Posted on 04/10/2012 6:31:39 AM PDT by marktwain
“When you carry a gun, you mean to harm somebody, kill somebody,” Bill Cosby claimed in a Friday interview with Deborah Simmons of The Washington Times.
“We’ve got to get the gun out of the hands of people who are supposed to be on neighborhood watch,” the comedian, actor and commentator advocated in his first public comments on the Trayvon Martin shooting.
“Without a gun, I don’t see Mr. Zimmerman approaching Trayvon by himself,” he declared.
Celebrity status and the ability to have his views shared with millions notwithstanding, there are more than a few problems with that opinion. First, being careful not to fall in with the rush to judgment Cosby seems caught up by, credible reports say it was Martin who approached Zimmerman “by himself”—and “without a gun.”
Then there are the reports that Cosby himself had obtained one of New York City’s rare, reserved for the rich, famous, powerful and connected concealed gun permits, joining other celebrities like Robert DeNiro, Howard Stern and Donald Trump. Assuming the accounts in the New York Observer and Boston Globe were accurate, has he since renounced the personal practice? And when he did carry a gun, did he “mean to harm somebody, kill somebody”?
Did doing so compel him to approach potential threats “by himself”?
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Yes. Somebody who intends to kill your children and your wife.
“Without a gun, I don’t see Mr. Zimmerman approaching Trayvon by himself,” he declared.
He’s right about that. What Mr. Cosby fails to understand is that it would have also detered Zimmerman if Martin was an actual burglar.
Guns are the great equalizer. Just ask any feminist with a gun in her purse.
Carrying a sidearm doesn’t make you aggressive, any more than a pocketknife or a pipewrench. Guns are a great equalizer. A young punk may be faster than I am, he may be stronger than I am; but in the eyes of my 9mm, we are equal.
I don’t want to make a mess, and do a bunch of paperwork; so I keep my gun to myself. But, if forced to defend myself, doing paperwork tomorrow is better than being dead today.
I always marvel at gun control advocates. In order to believe that gun control will prevent crimes, you have to believe that criminals will follow the law. Which, in essence, means you have to be completely illogical and irrational to imagine the law doing anything more than disarming the law-abiding populace.
“I don’t want to make a mess, and do a bunch of paperwork; so I keep my gun to myself. But, if forced to defend myself, doing paperwork tomorrow is better than being dead today.”
Well said!
Bill Cosby huh? What else would we expect. One carry’s a gun for protection just as Cosby did by carrying a gun in NYC, and had the permit to carry. Did he then mean that he was out to kill somebody. I doubt it. Cosby talking out both sides of his mouth.
Oh. Sorry. Too soon?
Cosby, especially, should understand this concept: his son was killed with a handgun while minding his own business. He was an exceptionally intelligent and gifted young man, killed by a punk who wanted to rob him and his friends.
“When you carry a gun, you mean to harm somebody, kill somebody,”
Only a person in the immediate act of attempting to harm or kill me or those in my family, where other means of protection of escape cannot be employed.
Oh. Sorry. Too soon?
Oops. Let me try that again. This time with a link to the story.
I remember some years back when Rosie O’Donnell made a huge issue that Walmart carried bullets etc... She used the whole libtard philosophy that guns kill people, blah, blah and blah. It was then “learned” that her bodyguards were armed while protecting her and her children. Loaded guns! Once again, it is a “I’m more important and my family is more valuable” than yours... Hypocrites.
Sometimes Cosby's humor is too sophisticated for me. Goes right over my head. Somebody care to explain this bit to me?
On second thought, never mind. Whenever you have to explain a joke it loses...oops...looses its funniness.
“When you carry a gun, you mean to harm somebody, kill somebody,”
Cosby is wealthy enough to enjoy “security”, meaning bodyguards, when the circumstances indicate it. The little people don’t have the means and must fend for themselves.
I think that Cosby hasn’t realized that there is a difference between defense and offense. Surely over the several decades that Cosby been a well-earned celebrity, he has been under the protection of armed security personnel. So who exactly is the “you” in his complaint? Is “you” the average person just wanting to exercise his unalienable right of self-defense? Of is “you” the little people who must all be denied arms because someone might do something that Cosby disapproves of? Surely “you” is not the criminal or murderer.
I’m willing to overlook Mr Cosby’s obviously emotional statement because he’s done much good. Liberal (therefore stupid) statements do him no good, but given that he lost his son to a gunman (who would have had the gun with or without “gun control”) - we should give him some slack.
Those who would disarm the population ignore the fact that evil people exist in the world. Most people are good people, but to ignore the fact that evil, including evil people, exists is dangerous folly.
Certainly Cosby speaks from painful experience. His loss is understood by all good people who have children. It's a loss that one can never fully recover from. I do understand. I understand how overwhelmingly tragic this is. I have children, and I know what Cosby's tragedy means.
But it would make the tragedy even worse if innocent people were rendered helpless to protect their children because of it.
A false premise. Carrying a gun for protection is not carrying a gun to commit murder or manslaughter.
So... one successful neighborhood watch, in my opinion, one dead thug, and probably stopped a burglary
No Bill, I aim to defend myself.
Bill, would you be happier, or even noticed if Martin had beaten Zimmerman to death?
I don’t agree with his overall argument, but I think he’s spot on with his comment:
If Zimmermand didn’t have a gun he wouldn’t have approached Trayvon.
I absolutely believe that to be a correct statement. Zimmermans actions created and escalated the situation, needlessly, and I have no doubt the gun in his posession contributed to his repeated and escalatingly stupid decisions.
Why not? I see the pictures on the TV and in the newspaper every day. Kid was 12 years old and real innocent-looking.
Just had to know that the anti-self defense loons would make an appearance.
“If Zimmermand didn’t have a gun he wouldn’t have approached Trayvon.”
When did you see Zimmerman approach Trayvon?
Uh oh! You stepped in it now. Put on your flame retardant clothing quick! Also, I’m glad you know exactly what happened. Have you filed your affidavit yet.
Some people just won’t be happy until we are all disarmed, at the mercy of the lawless, and easy prey for the savages. God forbid law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves.
I admire Bill Cosby, too, and can see where he’s coming from as it relates to his loss of his son. The Trayvon thing is a tragedy all around. From indications on various blogs he was headed in the wrong direction, but he was so young there was hope he could have turned it around as he matured. Zimmerman must now wish he was just carrying around pepper spray or a taser, but if you are facing deadly force, you respond in kind. This is one of those occasions were you can see both sides. One young man’s life is ended, and another young man’s life is ruined. Sad.
Using these circumstances to further racial division in the country (Obummer, Sharpton, Jackson, and their kind) is abhorrent.
I lost what little respect I had for Cosby when he bought himself the Ed.D degree and started putting a Dr. in front of his name. An Ed.D is not a Ph.D and Cosby’s was bought with donations anyway. Typical emotion driven fact devoid hypocritical libtard.
From the 911 audio, it's clear that Zimmerman did the right thing. The audio makes it clear that it's a media lie that Zimmermman kept pursuing Martin after talking to the operator. And we know he wound up back at his truck, where he started. How did he get back there, unless he walked back, as the breathing and conversation on the audio suggest? That means St. Trayvon had to have doubled back and followed him there.
Neighborhood Watch is more responsible for the overall decline in crime in America in the last several decades than any initiatives by our well-financed police SWAT teams.
Hmm.. let me see, he left his car, he admits pursuing him on foot, that’s pretty much proof he approached Trayvon.
Nothing I have read or heard alleges Trayvon walked up to Zimmerman’s car, dragged him from it physically and started beating him.
Zimmerman’s an idiot, and he was an idiot with a gun who did repeatedly dumber things that lead to the situation that occurred, pure and simple.
Bill Cosby's credibly destroyed
Zimmerman left his car, you can spin that any way you like, but he left his car and did pursue the kid, he escalated a situation against the advice of the police. He did repeatedly dumb things that escalated a situation needlessly.
Who is saying neighborhood watch is a bad thing? I never suggested it. However when someone does something stupid, and they do it with a gun in their hand, I am not going to knee jerk to defend their stupidity just because I am a firm believer in the 2nd ammendment. Here’s the truth, not every gun owner is responsible, and like it or not, there are idiots out there with guns who do incredibly stupid things with them. When they do stupid things with them, they don’t deserve defended, they deserve being called an idiot.
Neighborhood Watch guidelines in any NWO I’ve been involved with is to report, not to pursue.. So don’t try to spin Zimmermans idiotic actions as good and proper NW procedures. He was advised to not do what he did, he did it anyway, and he had a right to, but his stupidity in doing so is something you can’t white wash away. That action and actions that followed lead to what happened. Cause and effect folks, zimmerman calls the cops, stays in his car, and lets them handle it, this situation never happens. Trying to argue otherwise is a fools errand.
Zimmerman escalated the situation, did he throw the first punch? Who knows, the neighbor hood watch guys and ex con with a past, and the kid was a wanna be thug, and dead. So, its a he said she said on who threw the first punch. However Zimmerman did indeed, leave his vehicle and pursue the kid, against advice. Phone records confirm he was on the phone with his girlfriend around the time of this, and her testimony, whether you believe it or not, is the altercation began while she was on the phone and that Trayvon was being tailed and followed by Zimmerman.. Again, she could be lying completely, but the times of the phone call do confirm this. Zimmerman left his car, pursued this kid, and honestly, anyone tailing me at night, I’m not exactly going to think they have the best of intentions either.
Zimmerman mad repeatedly dumb decisions, and having a gun in his posession probably emboldened him to make those bad decisions. I don’t think that’s a wrong supposition, and I agree with that part of what Cosby stated.
Just because Zimmerman was trying to keep eyes on Martin, doesn’t mean he was pursuing him, it doesn’t mean he was “escalating” the situation, he was trying to get information for the dispatcher.
That Martin, felt emboldened enough to double back and confront Zimmerman instead of just returning home, tells me much about his “character”.
It’s obvious by the fact that he was able to “lose” Zimmerman that he could have physically run circles around Zimmerman and made it home safely.
But he didn’t. Why?
You are wrong in your conclusions because they were both "he". Only one of them said anything.
He said he got a sucker punch. Did he sucker punch himself?
So you didn’t then. Ok.
Yes. Somebody who intends to kill your children and your wife.
Agree it’s why the good guy’s own a gun you get the white hat and not a hoodie.
Everything turns on this assertion, which is repeated daily in the state-run media. But there's actually no evidence for it, as Ann Coulter pointed out in a recent column. The sounds on the 911 audio actually indicate the opposite. The dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he's following the subject, and when Zimmerman replies that he is, says, "We don't need you to do that." Immediately, Zimmerman, who has been breathing heavily as if trotting or running, starts breathing normally. Then he explains the situation in response to the dispatcher's next questions in a normal voice. And then he's back at his truck, which is where the fight and shooting take place.
Listen to the audio. Not only did Zimmerman break off his pursuit when the dispatcher suggested it, but somehow, afterwards, Trayvon made his way over to Zimmerman's truck, since that's where he got shot. He was more of a stalker than Zimmerman. This is probably why there was no chance of charging Zimmerman with murder, and the grand jury wasn't empaneled.
There's a lot that isn't known about the Martin/Zimmerman encounter, but there are facts that are known. Cold hard facts. When you said Zimmerman acted against the "advice of the police" was the point at which I realized you don't know the most basic, cold, hard facts.
Zimmerman didn't speak with the police. What other 'facts' do you know that aren't true?
I need to apologize for my last comment. If the 911 dispatcher was a police 911 dispatcher, then you’re justified in calling him the police. I apologize.
“I need to apologize for my last comment. If the 911 dispatcher was a police 911 dispatcher, then you’re justified in calling him the police. I apologize”
Actually you don’t need to apologize. Zimmerman spoke to a Police Dept. civilian EMPLOYEE. An employee that was not a sworn police officer and has no more authority than I do to tell anyone to do anything. Something the dispatcher apparently knew too. His comment was phrased as a suggestion, “We don’t need you to do that”, because suggests is all he could do. Besides the fact Zimmerman was not ordered to do anything the tape makes it pretty clear he heeded the dispatcher’s advice when he replied, “Ok”.
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.