Trayvon Martin

Matt Welch Debates Stand Your Ground on MSNBC

|

This morning I appeared on Jansing & Co. with Joy Reid to discuss continuing fallout from the George Zimmerman acquittal, including efforts to repeal "Stand Your Ground" laws:

NEXT: License Plate Scanners Track Millions of Americans

Matt Welch is an editor at large at Reason.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Episiarch

    “Talking” about SYG (which actually means “talking about repealing such laws and reducing the right to defend oneself”), even though it actually has nothing to do with this case, is exactly what these cunts want. Don’t oblige the scum. This is exactly what they did with Newtown and they’re trying to do it again. Amazing how they’re right back to climbing on a dead body again, isn’t it. They’re never going to stop. Ever.

    1. Let’s talk about self-defense. The laws generally say you can use force if you reasonably need to do prevent force from being used against you. Well, guns are bad, right, so using guns is never reasonable, right? So, if someone shoots someone, it’s automatically manslaughter at the very least. In fact, it really should be murder, since your intent to kill someone is reflected by your act of purchasing a deathmaker.

      1. John

        And without guns, no one would ever be able to commit murder anyway.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..uilty.html

        1. Scruffy Nerfherder

          That dude looks like he’s got some mental issues

          1. John

            Once in a while you see someone who looks like the crime they committed. If that guy doesn’t say “crazed killer pedophile” no one does.

        2. Look, John, only government employees, trained in the use of firearms, should be able to shoot people with impunity. That’s all self-defense claims are, you know, assertions of the right to shoot people for fun.

          1. John

            What would it have accomplished for that women to shoot that guy? Hell, she probably would have shot her daughter by accident instead.

          2. A Serious Man

            The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to wait for a state-sanctioned good guy with a gun to show up. It’s logic!

            1. Sure, some will have to die while waiting for law enforcement heroes, but that’s all for the greater good. Our culture is tainted by the existence of non-government guns. That’s why paintings are so lame these days–guns.

        3. Killazontherun

          Whew, what the fuck is going on with his face?

  2. Brett L

    Don’t you think deploying facts against them is an unreasonable use of force?

    1. John

      It is really not sporting to use weapons they have no understanding of against them.

      1. DJF

        Its like using fire to fend off a pack of hyenas

    2. fish

      Don’t you think deploying facts against them is an unreasonable use of force?

      Why? They just bounce off!

    3. Jordan

      It is asymmetrical warfare.

  3. Fatty Bolger

    It’s time for a national conversation on our need for national conversations.

  4. Outlaw

    Jesus fucking Christ, they’re so stupid and mendacious.

    Let’s say SYG was never passed and there was still a strict duty to retreat in FL.

    Zimmerman and Trayvon were both somewhere they had a right to be.

    Calling the cops about a suspicious person is not illegal. Following a person to point him out to the cops is not illegal.

    All evidence (or lack thereof in terms of physical damage done to Trayvon) suggested that Zimmerman was attacked and pinned down.

    You cannot fucking retreat when you’re being pinned down and beaten like a rented fucking mule. He would’ve been justified in using lethal force in that situation.

    This is such bullshit. The media and the administration wanted a case where a racist kkkonservative white gun owning concealed carrying Rethuglican wrongly killed a black kid. They thought they had it, but what they got was a Hispanic Democrat who voted for Obama and when that information fucking came out they said he was a “white Hispanic” and stoked the flames of racial hatred anyway.

    Fuck these idiots. Fuck the media. Fucking bastards. I hate them all and hope they get terminal fucking cancer.

    1. Outlaw

      And while I’m at it, I curse them and deny them entry into Valhalla!

    2. creech

      They way I read Holder and the rest is that someone feeling threatened has a duty to retreat if they can. Martin, supposedly feeling threatened, had a duty to retreat to his house, which (I’ve seen no evidence that he couldn’t) he didn’t do. So why does
      Holder hate Martin’s actions?

      1. Outlaw

        Holder is a racist anti-gun asshole. That’s all that needs to be said.

        Back in the old days, proving you retreated was only necessary if you defended yourself and were on trial.

  5. The Late P Brooks

    I watched that this morning. All I heard was Charlie Brown’s teacher.

  6. The Late P Brooks

    And, as I said in the ML thread, you should have leaned over and punched that dumb bitch for using the term “civilian” in that manner.

  7. albo

    MSNBC? I hope you used plenty of Purell afterwards.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.