Defensive Carry banner

House to vote on Trayvon Amendment

4K views 51 replies 39 participants last post by  Rexdale.TO 
#1 ·
From the Washington Times May 8, 2012:

House Democrats said Tuesday they will offer an amendment to push to overturn stand-your-ground self-defense laws in states like Florida.

The amendment, which would withhold some grants from states that have such laws, will come as part of the House's debate on the Commerce Department spending bill.

"'Shoot-first' laws have already cost too many lives. In Florida alone, deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted. Federal money shouldn't be spent supporting states with laws that endanger their own people," said Reps. Raul Grijalva of Arizona and Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the two Democrats who are offering the legislation. "This is no different than withholding transportation funds from states that don't enforce seat-belt laws."

Florida's law, which allows residents to use force in response to an attack without first having to retreat, has come under scrutiny after the nationally-polarizing death of teenager Trayvon Martin. George Zimmermann, a neighborhood watch volunteer, has been charged with murder in the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ANGLICO
#3 ·
Glad I checked before I posted again on this same article.

I am posting this as 'Politically Neutral'.

What does one party have against personal liberties excercised by law abiding citizens? Not enough control over them I guess. This should bother you, no matter what side of the political isle you may be on.

It's easy for the media to hide the fact that violent crime and murders tend to trend within one's ethnic group, and that minorities seem to have a much higher rate of such crime. When it becomes interacial, it is often too hard for the media to hide.

What is one political party trying to do here, kill more minorities (by having them kill themselves) by outlawing the right of individuals to defend themselves? That is the basic outcome of such legislation.

I am very glad they are pushing this nonsense, to gain base voting points. This will only further ignite the fire for citizens who understand the 2A to get out and vote this year.
 
#43 ·
Talk about stepping on State's rights!

^^^^This is what^^^^^^^^

our Federal Government is all about, & has become in the last 60 years or so.
Control.
I've said for the longest time, the states who collect gasoline taxes, and other monies to be collected at the decree of the feds, and then only get back way less than $1.00 for every $1.00 they send to Disneyland on the Potomac, should just NOT SEND THE MONEY THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

This country has become a land of "Elitists" who feel they know better than their constituents, and are going to do as they damn well please, or how some major money benefactor wishes for them vote.
I for one think its gone on for too long.
 
#9 ·
I do hope the inevitable backlash to a swollen and ineffective federal government in the resumption of states rights. The answer to so many problems. Unless you're a remora.
 
#52 ·
The right word is fascist. Support corporate rights(fund the rich), increasing police powers, stepping on personal liberty's while privatizing everything is fascism.

Doing all of the above except absorbing pretty much all corporations into the state, is socialism. Get it right :p.

It's my feeling that fascism is a better word to use because opressive regimes such as The Third Reich come up in a "regular" person's mind. Socialism tends to invoke, thoughts of "harmony", brotherhood and Nordic countries.

It's not about the message it's about the method.
 
#10 ·
I think the problem is going to be they are piggy-backing it on spending bill so it has a better chance to go through w/o as much attention being paid to it.

Nice that our legislators are jumping to the conclusions that:
1) Zimmerman is guilty,
2) The lives lost in self defense shootings were of upstanding citizens, and
3) The lives preserved in self defense shootings were of dirtbags.

Isn't there a presumption that if someone gets shot in a self defense shooting, they deserved it.
 
#11 ·
"'Shoot-first' laws have already cost too many lives. In Florida alone, deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted
I seriously doubt deaths have tripled but when people are allowed to defend themselves it follows that perpetrators of crime and violence are at risk and no longer able to victimize people with impunity. It sounds as if some House Democrats are going to push a bill that is simply pro crime, pro criminal. Pathetic.

Nothing wrong with shooting as long as the right people get shot.
Harry Callahan
 
#12 ·
More meddling by someone that just wants to make a name for themselves.

Never mind the facts or the ramifications of a poor bill that gets passed because of knee jerk reaction.

What we really need is a bill that outlaws stupid Congressmen from passing stupid laws.
 
#14 ·
The amendment, which would withhold some grants from states that have such laws, will come as part of the House's debate on the Commerce Department spending bill.
The Feds have used the purse to force States to pass laws in the past. If our State Governments had a pair they would immediately stop sending any tax monies back to D.C.. They should refuse to cooperate with Federal agencies until the attempted blackmail has ceased.

Michael
 
#16 ·
That was exactly how the Federal Government shoved the 55mph national speed limit down everyone's throats back in 1974
They threatened to withhold federal highway funds from the states that refused.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msgt/ret
#21 ·
the title has it all wrong, the house is not voting on this because the democrats cannot initiate a thing in the house, the republicans are in the majority and control what makes it to a vote and what doesn't.
in typical fashion the democrats are trying to ignore proper procedure and ignore the whole process of how a law is enacted. I will not go into giving a complete civic lesson now but let if suffice to say that unless the republicans allow this nonsense to proceed it shall remain a circus like act for the media to peddle to the ignorant masses.

it is a shame that the schools don't teach basic civics anymore, so few know how our government is supposed to function, if they did they wouldn't tolerate the garbage the left offers as governance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spirit51
#23 ·
-
Ellison is a two-bit liberal with his own agenda to stump for. Minneapolis 'voters' who elected him should be embarrassed, but I doubt they even understand how government actually works, much less what this creep is doing on their behalf.
 
  • Like
Reactions: barstoolguru
#26 ·
The media has so much sway aver the general public it is scary! A portion of the people believe EVERYTHING they read or hear. Most news is biased to suit the views of the producers and these people never even consider another point of view. Gee, look who they elected pres. last time. 'Nuff said.
 
#28 ·
First of all, how is killing 3 times as many scumbags a bad thing?

And if you want to take away grant money, fine. The state is saving A LOT of money by not having to have trials and then house these drains on society anymore.

Second, I love how it is in the name of Trayvon, when his attacker is on trial for MURDER. Clearly the law did not just give him blanket immunity to "shoot first." So how does this even apply to the TM/GZ case? These guys just make me shake my head and sigh/chuckle to myself.
 
#29 ·
I think it would be found unconstitutional if it ever passed....... "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness" , and the 2nd amendment rights...........

So... only the BG can show up with a gun ? Seems that's where we were before, and it didn't work out too well.
 
#31 ·
Your assumption may or may not be true - depending on who gets to appoint the next few justices.
 
#33 ·
I can hardly wait until November to see if the majority of this country has "wised up" and put this Country back on the RIGHT Constitutional path.
 
#34 ·
"In Florida alone, deaths due to self-defense have tripled since the law was enacted..."

Shouldn't that be looked at as a positive? To me, it shows the right to self defense is working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gigamortis
#38 ·
Ya know... It's true. Justifiable homicide has increased in FL. While homicide in general (including both criminal and justifiable homicides) is going down.

What does that mean?

To me it means:
  1. In the cases of justifiable homicide, there was a "choice" between one dead body or the other... either the criminal is dead, or the law abiding citizen is dead. The law abiding citizen prevailed and the criminal is dead. That is the better outcome.

  2. The criminal class is now aware that the law abiding citizen may be armed... so there is less violent crime perpetrated. The armed thug faces the risk/threat of equalizing force, something most of them are averse to... they want easy targets overwhelmed by their superior firepower... not a fair fight.

Stand Your Ground Law works... It deters crime, and it saves taxpayers the expense of incarcerating violent criminals who would eventually be released to commit yet more crime. In addition to those benefits, it allows the law abiding citizen to defend himself in situations and areas where he may not familiar with the "lay of the land" and my not be aware of (and use) routes of retreat (required in most states without SYG laws).
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top