search
top

More Projection

An article on Wicked Local talks about how carrying a firearm only emboldened him to seek trouble, and he projects that onto George Zimmerman and the rest of us.

If Zimmerman had relied on responsible adults to do their jobs or avoided direct confrontation, Trayvon Martin would probably still be alive.

I know avoiding confrontation goes against the grain of the National Rifle Association’s philosophy and lobbying and certainly is the polar opposite of laws like the Florida Stand Your Ground Law or, as I prefer to call it, the Shoot Me Where I Stand Law.

This is ridiculous. You can only stand your ground when presented with a reasonable fear of grave bodily injury or harm. In other words, someone has to already either be attacking you, or putting you in reasonable fear that you are about to be attacked. In the case of George Zimmerman, being straddled and getting your head pounded into concrete qualifies, and 6 jurors agreed his fear was reasonable. Duty to retreat plays no role because he had no opportunity to retreat. It’s amazing how many people keeping yammering about this case without the barest of facts. The jury had the fact, and they acquitted.

15 Responses to “More Projection”

  1. Patrick H says:

    Funny how I constantly read comments- including here!- about how many gun owners DON’T want to get involved, and just want to stay away, because of legal reasons. I’m not debating the merits of that, but it shows you how he has no idea what he is talking about.

    • HappyWarrior6 says:

      Good point.

      One of the first things any qualified CCW trainer will tell you is that there are, in fact, numerous legal repercussions that could arise and that those must be weighed against your safety and the safety of others around you. It’s obviously more of a no brainer if you or a loved one is being physically assaulted or threatened in front of you. However, I think anyone who carries looked at the George Zimmerman case and had some serious questions as to whether he was bringing trouble on himself first. The article seems to be playing to this fear in the extreme.

  2. Jack says:

    And pulling out the old “responsible adults” chestnut.

    It’s also fascinating how Martin is not given any agency or humanity. Apparently, there was no choice or intelect behind his actions.

    Also note the idea that the big-bad NRA not only promotes murder but makes the even bigger faux pause of being, gasp, confrontional in it’s lobbying.

    Oh if only those icky gun people would just let “responsible adults” tell them what to do.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      It’s also fascinating how Martin is not given any agency or humanity. Apparently, there was no choice or intelect behind his actions.

      Keep in mind, this is how the left views blacks — little more than animals, reacting instinctively to events around them.

      Those of us who believe they’re fully developed human beings, responsible for their actions and capable of overcoming the circumstances of their birth or hardships created by idiots are the ones called “racists” these days.

    • Sigivald says:

      Equally interesting that in this writer’s world cops (the “responsible adults”) never shoot someone who isn’t guilty, and evidently never have anything to do with escalation.

      I’m not one of those “all coppers are bastards” types, but events nationwide show us that some cops are very much likely to overreact, escalate, panic, or use excessive force, nationwide.

  3. Robb Allen says:

    Honestly, I don’t see the problem with being emboldened. I think not being required by law to cower is a good thing. Being emboldened should also have the equal and opposite reaction that the criminals now realize they CANNOT be emboldened to ply their trade, and I can only see that as a good thing.

    • Sebastian says:

      There’s a difference, I think, between having confidence you can deal with any trouble that may find you, and feeling emboldened, in the sense he means, which means either seeking trouble, or not taking sufficient precautions to avoid trouble if you can.

  4. emdfl says:

    The correct response to fools like the scribbler of that ignorant screed is to suggest that they lie down on a concrete pavement. Then allow a bigger and stronger person to sit on them and start pounding their head into the pavement. And tell the poundee that they can stop the pounder any time by simply saying, “BANG!”.

  5. Defens says:

    Although NRA lobbying may be confrontational (which is great – that’s why I’m a Life Member) the training philosophy is certainly not. As an NRA Instructor, we teach to avoid conflict, stay out of places that might get you in trouble, to look at DGU as a last resort, and to be keenly aware of the consequences of it.

  6. Andy B. says:

    I think the best and only answer to what is maintained is, to look at the actual statistical records of what permit holders get involved in. My belief is that it points to, the vast majority of permit holders avoiding involvement rather than seeking it.

    The problem is, that anecdotally, examples of both extremes do exist. I personally avoid potentially confrontational situations when carrying (Anecdote #1) but I also knew someone who went looking for trouble, until he found enough of it that the sheriff pulled his permit (Anecdote #2); and it was one example where, knowing the guy, I had no problem with what the sheriff did.

    A third, ambiguous anecdote is, I know of a guy who has gotten into two shooting scrapes, that as told sounded like legitimate self-defense, and in both examples no one was injured. But a cop I knew opined that anyone who got into two shooting incidents had almost certainly been looking for trouble.

    I don’t know about that, but the existence of all three anecdotes demonstrates why only a statistically large body of honest data can tell the truth.

  7. BikerDad says:

    I read the fellow’s piece, and all I can say is, “The Fail, it burnsez.”

    1) He has opted to punish his own daughter for having the temerity to defend herself.

    2) He demonstrates an incredible ignorance of the Zimmerman case when he asks “what was Martin supposed to do?” Well, given that Martin had already separated from the “”stalker”” (double scare quotes there folks), we can only surmise that our Wicked Local knucklehead is willfully ignorant. At best.

  8. Windy Wilson says:

    BikerDad,

    1. Anybody who would do that is, if not a child molester/ rapist/murderer himself, accessory to one.

    2. The leftists who have the disconnect between their daily lives and what happens on TV are quite happy to make up their own facts, which result in an Alice-through-the-looking-glass- White-Queen-belief-in-6-impossible-things-before-breakfast certainty that Zimmerman saw Martin, followed him, and shot him in cold blood before Martin did anything.

  9. Brad says:

    Christ. Once again it’s not really about guns so much, but all about the rampant ignorance about the facts of the Zimmerman case and the facts of self-defense laws.

    How these buffoon sling insults at us all the while not only demonstrating their ignorance but even PROCLAIMING it! simply amazes me. They really believe they know better than us, and that they are OUR betters. Good grief.

    • Brad says:

      Sebastian

      “An article on Wicked Local talks about how carrying a firearm only emboldened him”

      Still, to be fair to the ass who wrote that article, it was not that writer who was carrying. That writer talks about a book he read and how the writer of that book, named Canada, felt that carrying a firearm emboldened him.

      You might want to edit your first sentence. I know that I got the wrong idea until I clicked through and read that article for myself.

  10. fred says:

    The only reason anyone would buy and carry a first aid kit is if they want to hurt people. Any reasonable person would just call 911 if they encountered someone needing an ice pack or bandage. So the fact that someone thinks ahead to buy a first aid kit, and then carry it with them, means they think they are better than the rest of us, they want to play vigilante by serving up their own justice outside the system, and they plan ahead specifically to hurt people.

    there is no other reason to have a first aid kit! only ems. firefighters and police should have first aid kits, the rest of us wouldn’t even know how to use them correctly! or worse a victim might take the first aid kit from you and use it on themselves! think of the children !

top