top and waste a load of people .

Simple statement.

Simple statement and a stupid one.

V_Moth · 23-12-2012 04:36PM

To solve this issue, we need to go back to 1974 and the classic piece of advice given in the film Zardoz:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOROvO2fxTc

BrokenArrows · 23-12-2012 04:39PM

There needs to be a 4th option. An idiot with a gun.

roadrunner16 · 23-12-2012 04:49PM

realies wrote: »

That still does not make him a lunatic,

Does this killing not have to be taken in to context in what was happening in the area at the time,I wonder if the same happened here would there be as much condemnation of the suspect charged with 2nd degree manslaughter.

From January 1, 2011 through February 26, 2012, police were called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times.[70] During the 18 months preceding the February 26 shooting, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police line seven times. On five of those calls, Zimmerman reported suspicious looking men in the area, but never offered the men's race without first being asked by the dispatcher.[103][104][105] Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, and one shooting.[106] Twin Lakes residents said there were dozens of reports of attempted break-ins, which had created an atmosphere of fear in their neighborhood. In one case a woman with an infant hid in an upstairs room until the police arrived and scared away the intruders, who had already entered her home and disconnected the television.[62]
In September 2011, the Twin Lakes residents held an organizational meeting to create a neighborhood watch program. Zimmerman was selected by neighbors as the program's coordinator, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.[5][107] Zimmerman "once caught a thief and an arrest was made...He helped solve a lot of crimes," said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association.[70]
Three weeks prior to the shooting, on February 2, 2012, Zimmerman called police to report a young man peering into the windows of an empty Twin Lakes home. Zimmerman was told a police car was on the way, and he followed protocol, awaiting their arrival. By the time police arrived, the suspect had fled. On February 6, 2012, workers witnessed two young black men lingering in the yard of a Twin Lakes resident around the same time her home was burglarized. A new laptop and some gold jewelry were stolen. The next day police discovered the stolen laptop in the backpack of a young black man, which led to his arrest. Zimmerman identified this young man as the same person he had spotted peering into windows on February 2.[62]

Ok I did not know all of that, but in each case you have cited , Zimmerman notified the police. and then they took action, in this case he took the law into his own hands. he made a mistake like we all do but he then took it to far and now someone had been killed as a result, he could have just called the police and left it at that. which is what I think most people would do.

looksee · 23-12-2012 05:57PM

Dean09 wrote: »

What??

What what? You were asking why someone would run if they are being scrutinised. Several people have answered that question. I was saying that if you were black and in that situation you would understand why he ran.

mckenzie84 · 23-12-2012 06:51PM

Zimmerman was an egotistical, idiot, trying to be a hero with a gun.

I completely understand why the young lad ran. It's a dark, rainy night and he's walking down the street on his own in a neighborhood he barely knows. A man drives up next to him, slows down and starts eyeballing him. Of course that would make you extremely nervous. I imagine that I would also run if I was in that situation.

Zimmerman was just an idiot who has seen to many shoot em up cop films and wanted to be the big man.

El Guapo! · 23-12-2012 07:29PM

looksee wrote: »

What what? You were asking why someone would run if they are being scrutinised. Several people have answered that question. I was saying that if you were black and in that situation you would understand why he ran.

Why does it make a difference if he was black?

Snickers Man · 24-12-2012 03:51AM

OP here.

The reason I gave the options I did in the poll was precisely to highlight the stupidity of the argument that there are "goodies" and "baddies" and as long as both are armed the goodies will be able to take care of the baddies.

This is the basic premise of the NRA and La Pierre and it is nonsense.

For what it's worth, I think Zimmerman was probably a well meaning guy with a gun, but he was empowered with lethal force to a degree that was beyond his training, competence and disposition to handle. And an innocent kid is dead as a result.

realies wrote: »

Does this killing not have to be taken in to context in what was happening in the area at the time,.....

From January 1, 2011 through February 26, 2012, police were called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times.

..During the 18 months preceding the February 26 shooting, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police line seven times. On five of those calls, Zimmerman reported suspicious looking men in the area, ...

Crimes committed at The Retreat in the year prior to Martin's death included eight burglaries, nine thefts, and one shooting.

If this is to be taken as a justification or even mitigation for what Zimmerman did then I find the reasoning breathtaking in its impertinence.

That police were called 402 times does not prove that there were 402 crimes perpetrated or even being attempted. It rather points to a level of paranoia among the residents.

Tot up the crimes you say were perpetrated there and you get 18. So for every crime that occurred in the area police were called 22 times!!!

How many of those crimes were committed or attempted by Trayvon Martin? He had only come to the area a week before.

There is no evidence whatsoever that he was in the process of committing of planning a crime. His behaviour can be explained perfectly adequately by the provable fact that he was on the phone. Zimmerman read the situation incorrectly. Maybe he had also called the police for spurious, if well intentioned reasons before.

Even if there HAD been 402 crimes committed in the area it still wouldn't give some jumpy nervous insecure incompetent the right to kill a kid out of frustration.

It's why democracies like the US have courts of law to determine guilt or innocence.

Incidentally, another of the early Amendments to the US Constitution which comprise the "Bill of Rights" of which the notorious Second Amendment is one is the Fifth which says that no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law"

A lot of the apologists for Zimmerman and the NRA seem to forget about that one.

Czarcasm · 24-12-2012 04:59AM

Dean09 wrote: »

Why does it make a difference if he was black?

Context is important- Black in a predominantly white neighbourhood. Of COURSE you're going to stand out, and to suggest anything like racism, etc, is just pure nonsense.

the_syco · 24-12-2012 05:26AM

George Zimmerman sees it all as "gods plan"...

He also has a habit of lying on TV, in the interviews (did not follow Martin) versus what he told the 911 operator (I'm following him)...

Manic Moran · 24-12-2012 06:04AM

Might I suggest we see what happens to Zimmerman at trial before declaring who was wrong and right?

And an innocent kid is dead as a result.

I suspect the trial is most likely to resolve the issue. If, as Zimmerman claims, Martin attacked him, even out of umbrage of being followed and racially profiled, Martin isn't innocent.

In either case, the Zimmerman/Martin case contributes nothing to the idea that the NRA chief is wrong, no matter which point of view you take:

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy with the gun, he certainly stopped the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy with the gun, he certainly wasn't stopped by the good guy without a gun.

Neither position disproves Mr La Pierre.

And, of course, it also seems that 'good guy with a gun' is the standard default of every serious organisation on the planet, from Army security at Dail Eireann to the gold repository at Fort Knox. If 'good guy with a gun' isn't effective or necessary, they wouldn't have guns.

The Aussie · 24-12-2012 07:07AM

Manic Moran wrote: »

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy with the gun, he certainly stopped the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy with the gun, he certainly wasn't stopped by the good guy without a gun.

Touché Sir

GreeBo · 24-12-2012 12:18PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Might I suggest we see what happens to Zimmerman at trial before declaring who was wrong and right?

I suspect the trial is most likely to resolve the issue. If, as Zimmerman claims, Martin attacked him, even out of umbrage of being followed and racially profiled, Martin isn't innocent.

In either case, the Zimmerman/Martin case contributes nothing to the idea that the NRA chief is wrong, no matter which point of view you take:

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy with the gun, he certainly stopped the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy with the gun, he certainly wasn't stopped by the good guy without a gun.

Neither position disproves Mr La Pierre.

And, of course, it also seems that 'good guy with a gun' is the standard default of every serious organisation on the planet, from Army security at Dail Eireann to the gold repository at Fort Knox. If 'good guy with a gun' isn't effective or necessary, they wouldn't have guns.

There is a little but significant difference between being trained and employed to protect people with a gun and being average joe with a gun, its rather silly of you to suggest otherwise imo.

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy, the lack of a gun would have prevented him from becoming the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy, the lack of a gun would have prevented him shooting someone to death.

We can do this all day tbh.

Snickers Man · 24-12-2012 04:26PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy with the gun, he certainly stopped the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy with the gun, he certainly wasn't stopped by the good guy without a gun.

Neither position disproves Mr La Pierre.

If neither of them had a gun, they'd probably both be alive today one bitching about the lack of respect of kids today and the other bitching about crazy old guys hassling the innocent for no reason.

But in the La Pierre analysis, one of them had to die.

Manic Moran · 24-12-2012 07:22PM

Snickers Man wrote: »

If neither of them had a gun, they'd probably both be alive today one bitching about the lack of respect of kids today and the other bitching about crazy old guys hassling the innocent for no reason.

But in the La Pierre analysis, one of them had to die.

Occupational hazard of engaging in conflict in an armed society. Correct solution is don't engage in conflict unless you need to. When you do need to, win.

It seem likely that whichever person was the outlier who broke the law will have paid a price. If it's Mr Zimmerman, then he will be number 169 out of some 2.4 million permitted pistol carriers known to have committed some form of crime since 1987 with a firearm in Florida. Not a bad rate.

Sertus · 24-12-2012 07:31PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

Might I suggest we see what happens to Zimmerman at trial before declaring who was wrong and right?

And why does this not apply to your comments as well ?

Manic Moran wrote: »

If you think Zimmerman was the good guy with the gun, he certainly stopped the bad guy.
If you think Zimmerman was the bad guy with the gun, he certainly wasn't stopped by the good guy without a gun.

Another NRA style false dilemma.

Zimmerman self proclaimed himself as a 'good guy with a gun', became self appointed police detective, judge, jury and executioner then shot dead a kid he claimed was a 'bad guy'. Personally I find such self styled pseudo good guys, with severe ego problems, armed with a firearm, as big a problem in society as any 'bad' guys. At least 'bad guys' are up front and honest about what they are, unlike the two faced hypocritical self righteous gun toting NRA types.

Manic Moran · 24-12-2012 07:45PM

Sertus wrote: »

And why does this not apply to your comments as well ?

Erm. It does. I don't believe I've made a statement indicating that either side is the correct one. Hence the "ifs."

Zimmerman self proclaimed himself as a 'good guy with a gun', became self appointed police detective, judge, jury and executioner then shot dead a kid he claimed was a 'bad guy'.

Not if his story is true. If it is true, then the kid was the bad guy and Zimmermann acted within his rights.. Not for skulking around and being black, but for engaging in physical confrontation.

GreeBo · 24-12-2012 10:50PM

soyou think being shot to death is a suitable response to physical violence ?
that's going to lead to a lot of dead drunk people so..

A good guy with a gun?

Comments