Schumer calls for federal probe of 'Stand Your Ground' laws after Florida shooting

The Federal Government can "probe" all they want... they have NO JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY over Florida's gun laws. Period... end of story. They can conclude whatever they wish, and if the Governor of Florida has any intestinal fortitude about him he will tell the FedGov to pack sand.

Originally posted by johnlucchese

To tell you the trueth - gun laws in New York are working out fine...for us law abiding citizens who want to own a gun. It takes anywhere from 6 - 9 from the time you apply until you can actually buy a gun. "They" got what they wanted.

If I am a criminal.....I can go to any one of two dozen projects or my local drug dealer and buy one today.

So, in conclusion, it's easier for a criminal to buy a gun than it is for a regular citizen.....

I am sorry to hear that - I would never live in a State with such laws...nor do I want the Senator's and other legislators from those States to have any input into my State's laws.

While you still can - vote with your feet is all I can say. If these bone heads have their way soon enough we’ll all be under the same restrictive umbrella.

I would hope there is a secession before Missouri becomes any semblance of NY, IL r CA but my hope is fading.

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
The Federal Government can "probe" all they want... they have NO JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY over Florida's gun laws. Period... end of story. They can conclude whatever they wish, and if the Governor of Florida has any intestinal fortitude about him he will tell the FedGov to pack sand.

I'm guessing that his intestinal fortitude is directly proportional to the amount of federal funding he would lose should he disagree...like all the politicians.

I think the only thing that at this point can stem the tide of the monster that is the federal government is a secession.

Originally posted by Golf66
Awesome - didn't take long for the liberal anti-gun lobby to come out and exploit the crisis...

Still, Schumer wrote in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Sunday that the laws themselves should be investigated.

These laws seem to be encouraging vigilantism by allowing individuals to use deadly force as a first resort," Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement.

Schumer asked Holder's department to probe whether the laws "are creating more violence than they are preventing," and whether potential murders are "going unprosecuted" because of them.

He estimated that 23 states have some form of this law.

Read more: www.foxnews.com... 1

Hey Chuck I have an idea let’s leave it up to the individual States what is appropriate for their citizens huh? How's strict gun control working for you in NY? Not so hot I hear...

My State has this law - I say let the liberals in NY hug each other and sing khumbahya. Leave Missouri alone please we are fine with keeping some semblance of our rights to protect ourselves.

As for Holder - he needs to worry about gun control in the ATF before he starts picking apart the States laws.

That's the entire purpose of the media making a big deal of this killing, but not the hundreds of other black on black teen killings.

Do like the politicos do........
When in danger or in doubt...............
run in circles, scream and shout...............
yeah right..................................

reply to post by Golf66

As for Holder - he needs to worry about gun control in the ATF before he starts picking apart the States laws.

That same point entered my mind as well. What's more I chuckle at the irony wrapped up in this messy sideshow.

Obviously perception matters, and yet the perception of an AG with Operation Fast & Furious baggage being asked to probe a state law related to a death by firearm appears to have passed over the senator's head.

Kabuki theatre written by Quentin Tarantino? Sort of has that flavor.

Originally posted by spyder550
This law is basically a hunting license - no witness - no problem - your word against the dead guys.

You guys really want to live in that world - really?

Read the law and understand what its intent is and you'll see that it is a license to not be required to retreat in the face of aggression. It allows you to defend yourself, your loved ones, your home, your fellow humans from predators bent on grazing on a populace of acquiescent sheep.

There will be the occasional nutbar that takes it too far, or uses the law to their advantage to become vigilantes, and they must be dealt with. But it's a good law, and the needs of few do not outweigh the needs of the many. It's quite the other way around, despite liberals trying to twist it that way.

/TOA

Chuck Schumer the same idiot that goes around NYS every year saying he is going to investigate the unusually high gas prices, only to disappear until the next year and start the process all over again with no results. Please quit your job Chuck, you suck. Hey theres a campaign slogan. God I can't wait to get out of this state...

Okay, so a anti- gun douche has armed security.... seems contradictory to me. As I tell all anti gun activists- Dont worry, I wont use my guns to defend you, your family, your property or your rights out of respect for your beliefs should you ever become a victim in my presence. I also will not call the police and neither should you. They have guns, remember?
It sounds harsh, but believe me it has made sense to more than one anti gun nut who is now a gun owner. Fact is if you are not going to stand up for yourself why should anyone else?

Originally posted by Kovenov

Obviously perception matters, and yet the perception of an AG with Operation Fast & Furious baggage being asked to probe a state law related to a death by firearm appears to have passed over the senator's head.

Kabuki theatre written by Quentin Tarantino? Sort of has that flavor.

I know right - I'm sure this little tid bit slipped Chucks mind.

Then again - I don't think they (collectively liberal gun haters) are after much of the truth just a way to infect the nation with their agenda.

The law, in most states, are largely ambiguous and like the OP said they're creating more issues then it's resolving.

Calm down, your guns are still safe.

reply to post by spyder550


Sorry, we already live in that world and did way before this law was enacted. Now though we can actually fight back instead of having to just be victims of predatory criminals. If you dont like the law, then dont abide by it. It doesnt FORCE you to defend yourself it just gives you the RIGHT to. You want to be a victim, statistic or number, be my guest. Thats your buisness. I'll stand up for myself, my family and my property thank you.

reply to post by franklin555


I must disagree with you. Bill Lee is by far NOT a racist. He is a good man with strong moral values and beliefs. Zimmerman on the other hand may very well be as you described him. I cant say for sure, I dont know him personally.
I too have a ccw. I have been in confrontations while carrying. Regardless of if I was loosing or not, I never saw the need to draw my weapon. If I had the opportunity to remove it and secure it, I did so before it became a physical confrontation. Otherwise I just pretend it isnt there and do what I need to do.

I love all these "expert opinions" about what took place in the Zimmerman case. None of you were there, everyone is going off of what's been reported by "the media" which indicates none of you have enough sense to understand that the media gets everything wrong almost all of the time. I can give you example after example where the entire population of this country has taken action based on completely false reporting by the news media.

Are cops required to run away before shooting someone? Why not? If it's good enough for your family it should be good enough for the cops, right?

Until you folks wake up and realize the existing political parties are not acting in your best interest and start doing something about it (more parties, different candidates, stop voting for the establishment) things will only get worse.

People think the civil war was started because of slavery. This is not true, the civil war started over the exercise of Federal power over the states and the big banks / financial powers of the North wanting to eliminate a competing economy in the South. Getting rid of slavery was just a quick way to strip billions of dollars out of the South by devaluing the highest valued asset in the entire country at that time - slaves (worth billions of dollars in civil war era money). Ever since then, this country has ridden a long slide towards Federal domination over the States.

Nobody here and nobody in the media has enough information to have an opinion not based purely on biases. Schumer knows how predictable people are and that they will wrongly take sides based on pure speculation. It's the same way these clowns get elected. Voter apathy. That and Obama's reelection depends on keeping the country divided.

Originally posted by WTFover

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by Golf66

 

Then why isn't Zimmerman in jail for murder?

I don't know anything about this agency and can't make a judgement on their capabilities, but when there are circumstances, wherein there is no clear probable cause or there is any question about the evidence, all the case info (reports, forensics, witness testimony, etc.) will be handed to a grand jury, which will make the determination of the existence or absence of probable cause.

This is extremely common and prevents the law enforcement agency from making arbitrary decisions.

Hey WFTover.... do ya hear that applause for you... well said, well done... star and badge for you

reply to post by Golf66


There are two problems I have with this bill - It is not limited to structure or vehicle. It says any place that the party has a right to be. (streets, parks, McDonalds) and the fact that the party is immune from prosecution or investigation unless he shoots a cop. (My son-in-law is a cop I'm glad there is an exception, he would still be dead though) The wording of the law is the person doesn't have to retreat "needlessly", does this mean -- if retreating is inconvenient? The judgement is left to the individual. I felt that the 80 year old lady was going to harm me with her hoverround.. OKEE DOKEE that's your story then you are free to go - hope you have a nice weekend.

I believe with a little research you would find that this bill was written by the American Legislative Exchange Council.

This is what happens when you farm out your legislatin to Koch et al. The legislators who introduced this bill and voted for it are now trying to say it wasn't quite their intention. Perhaps if they didn't just submit boiler plate and actually read the bills. We would be better off.

The bill is SB-438 2005 you can look it up pretty easily -- I did

Originally posted by stirling
Do like the politicos do........
When in danger or in doubt...............
run in circles, scream and shout...............
yeah right..................................

Well said Stirling... I'm awaiting the day a politican can run in a circle fast enough to stick his own head up his own arse... lol

The craziest thing about this shooting is not the law, but the way that people act like they saw the video of the entire incident. I have no clue as to what happened so I refuse to get riled up like ya'll gun toters.

Personally,

I'm of the opinion that all "STAND YOUR GROUND", "Imminent Danger" and such laws are fine.
The issue is murderers trying to hide behind the laws to cover crimes.

All Natures' creatures have a basic, inalienable right to self defense.

Never have I seen laws for, nor thought it was cool to OFFEND.