Tensions are building in Sanford, Florida...

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

2 posts / 0 new

Tensions are building in Sanford, Florida – where George Zimmerman still walks free after shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin to death last month as Martin walked home from a 7-11 armed with skittles and an iced tea. Zimmerman is protected by Florida’s radical “Shoot First” law, which allows a person to shoot and kill another person if they feel threatened.

The law was written by the American Legislative Exchange Council at the behest of the National Rifle Association. But as more evidence comes to light – it’s looking more and more like Zimmerman acted in cold-blood murder and not self-defense – yet the Sanford police department has yet to arrest Zimmerman.

On Wednesday night – Sanford city commissioners passed a “no confidence” vote in the city Police Chief Bill Lee, Jr. who continued to defend his department’s actions. With public anger boiling over in the city – the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has decided to send its community relation service to Sanford to prevent all-out riots and social unrest. Meanwhile – hundreds of people gathered in New York City on Wednesday to show support for the Martin family and demand justice for Martin’s killer.

Thom Hartmann Administrator's picture
Thom Hartmann A...
Dec. 29, 2009 10:59 am


These laws are designed to protect the shooters, not the ones getting shot. I would like to know how the NRA would define an acceptable ratio of law-abiders being protected to innocents being shot? Is 10 to 1 good enough? How about 99 to 1? Isn't our legal system based upon allowing some guilty to go free as a trade-off for ensuring freedom for the innocent. Statistically speaking, these things will happen. What is the acceptable threshold NRA?

It's been said there is a price to be paid for a free society. Prior to these laws, that price was being in the wrong place at the wrong time while a societal deviant was doing harm to society (often with a gun). These laws were supposed to rectify that problem by providing even more freedom to fight back (with a gun) against the deviants. Are the deaths related to further proliferation of gun violence from these laws just another price to pay for freedom? Has society gained any more freedom as a result of these laws?

The NRA wins when they push for more freedom resulting in more guns in the hands of law-breakers. The NRA wins again when they push for further freedom resulting in more guns in the hands of law-abiders. Heads they win, tails we lose. The NRA, law-breaking gun owners and law-abiding gun owners all win big in this society of freedom. The only losers are the ones who hope for the freedom to live in a society with less guns. Thanks NRA.

Laborisgood's picture
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

How Did the America Media Miss the "Pro-Life" Movement Isn't about Saving Life - But - Is About Women Under the Thumbs of Men?

Thom plus logo Anti-abortion groups want you to believe they're all about saving "unborn" human lives, but a new poll shows that, for the majority of abortion rights opponents, that's a lie. The "pro-life" movement, it turns out, is fundamentally about keeping women down - a sentiment that's even shared by a majority of women who support forced pregnancies.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system