[HeyBub[_3_]]

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been
corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that
a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about. "

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...l-rights-punch

Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one from the
Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested in the protests
over the shooting.

"Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of justice denied,
according to protesters who are expected to amass throughout the day to
continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest in the Sanford, Fla. case."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,3121664.story

Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the facts are in.

Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...t-trayvon.html

[Stormin Mormon[_7_]]

Not relevant. According to the black race baiters, he was lilly white,
uptight, and outa sight.
(Sounds like a line from a joke?)

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...t-trayvon.html

[Ron]

On Mar 26, 5:47*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

[Robert Green]

"Ron" wrote in message
...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article discusses.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...pagewanted=all

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

--
Bobby G.


--
Bobby G.

[harryagain]

"Robert Green" wrote in message
...
"Ron" wrote in message
...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing
his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article discusses.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...pagewanted=all

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Wonderful place America. I expect the next thing will be that Zimmerman
knew all this before he shot him.

[gonjah]

On 4/1/2012 11:34 AM, harryagain wrote:
"Robert wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...
So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing
his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article discusses.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-20/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-20120320_1_robert-zimmerman-domestic-violence-online-petition?pagewanted=all

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.
Wonderful place America. I expect the next thing will be that Zimmerman
knew all this before he shot him.



This thing stinks like old fish:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...-2-experts-say

[Ron]

Robert Green wrote:
"Ron" wrote in message
...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article discusses.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...pagewanted=all

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Check this out

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/f...ce%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.


--
Grab your gun and bring the cat in.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:00:55 -0400, Ron wrote:




Check this out

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/f...ce%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.


No matter what an investigation show, Florida authorities are under a
lot of pressure from assorted protest groups. They may charge him
just to appease them. I would hope they still go by facts of the case
though, not political pressure.

[Oren[_2_]]

On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:00:55 -0400, Ron wrote:

Check this out

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/f...ce%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.

Charge him with what?

Here is a portion of the Police Report.

See initial charges, yet to be brought. Read the narratives.

PDF

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-03/69081607-29132322.pdf

[HeyBub[_3_]]

Ron wrote:

Check this out

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/f...ce%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another
story.

Could be. There are several reasons, however why Zimmerman wasn't arrested.

* A warrant for an arrest must state "probable cause" that the accused
committed a crime. Evidently there was some disagreement as to whether there
was sufficient evidence of a crime.

* Upon arrest, the "speedy trial act" clock begins. If an arrest is not
necessary, it would be foolish to arrest someone and put the prosecution
under an unnecessary time constratint.

* Even if arrested, Zimmerman would make bond in a heartbeat, maybe even
release on PR, so the arrest would serve no good purpose.

* Florida law specifically PROHIBITS an arrest in a probable self-defense
case.

* The sanctions for a false arrest are substantial. Who would be willing to
risk them?

Try to follow along:

Florida Statutes #776.012
Use of force in defense of person - A person is justified in using force
that is intended or likely to cause death or bodily injury against another
when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct
is necessary to defend himself or herself against the other's imminent use
of unlawful force.

Now add to the above
Florida Statutes #776.032
Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of
force - (1) A person who uses force as described in #776.012... is justified
in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action
for the use of such force. (2) A law enforcement agency may use standard
procedures for investigating the use of force, but the agency may not arrest
the person for using force unless it determines that probable cause exists
showing that the force that was used was unlawful.

It's crystal clear that the cops did NOT have probable cause to believe
Zimmerman acted unlawfully. All they had, at the scene, was Zimmerman's word
against nobody's!

The forensic evidence and semi-witness accounts may elevate the cop's
thinking to the probable cause level, but at the time, on the street, they
just couldn't do it.

[Robert Green]

"Ron" wrote in message
ng.com...
Robert Green wrote:
"Ron" wrote in message

...
On Mar 26, 5:47 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
HeyBub wrote:

The little snowflake, Trayvon Martin, has some skeletons:

* He was on suspension from school for graffiti, after being found with
a
bag of woman's jewelry and burglar tools
* Another suspension for possession of Marijuana
* Another suspension for tardiness and truancy

All of this is, of course, irrelevant to his fatal altercation in a
burglary-ridden sub-division.


http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/2...-expected-at-t...

So does Zimmerman.

http://preview.tinyurl.com/bq4c8qj

Interesting article. It appears that he might have been close to losing
his
gun because of the domestic violence beef the Sentinel article
discusses.



http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...pagewanted=all

Neither of them appears to be an "angel" which is no surprise to me.
Zimmerman's father nailed it when he said ""George is going to suffer
for
years and years," he said." Unfortunately, he or his loved ones could
easily wind up dead as the hunter becomes the hunted. No one comes out
a
winner in Sanford. Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death
civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Check this out


http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/f...ce%20Guide.pdf

I think he will be charged with *something*, convicted is another story.

I dunno. His fate may rest in the hands of 12 people not smart enough to
get out of jury duty. (-: But I think you're right. He will be charged
with something, if only to placate the protestors. Not, perhaps how it
should be, but certainly how it's been throughout US history.

--
Bobby G.

[Oren[_2_]]

On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:55:06 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Um, Florida being a Castle Doctrine state protects from a justified
shooting. The family cannot sue for wrongful death, take your house,
land, cats, dogs or anything from all the people you ever knew.

My state is not called a castle doctrine state because THAT one point
in the law was not written in this past year. Had protection from
civil liabilities been added, we would be in the states called Castle
Doctrine.

I see today, "deep pockets" in Texas is or has already given $10,000
to the Zimmerman defense -- assuming he committed a crime and is
arrested, put on public trial and all that mess.

[Robert Green]

"Oren" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:55:06 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

Zimmerman will undoubtedly face a wrongful death civil
suit funded by some very deep pockets.

Um, Florida being a Castle Doctrine state protects from a justified
shooting. The family cannot sue for wrongful death, take your house,
land, cats, dogs or anything from all the people you ever knew.

Remember, the key word in that law is "justified." If a court finds
Zimmerman's use of force unjustified, all those protection vanish into thin
air.

My state is not called a castle doctrine state because THAT one point
in the law was not written in this past year. Had protection from
civil liabilities been added, we would be in the states called Castle
Doctrine.

The lesson of the ACA should be clear here. Just because a law is passed
doesn't mean it's going to pass constitutional muster.

I see today, "deep pockets" in Texas is or has already given $10,000
to the Zimmerman defense -- assuming he committed a crime and is
arrested, put on public trial and all that mess.

You're the one who recently said, IIRC, if they can't get someone on state
charges, they Feds can go after them without fear of double jeopardy. The
Feds can go after Zimmerman for violating Martin's civil rights regardless
of the state law. That was a quite popular tactic in the South where some
states had laws that made it almost impossible for a white person to be
tried for killing a black one.

This incident, as they say in the news business had "grown legs" and there's
no telling where those legs might take it. With big money on both sides of
the issue, I suspect this case will end up in the Supreme Court. I am sure
that more than one or two thugs and gangstas are saying to themselves "All I
have to do is ambush a dude where there are no witnesses, muss myself up to
look like I was attacked and I can kill anyone I want to and walk." Even
die-hard 2nd Amendment fans are going to find such cases hard to choke down.

--
Bobby G.

[Doug[_14_]]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:36:27 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been
corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that
a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told police about. "

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...l-rights-punch

Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one from the
Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested in the protests
over the shooting.

"Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of justice denied,
according to protesters who are expected to amass throughout the day to
continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest in the Sanford, Fla. case."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,3121664.story

Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the facts are in.

Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.



Aside from all of this, I am surprised our president who is an
attorney from a top notch law school, speaks before knowing all the
facts. As you point out, this is not the first time he's done this.
I'm not much of a beer drinker but I'll be glad to buy if he invites
me to the next beer summit.

[John Carter]

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the
Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the
unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George
Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed his head into the
sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has
been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been
no reports that a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told
police about. "

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...s-trayvon-mart
in-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-civil-rights-punch

Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one
from the Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested
in the protests over the shooting.

"Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of
justice denied, according to protesters who are expected to amass
throughout the day to continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest
in the Sanford, Fla. case."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...artin-case-201
20326,0,3121664.story

Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the
facts are in.

Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.


Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program. The police want eyes
and ears out there, not an untrained civilian with sidearms
going after a suspicious character. We operate in pairs and
without weapons. We did disnss a member for bringing a gun to
a watch. Our watch program is now inits seventh year, and during
that time, we have been responsible for many leads leading to arrets.
Our local police department loves the work we do to help them.

[Norminn]

On 3/29/2012 2:37 AM, John Carter wrote:
wrote in
:

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the
Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the
unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George
Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed his head into the
sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

"That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has
been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been
no reports that a witness saw that initial punch Zimmerman told
police about. "

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...s-trayvon-mart
in-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-civil-rights-punch

Now contrast the story from the Orlando Sentinel (above) with one
from the Chicago Tribune (below). The latter seems more interested
in the protests over the shooting.

"Martin was killed one month ago today. That's one month of
justice denied, according to protesters who are expected to amass
throughout the day to continue their demand for Zimmerman's arrest
in the Sanford, Fla. case."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...artin-case-201
20326,0,3121664.story

Once again, our president seems to have spoken before all the
facts are in.

Maybe a beer summit can sort it all out.


Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program. The police want eyes
and ears out there, not an untrained civilian with sidearms
going after a suspicious character. We operate in pairs and
without weapons. We did disnss a member for bringing a gun to
a watch. Our watch program is now inits seventh year, and during
that time, we have been responsible for many leads leading to arrets.
Our local police department loves the work we do to help them.

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by PD
and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their program.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

Norminn wrote:

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by
PD and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES patrol, even
in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt him a second time?

[Kurt Ullman]

In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

Norminn wrote:

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by
PD and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES patrol, even
in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt him a second time?

Farting in his general direction is generally viewed as a violation of
air quality laws.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

[Robert Green]

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Norminn wrote:

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by
PD and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES patrol, even
in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt him a second time?

Very soon in Florida and elsewhere there could be a laws to address that.
Roam around looking for trouble while armed? You'll get arrested. Or
revoke your handgun permit. Or charge you with being an unlicensed security
guard. Or do any number of things quite more unpleasant than a taunting.
Heller didn't give Americans unfettered carry rights, despite what some
people incredibly choose to believe. It said there could be reasonable
conditions places on gun ownership.

As the pendulum swings, don't be surprised to see anti-vigilante laws being
passed in a number of states. Heller and McDonald were 5-4 decisions. All
that has to happen is one conservative member retires for the calculus to
change completely. H & McD concerned, primarily, handgun ownership bans,
real and defacto. There will need to be a large number of lawsuits in order
to determine whether any other existing gun regulations might also be
unconstitutional. As far as I know, NYC's Sullivan law still stands.

--
Bobby G.

[HeyBub[_3_]]

Robert Green wrote:

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES
patrol, even in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt
him a second time?

Very soon in Florida and elsewhere there could be a laws to address
that. Roam around looking for trouble while armed? You'll get
arrested. Or revoke your handgun permit. Or charge you with being
an unlicensed security guard. Or do any number of things quite more
unpleasant than a taunting. Heller didn't give Americans unfettered
carry rights, despite what some people incredibly choose to believe.
It said there could be reasonable conditions places on gun ownership.

As the pendulum swings, don't be surprised to see anti-vigilante laws
being passed in a number of states. Heller and McDonald were 5-4
decisions. All that has to happen is one conservative member retires
for the calculus to change completely. H & McD concerned, primarily,
handgun ownership bans, real and defacto. There will need to be a
large number of lawsuits in order to determine whether any other
existing gun regulations might also be unconstitutional. As far as I
know, NYC's Sullivan law still stands.

Giggle.

[Kurt Ullman]

In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:


Very soon in Florida and elsewhere there could be a laws to address that.
Roam around looking for trouble while armed? You'll get arrested. Or
revoke your handgun permit. Or charge you with being an unlicensed security
guard. Or do any number of things quite more unpleasant than a taunting.
Heller didn't give Americans unfettered carry rights, despite what some
people incredibly choose to believe. It said there could be reasonable
conditions places on gun ownership.
But this issue, at least on the criminal side, has nothing to do with
ownership. It has to do with use of the gun. Under what circumstances
can you legally put a hole in somebody. The ownership issue is beside
the point entirely and licensing only peripherally. Is there anything in
the record to indicate Z couldn't have gotten the permit or that it was
illegally obtained?


As the pendulum swings, don't be surprised to see anti-vigilante laws being
passed in a number of states. Heller and McDonald were 5-4 decisions. All
that has to happen is one conservative member retires for the calculus to
change completely. H & McD concerned, primarily, handgun ownership bans,
real and defacto. There will need to be a large number of lawsuits in order
to determine whether any other existing gun regulations might also be
unconstitutional. As far as I know, NYC's Sullivan law still stands.
Not on this issue, though.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

[Attila.Iskander]

"Robert Green" wrote in message
...
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Norminn wrote:

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by
PD and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

And if a member of the community DOES carry a weapon and DOES patrol,
even
in a marked vehicle, what're the police to do? Taunt him a second time?

Very soon in Florida and elsewhere there could be a laws to address that.
Roam around looking for trouble while armed? You'll get arrested. Or
revoke your handgun permit. Or charge you with being an unlicensed
security
guard. Or do any number of things quite more unpleasant than a taunting.
Heller didn't give Americans unfettered carry rights, despite what some
people incredibly choose to believe. It said there could be reasonable
conditions places on gun ownership.


Man,
You're getting more and more stupid and desperate as time goes on.

And NO, Heller did not give rights
JUST LIKE THE CONSTITUTION does not "GIVE RIGHTS"

As to "reasonable conditions", THERE ARE NOT "reasonalbe conditions" allowed
under the letter of the 2nd AMendment
ANd notwithtanding Scalia's opining on it, the 2nd Amendment does NOT say
"..he right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,
EXCEPT FOR.."
It just says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."
That's a pretty ABSOLUTE dicta when you think about it
Isn't it funny how ACTUALLY READING the law, simplifies it...




As the pendulum swings, don't be surprised to see anti-vigilante laws
being passed in a number of states.

yawn
Won't happen
But it's a typical solution to pacify the idiot, the unthinking and the
ignorati.
More laws that don't do anything more than the existing laws, were they
enforced.
Vigilantism, is already a crime covered under current criminal code
Typically under kidnapping, illegal detention, assault and homicide


Heller and McDonald were 5-4 decisions. All that has to happen
is one conservative member retires for the calculus to change completely.

At least that's what the wishfull thinking left would love to believe
But the US Supreme Court has a LONG history of NOT going back on previous
decisions (look up Stare Decisis)
And there is also a good chance that judges with questionnable integrity
like Sotomajor and


HE & McD concerned, primarily, handgun ownership bans,
real and defacto. There will need to be a large number of lawsuits in
order
to determine whether any other existing gun regulations might also be
unconstitutional. As far as I know, NYC's Sullivan law still stands.


It still stands because it has NOT been challenged since Heller and
MacDonald
But not surprised you would spout such an ignorant strawman..
Par for the course
Meanwhile various other States have already been challenged and have had
some or all of their restrictions knocked down as unconstitutional

[Robert Green]

"Norminn" wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2012 2:37 AM, John Carter wrote:

Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program.

Agreed. I think that's going to weigh against him if he's indicted. Every
watch program I've known of follows similar rules. Why? Zimmerman showed
us why. )-:

The police want eyes
and ears out there, not an untrained civilian with sidearms
going after a suspicious character. We operate in pairs and
without weapons. We did disnss a member for bringing a gun to
a watch. Our watch program is now inits seventh year, and during
that time, we have been responsible for many leads leading to arrets.
Our local police department loves the work we do to help them.

I've said it before. Cops like the assist from well-run neighborhood watch
programs but a lot of them don't like the idea of lone, armed vigilantes
running around acting like the police. That's especially true of undercover
and plainclothes cops who even fear being shot by their uniformed and
well-trained brethren.

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by PD
and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

That makes perfect sense. There's an incredible difference in stopping a
person to ask them what they're doing when you're in marked patrol car and
when you're in your private vehicle. In the former case, your intent and
association with law enforcement is clear. In the latter, who knows what
kind of sociopath you are?

--
Bobby G.

[[email protected][_2_]]

On Apr 5, 2:30*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Norminn" wrote in message

...

On 3/29/2012 2:37 AM, John Carter wrote:
Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
* I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
* trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. *I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. *It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program.

Agreed. *I think that's going to weigh against him if he's indicted. *Every
watch program I've known of follows similar rules. *Why? *Zimmerman showed
us why. *)-:

It figures you'd agree with something that as stated, is
not based on facts or logic. Just because the neighborhood watch
programs you and Norminn are involved with prohibit guns
doesn't mean all neighborhood watch programs even have
an opinion on the matter.

The Sanford police department has a 17 page manual on their
neighborhood watch program and the subject of guns is not
mentioned once. Funny thing, that. If they had such a policy
one would think it would be in the handbook. And I'd say the
actual Sanford program is factual, while Normin's experience
and opinions have no bearing.

[Attila.Iskander]

wrote in message
...
On Apr 5, 2:30 am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Norminn" wrote in message

...

On 3/29/2012 2:37 AM, John Carter wrote:
Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program.

Agreed. I think that's going to weigh against him if he's indicted.
Every
watch program I've known of follows similar rules. Why? Zimmerman
showed
us why. )-:

It figures you'd agree with something that as stated, is
not based on facts or logic. Just because the neighborhood watch
programs you and Norminn are involved with prohibit guns
doesn't mean all neighborhood watch programs even have
an opinion on the matter.


He has been consistent in that at least

The Sanford police department has a 17 page manual on their
neighborhood watch program and the subject of guns is not
mentioned once. Funny thing, that. If they had such a policy
one would think it would be in the handbook. And I'd say the
actual Sanford program is factual, while Normin's experience
and opinions have no bearing.


He hasn't let facts interfere with any of the presumptions or ignorant cant
he has spouted so far.
Maybe that's why he needs to believe I'm a "sock-puppet".

[Attila.Iskander]

"Robert Green" wrote in message
...
"Norminn" wrote in message
...
On 3/29/2012 2:37 AM, John Carter wrote:

Don;t know who is telling the truth, but one thing
I know for sure - either Zimmerman wasn't properly
trained in the neighborhood waych program, or he was
ignoring what he waas told. I am a member of our
city neighborhood watch program, and I know for sure that
NO guns permitted. It's the neighborhood WAYCH proram, not
the neighborhood LAW ENFORCENENT program.

Agreed. I think that's going to weigh against him if he's indicted.
Every
watch program I've known of follows similar rules. Why? Zimmerman showed
us why. )-:

The police want eyes
and ears out there, not an untrained civilian with sidearms
going after a suspicious character. We operate in pairs and
without weapons. We did disnss a member for bringing a gun to
a watch. Our watch program is now inits seventh year, and during
that time, we have been responsible for many leads leading to arrets.
Our local police department loves the work we do to help them.

I've said it before. Cops like the assist from well-run neighborhood
watch
programs but a lot of them don't like the idea of lone, armed vigilantes
running around acting like the police. That's especially true of
undercover
and plainclothes cops who even fear being shot by their uniformed and
well-trained brethren.

The Orlando paper had a story about the Sanford neighborhood watch/PD
roles. Not only is NW NOT supposed to carry weapons, they are not
supposed to PATROL. There is an entirely separate group, trained by PD
and driving marked vehicles, who are supposed to patrol under their
program.

That makes perfect sense. There's an incredible difference in stopping a
person to ask them what they're doing when you're in marked patrol car and
when you're in your private vehicle. In the former case, your intent and
association with law enforcement is clear. In the latter, who knows what
kind of sociopath you are?


More ignorant presumptions
Particularly when one considers that civilians actually shoot more than
twice the criminals that police, while the police shoot more than 6 times
the innocent bystanders than civilians

It would make more sense for you to be better informed when you spout your
agenda

[metspitzer]

On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 16:36:27 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

"With a single punch, Trayvon Martin [the deceased] decked the Neighborhood
Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then
Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman [the non-deceased] and slammed
his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law enforcement
authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

We will just ignore that the racial element was planted by NBC and use
this as a teachable moment anyway.