Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michael Dunn trial: Man accused of shooting teen over music
BayNews9 ^ | February 2, 2014 | Tamara Lush / AP

Posted on 02/04/2014 6:02:49 AM PST by Uncle Chip

A man with a gun. A black teen, shot dead.

Was it murder or self-defense?

Jury selection is scheduled to begin Monday in Florida in the trial of 47-year-old Michael Dunn, a Satellite Beach software developer charged with first-degree murder and attempted murder in the November 2012 shooting of 17-year-old Jordan Davis outside a Jacksonville convenience store.

Authorities say an argument over loud music led to the shooting. Davis was parked in a vehicle with three friends outside the store. Dunn and his fiance had just left a wedding reception and were heading back home when they stopped at the store and pulled up next to the sport utility vehicle that Davis was sitting in.

An argument began after Dunn told them to turn the music down, police said. One of Davis' friends turned the music down, but Davis then told him to turn it back up.

According to authorities, Dunn became enraged and he and Davis began arguing. One person walking out of the convenience store said he heard Dunn say, "You are not going to talk to me like that."

Dunn, who had a concealed weapons permit, pulled a 9 mm handgun from the glove compartment, according to an affidavit, and fired multiple shots into the SUV, striking Davis in the back and groin.

Dunn later told police he felt threatened. His attorney has said Dunn saw a gun and shot in self-defense, perhaps laying the ground work for a case under Florida's "stand your ground" law.

If the case sounds familiar, that's because it has echoes of a trial that received wide attention and happened only two hours away.....

(Excerpt) Read more at baynews9.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: jordandavis; michaeldunn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

1 posted on 02/04/2014 6:02:49 AM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

“Van Halen was better with Sammy Hagar singing!”


2 posted on 02/04/2014 6:04:31 AM PST by a fool in paradise ("Health care is too important to be left to the government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
If the case sounds familiar, that's because it has echoes of a trial that received wide attention and happened only two hours away.

This case is NOTHING like the Zimmerman case.

The Left NEVER gives up their lies.

3 posted on 02/04/2014 6:06:39 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (The only way women can "have it all" is if men aren't allowed to have anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Yep

Take race out of it and it’s the Curtis Reeves theatre shooting.


4 posted on 02/04/2014 6:12:44 AM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

RUN AWAY...RUN AWAY!


5 posted on 02/04/2014 6:13:27 AM PST by gr8eman (How ya doin Bob?...Bitchen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

They never mention race unless the victim is black.


6 posted on 02/04/2014 6:13:38 AM PST by bk1000 (A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

The only similarity is the same prosecutor. Other than that, there are none. From the reports in the press plus this guys action after the shooting, he left the scene, he seems guilty. He was not being pummelled, he was not looking out for his neighbors, he simply went over the edge. He gives concealed owners a bad name. The press will make much of the verdict in this case, mark my words. BTW, he did not have the firearm on his person, rather he retrieved it from his truck. Under the florida statues he did not have to have a CC permit to have the firearm in his glove compartment as long as it was out of reach of the driver. So, the CCW issue is moot.


7 posted on 02/04/2014 6:14:50 AM PST by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

It certainly doesn’t seem like from the reporting thus far it was a life or death situation. I think sometimes the presence of a weapon in vicinity of a driver gives them reason to act in a manner in which they would ordinarily not act were it for the gun.


8 posted on 02/04/2014 6:21:16 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
I think sometimes the presence of a weapon in vicinity of a driver gives them reason to act in a manner in which they would ordinarily not act were it for the gun.

Sounds more like the guy was a time-bomb looking for a place to go off.

9 posted on 02/04/2014 6:26:27 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (The only way women can "have it all" is if men aren't allowed to have anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

This guy is going down, big time.

One thing I have learned here in the Jax area from following the local news: every phone call and letter Dunn sent to his family from prison has been splashed all over the media. Text and audio. If you are in jail, anything you transmit to the outside WILL be used to hurt your case, if the media wants to do so.


10 posted on 02/04/2014 6:27:54 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

Stacking on more misery for his family, he was in town to attend his daughter’s wedding that weekend. Talk about a party pooper.


11 posted on 02/04/2014 6:28:36 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

“I think sometimes the presence of a weapon in vicinity of a driver gives them reason to act in a manner in which they would ordinarily not act were it for the gun.”

Well, if you mean they may get to act as an EMT prop I agree with you.

Let me put it this way from a personal experience. I was in a disabled vehicle with my family when some nutcase came up to the car and began banging on my driver’s side window with a force that could easily have broken it. For some reason he wanted to get at me. I was not a physical match for him nor in a position to do anything being constrained in the car. I pulled out my near by pistol, pointed at him and he stopped. Since he left, I did not shoot him but would have had he broken that window. Had I not had the pistol, more than likely I would have been riding on a gurney. This was in non gun state California, I did not have a permit, and had I shot the SOB probably would have gone to the pokey. However, I would rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6 and IMO the pistol saved me and my family from a disaster. So I don’t cede your point about the availability of a firearm.


12 posted on 02/04/2014 6:30:43 AM PST by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

I certainly wasn’t talking about the kind of situation you describe. I think there are cases that the presence of a weapon causes bravado and daring that is unnecessary; if the reporting is accurate, the driver could have just gone about his business and then left.


13 posted on 02/04/2014 6:33:28 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

from all that i have read, i agree... like that retired cop in the movie theatre...


14 posted on 02/04/2014 6:37:20 AM PST by latina4dubya (when i have money i buy books... if i have anything left, i buy 6-inch heels and a bottle of wine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

You mean like actually being able to protect themselves rather than being at the mercy of the mugger/rapist/murderer/burgler/etc. that otherwise would get away with his/her crime?

Guns are used much more often for self protection than they are to commit crimes. If convicted, this gent will be one of the 0.001% of concealed carry holders convicted of a committing a crime with his gun.


15 posted on 02/04/2014 6:38:46 AM PST by RetiredNavy ("Only accurate firearms are interesting")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
The fruits of the 'we can all carry firearms in public' philosophy. There was a shooting by a "carrier" outside a bar the other day.

No person should be allowed to carry a gun without a specific reason; i.e. carrying jewels, carrying money to the bank. Note I am NOT saying we cannot OWN or POSSESS firearms I am just saying no carrying absent good reason.

Remember morons the very people who in the nineteenth century lived in an "open carry" environment were the very people who passed the laws regulating the carrying of firearms. Open carry will take us back to Dodge City 1876.

16 posted on 02/04/2014 6:38:56 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RetiredNavy

What part of the story here thus far reported and available to us clearly indicates the victim is in the ‘mugger/rapist/murderer/burgler/etc.’ category?

I am all in favor of being able to protect oneself with deadly force when the situation warrants. If the reports thus far are to be believed, loud music isn’t life threatening. Sorry, don’t buy it. I’m 2A, but I am not stupid, no matter what you think.


17 posted on 02/04/2014 6:41:29 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

I agree, this guy could have gotten in his car and driven away at any time. Instead he chose to argue with a punk about his loud music.


18 posted on 02/04/2014 6:41:30 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
The fruits of the 'we can all carry firearms in public' philosophy. There was a shooting by a "carrier" outside a bar the other day.

No person should be allowed to carry a gun without a specific reason; i.e. carrying jewels, carrying money to the bank. Note I am NOT saying we cannot OWN or POSSESS firearms I am just saying no carrying absent good reason.

Remember morons the very people who in the nineteenth century lived in an "open carry" environment were the very people who passed the laws regulating the carrying of firearms. Open carry will take us back to Dodge City 1876.

I don't agree with anything you wrote. If a peerson cannot carry a gun in his vehicle, then he is not safe when confronted with violent force. Maybe a tragedy like the Knoxville Horror could have been prevented if the young victims had been armed.

19 posted on 02/04/2014 6:46:38 AM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

I read an account where he was 150+ miles at home and was attending a wedding with his GF, he stopped to get a bottle of win going from the wedding back to the Hotel. I bet he was drunk.


20 posted on 02/04/2014 6:47:42 AM PST by Leto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

They finally caught him? I guess it was just a matter of time.

21 posted on 02/04/2014 6:49:29 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (The Left: speaking power to truth since Shevirat HaKelim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
No person should be allowed to carry a gun without a specific reason; i.e. carrying jewels, carrying money to the bank. Note I am NOT saying we cannot OWN or POSSESS firearms I am just saying no carrying absent good reason.

Who gets to decide what's "good cause"? I carry a gun because I go everywhere with my four-year-old daughter. I am responsible for her protection, and the only way I can be a match for an average-strength man is with a gun. I consider it my God-given responsibility to carry and that it's nobody else's business to tell me I can't.

As, for "Dodge City", that's a myth. "In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year." - Source

22 posted on 02/04/2014 7:00:50 AM PST by JenB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sans-Culotte
Men should carry in bars while drinking?

The situation you describe was racial and it is speculation-which you admit-that carrying a gun would have stopped the crime.

Remember if EVERYBODY carries then it will not be long before we will have open gun battles on our streets. It is already starting and an example are the two idiots in the article above; these two imbeciles were arguing over loud music, the next pair of "open carry" morons will be arguing over a perceived insult; another pair will be arguing over who caused the accident at the intersection and then they will pull their guns to settle the dispute; Then, we will have two drunks shooting it out in a bar over which team is the better football squad. Why did nineteenth century Americans pass laws regulating "open carry." Can we learn from history?

People today have no common sense all Constitutional "RIGHTS" have limits.

23 posted on 02/04/2014 7:08:02 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
Robert A. Heinlein

Too bad neither of these clowns remembered that.

"...One of Davis' friends turned the music down, but Davis then told him to turn it back up."

"One person walking out of the convenience store said he heard Dunn say, "You are not going to talk to me like that.""

If Davis had been armed he would have been well within his rights to shoot Dunn when he approached the vehicle in a threatening manner. That's Stand Your Ground, not what Dunn did. If the story is accurate Dunn is going down.

24 posted on 02/04/2014 7:21:26 AM PST by Jed Eckert (Wolverines!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JenB

You “Dodged” The issue(no pun intended.) Why did the folks of those days, in the towns mentioned, pass the laws restricting, in their town, the carrying of a gun at will? Not one open carry fanatic(a dangerous being), will ever answer the question. Tell us why the very people who once lived under unrestricted carry rules passed laws restricting carrying? Answer the question if you can.

Once again there is NO unrestricted Constitutional RIGHT. Open carry will prove to be a disaster and a repeat of Dodge City 1876.


25 posted on 02/04/2014 7:22:53 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Men should carry in bars while drinking?

You didn't say that or ask that in your original post. You said:

No person should be allowed to carry a gun without a specific reason; i.e. carrying jewels, carrying money to the bank.

You come off to me like just another gun grabber. They always start with "limits" on rights until eventually the rights are taken away. I carry a gun and do not carry jewels or money to the bank. I carry a more precious cargo: my life, and that of my wife.

26 posted on 02/04/2014 7:27:36 AM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mouton
From the reports in the press...

I wouldn't believe a word of it-- the press are nothing but agents of the Ministry of Propaganda.

We won't know the truth until his attorneys get to make his case.

27 posted on 02/04/2014 7:30:41 AM PST by pierrem15 (Claudius: "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Perhaps in some individuals, but my experience with CCW holders and veterans is the opposite-- with training you fully realize how powerful guns are and you realize that (unlike the police), you will bear full responsibility for any misuse of a weapon.

Criminal gun training consists of what they see on TV, which explains why a lot of innocent bystanders get killed when they shoot.

28 posted on 02/04/2014 7:35:02 AM PST by pierrem15 (Claudius: "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Not one open carry fanatic(a dangerous being), will ever answer the question.

So, you're resorting to slander (actually, libel, here), in calling all of us who choose to open-carry a "dangerous being". Thugs are dangerous beings. They tend to not open-carry.

To answer your question on why they banned guns in many "old-west" towns? They were like you. They thought everyone with a gun was a dangerous being out looking to kill someone, and they wanted total control over their citizens. Facts be damned. Criminals and governments are the only ones who benefit from gun bans.

29 posted on 02/04/2014 7:39:45 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (Has anyone seen my tagline? It was here yesterday. I seem to have misplaced it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sans-Culotte
No I did not say that in my original post. I did add it later. So what? Carrying in a bar necessarily follows from the doctrine of unlimited right to carry. People have the right to own and posses firearms in their homes and place of business they simply should not have an unrestricted right to carry at their pleasure. I'll bet in your entire life you and/or your family have never been seriously threatened.

Now answer the question: Are you in favor of the "right" to carry firearms into a bar? Do you favor the mixture of guns and liquor? I'll bet the questions are not answered.

30 posted on 02/04/2014 7:41:12 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

This doesn’t sound anything like the GZ case.Loud music isn’t a good reason to shoot anyone.It may be a reason to call the cops...but not to shoot.Assuming that nobody in the car was armed,or if they were that there’s no evidence of any attempt by them to *use* a weapon,then it certainly seems that the guy was way,way,way,*way* out of line in shooting...even if the kid(s) behaved and talked like punks (which may or may not have been the case).What little I know about this case leads me to believe that I’d vote “guilty” in this one...unlike in the GZ case.


31 posted on 02/04/2014 7:42:52 AM PST by Gay State Conservative (Osama Obama Care: A Religion That Will Have You On Your Knees!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
I will also say that the moron in this story should not have been carrying a gun. I did not notice in the story whether he had a permit or not. In order to carry mine, I have taken a CHL class twice; once when I originally applied and once when I renewed. It was stressed in both classes that guns may not be taken into bars (in Texas), and that confrontations are to be avoided whenever possible. If I were in the position of driving up to a convenience store and parking next to guys with their radio blaring, I would either:

a.) go about my business and say nothing, or

b.)leave and not even get out of my car.

Your Dodge City in 1876 comparison belongs in a conversation about the Old West, which is a subject for another discussion.

32 posted on 02/04/2014 7:44:25 AM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Now answer the question: Are you in favor of the "right" to carry firearms into a bar? Do you favor the mixture of guns and liquor? I'll bet the questions are not answered.

1.) No.

2.) No.

You lose your bet.

33 posted on 02/04/2014 7:45:52 AM PST by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
Open carry will take us back to Dodge City 1876.

... which would be a BIG improvement over Kansas City, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Miami, Washington DC, 2014.
34 posted on 02/04/2014 7:59:32 AM PST by Dr. Sivana ("We are not sluts."--Sandra Fluke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Sorry, read that as an across the board comment.


35 posted on 02/04/2014 10:14:17 AM PST by Mouton (The insurrection laws perpetuate what we have for a government now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Any thug that inflicts his anti-social crap music at 120+ decibels on the rest of us ought to be shot. Civility requires there to be some limits and too loud music crosses the line.


36 posted on 02/04/2014 1:07:36 PM PST by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

“Loud music isn’t a good reason to shoot anyone.It may be a reason to call the cops...but not to shoot.”

The human scum that live behind our house play house-rattling music at any hour that suits them. We have called the police on them three times. As soon as the squad car leaves, the music resumes.


37 posted on 02/04/2014 1:13:53 PM PST by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

I find it interesting that you see yourself in my comment. It was not directed at either you, nor particularly at the the gent that shot this man. Neither was it an accusation against the victim of the shooting.

You obviously missed the main point of my comment - what you think/feel doesn’t matter much. The facts indicate that your fears about people shooting people just because they have a gun are unfounded. Far less than 1% of concealed carry holders are charged/convicted of a crime committed with their gun. Indeed, the policemen are arrested and convicted at higher rates than those with concealed weapons permits.

I find the fact that you are “all in favor of being able to protect oneself with deadly force” while at the same time stating that people with guns should not be trusted is a bunch of horse pucky. Are you the only one that can be trusted to use a firearm appropriately? Who make you God?

You are NOT a second ammendment supporter, otherwise you would not give the liberals ammunition to suppress your rights.


38 posted on 02/04/2014 1:16:21 PM PST by RetiredNavy ("Only accurate firearms are interesting")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RetiredNavy

YOU responded to me. I didn’t pick those words out of the air. You’re nuts


39 posted on 02/04/2014 1:22:40 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
AEMILIUS PAULUS said: "It is already starting and an example are the two idiots in the article above;"

Crime rates are down; not up.

Please tell me how many of the examples of which you speak have happened, how many people are now legally carrying firearms, and how you determined that there is a statistically significant problem with exercising the Second Amendment.

40 posted on 02/04/2014 3:22:47 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
AEMILIUS PAULUS said: Are you in favor of the "right" to carry firearms into a bar?

I'll give you an answer; unequivocally, YES!

There is no presumption that visiting a bar makes one less able to responsibly carry a firearm.

Are you in favor of outlawing the driving of a car to or from a bar?

How about liquor stores? How about restaurants that serve liquor?

Are you also in favor of the infringement of the right to carry within a 1000 feet of a school? Do you presume that no one would ever approach a school with a firearm unless they intended to murder children?

I presume you see no "slippery slope". Just how far down have you slid?

41 posted on 02/04/2014 3:29:59 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

An argument with Phil Spector about stereo would likely to result in a shooting.


42 posted on 02/04/2014 3:33:05 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
Alcohol and guns exactly what is needed. One can only hope that if such insanity prevails, which will likely happen in our increasingly ungovernable society, that the people who advocate the mixture of guns and alcohol get to live that mixture first hand.

Absolutely no unrestricted carrying of firearms, demonstrable necessity before one is given a permit. No guns in bars, no carrying on the streets. Sanity must prevail.

43 posted on 02/06/2014 10:41:35 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
Crime rates go up and down over time. We are currently in a down phase(assuming police departments are being truthful in reporting statistics, a debatable presumption see the police of Atlanta, Georgia.)-besides association is not causation.
44 posted on 02/06/2014 10:45:46 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

Your post actually support my thesis-no carrying of firearms in public-the cities you name demonstrate the results of unrestricted carrying of firearms, and don’t give me that cr*p about the cities you named having restrictive gun laws. The idiots in charge of those cities are unwilling to enforce the existing laws for racial reasons.


45 posted on 02/06/2014 10:51:38 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS

“I am just saying no carrying absent good reason.”

With all due respect, BS.

An attack on my person can happen at any time, any place...you sure you didn’t forget a sarcasm tag or something because the bulk of your comment sounds like it was lifted straight out of the Brady campaign.


46 posted on 02/06/2014 10:54:52 AM PST by SZonian (Throwing our allegiances to political parties in the long run gave away our liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
and don’t give me that cr*p about the cities you named having restrictive gun laws. The idiots in charge of those cities are unwilling to enforce the existing laws for racial reasons.

Yes, I will give you that crap. I appreciate that you have doggedly stuck by your position, knowing that it is not a popular one around here. But, if you are going to paint a hell for us to avoid, don't pick one milder than the one many of us have already been/lived in.


47 posted on 02/06/2014 11:24:54 AM PST by Dr. Sivana ("We are not sluts."--Sandra Fluke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
AEMILIUS PAULUS said: "Absolutely no unrestricted carrying of firearms, demonstrable necessity before one is given a permit. No guns in bars, no carrying on the streets."

You are describing the situation in most of Kalifornia. Perhaps now you can supply the evidence that Kalifornia is benefitting from such infringements.

You seem to be among those who believe that if you outlaw the carrying of arms, the outlaws won't do it.

48 posted on 02/06/2014 12:03:52 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Dr. Miguelito Loveless. Man, I miss that show show. Dude died young back in ‘73.


49 posted on 02/07/2014 11:13:44 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
California's crime rate is down as is most of America's. It is not due to some states allowing the open carrying of firearms. The decline in crime rate is due to harsher sentencing laws in California-Three Strikes."

California has and has had a more restrictive attitude towards firearms than many states.( California is not as bad as New York.)I have lived here in California for 76 years and have carried my fire arms as prescribed by law. I have been stopped and searched over the years all while carrying firearms and no police officer ever complained about my guns and shooting. They merely looked and said "ok go on." The gun was in the trunk and the ammunition in the glove box as state law commanded.

Open unrestricted carrying of firearms is a recipe for disaster. My wife informed me this morning that some imbecile shot some poor soul in a movie theater because the victim was texting. There was a shooting outside a bar-I actually had one one imbecilic poster on this forum say he approved of people carrying guns into bars. The advocacy of the mixing of liquor and loaded guns-God Help Us! These types of attitudes will be the foundation for people to take away all gun rights. We will all lose.

No right is unrestricted. I totally approve of a man's right to own and possess firearms in his home and place of business, and to use them in defense of his and his families health, well being and property. A man can carry firearms if he has a specific purpose such as carrying jewels and/or sums of money or is required to go into dangerous areas. A man can carry when he goes hunting or target shooting and then guns in the trunk and ammo in the glove box are appropriate.

Not one open carry nut on this forum ever answered my question as to: why did the citizens of 19th century western American towns overwhelmingly vote against the unrestricted carrying of firearms with town limits? Answer the question! You can't because human experience dictates that not everyone should carry as he pleases and those people experienced "Open Unrestricted Carry" and rejected it as would any sane people with a minimum knowledge of human frailties-SHOOTING A MAN FOR TEXTING IN A THEATER! Lord

50 posted on 02/08/2014 9:36:27 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson