I do believe that it is, in fact, a basic tenet of not only American justice, but of English justice, that when one is found not guilty of a charge, that means all the rights, privileges and immunities of citizenship are fully restored. Sadly, it seems our opponents in the gun control movement don’t even believe in that:
The irony of all of this is that he has already killed someone with a gun but he got his guns and his rights back after the trial. Why? Because that is what the gun rights extremists want. They think it’s perfectly fine for someone like George Zimmerman to be able to possess and carry lethal weapons around even after that person has already killed someone with a gun.
He was found not guilty of the crime of murder by a jury of his peers. So yes, that is what I want. I want people who are found not guilty to not be punished by the law as if they had been. If that makes me a “gun rights extremist,” I’ll wear the banner proudly. I tend to think that just makes me a believer in the basic tenets of justice and human rights.
Regardless of what kind of trouble Zimmerman has found himself in since his acquittal (to me it almost seems like he wants to go to jail) he has not yet been found guilty of any crime serious enough to warrant deprivation of rights. Do the leaders of the gun control movement really want to argue that people found not guilty of crimes should be punished anyway? Do you really want to argue that someone found not guilty of a crime should be found guilty anyway, just because you know he’s guilty? If you think that, pardon me if I do question your patriotism, and belief in the basic legal institutions that have served this country for more than two centuries.
They believe in collective guilt so strongly that the idea of innocent until proven guilty completely escapes them. We’re gun owners, ergo we’re guilty of SOMETHING because we own guns. Zimmerman was guilty from the moment he bought his Kel-Tec.
not tenant but tenet “a principle or belief”
1) “tenet” not “tenants”
2) zimmerman is a horrible person for 2A supporters to gather around as a proxy for all of us, primarily bc he’s a dirtbag.
He may be a dirtbag (I have no idea either way), but he didn’t commit murder. And one shouldn’t be convicted of murder or any other crime just because they’re a dirtbag, either. Even dirtbags are innocent until proven guilty. I don’t care about optics, I care about justice.
She’s all emotion, no reason. I imagine a lot of her audience is the same way. It doesn’t matter if it’s right or wrong, but how it feels.
We deliberately set up our justice system to make it harder for the state to convict someone so as to not deprive them of their rights on a whim.
If someone thinks that a defendant who has been found not guilty should suffer ANY consequences, they are not a fellow citizen.
Sorry about bringing that frivolous libel lawsuit citizen, but now we have to cut your tongue out, just in case.
Sorry about that wrongful prosecution for self defense citizen, but now we can’t give you back your personal firearm…oh wait, some places already do that!
Gun control people visible bristled at being accusing of running a show trial with Zimmerman, but their continued willingness to openly state that they want him punished despite the verdict shows that those accusations were absolutely true. They want him punished because his continued existence offends them, nothing more. They don’t consider the law, only their own feelings on the matter.
Zimmerman may be a good man, he may not. Only those who personally know him can say. What is evident to me here, is that there is a significantly large portion of our society that wants to see him go to jail. The Lake Mary Police chief has openly stated that he is one of them. On top of that, the man’s story makes good headlines, and drive eyeballs to TV sets, newspapers, and websites. That means that the press has a vested interest in keeping him in the news.
Those facts, I think, are a larger factor in his continuing troubles than anything else. Every allegation that has been made against him has failed to be proven. That speaks volumes to me.
I also think we’ll keep hearing this stuff due to Zimmerman being an easy target for anyone who forms a relationship with him. If he doesn’t comply with one’s wishes, say he pulled a gun. Everyone will believe it.
This is why we talk about there is no good outcome from a self-defense shooting. He’s a marked man until it fades over the news and interest horizon. I’m surprised he didn’t pull a Casey Anthony and disappear.
If I ever found myself in that position, my sailboat becomes my most valuable possession and the one I would not give up (my house would be first) as it would be my escape. I’d be taking an extended coastal and Caribbean cruise. Awful hard to hound someone following their every move when you’re in the middle of the ocean or swinging at anchor at some island.
At a minimum, a quiet court date to do a legal name change. To at least buy time to get ahead of the jackals. In Zimmerman’s case, he’d almost have to do the equivalent of a personal Witness Protection Program relocation and life change to escape this.
When I was younger man, liberals in this country used to believe in liberty – that is, the widest possible interpretation of the rights granted in the Bill of Rights. I don’t know what happened to these people but today they prefer tyranny. They apparently prefer a Big Brother type government that is moving to extinguish the basic principles on which the country was founded. Instead of an individual review of the facts of a case by a judge who can take into account various nuisances when prescribing justice, liberals today apparently prefer rule by legislative fiat where penalties can be presubscribed regardless of the facts. These people are truly sheep before wolves.
I agree with your sentiments, but based on your opening statement you must be about as old as Methuselah!
“Do the leaders of the gun control movement really want to argue that people found not guilty of crimes should be punished anyway?”
Yes, they do. They also believe that THEY are the appropriate persons to decide that. And unfortunately, they’re not alone. The premise of “innocent until proven guilty” applies only in a courtroom. Having tried many cases to a jury, I regularly ask this question of potential jurors:
“When you came in here and learned this was a criminal case, how many of you thought ‘I wonder what he did?'”
About 75% raise their hands; the rest would, but are a little ashamed to.
What they completely forget, of course, is that those same principles can be applied to them.
I watched ALL the testimony via video. The Stste had nothing. The shooting went down exactly as he said it did. The local PD had already exonerated him. Then, in the interest of acerbating racial strife, our fearless leader told the DOJ to get that man. ‘Cause he didn’t look like the son Obamarama never had.
Crucified in the press. Hounded by an unethical “special prosecutor”. How can he ever have a normal life again? Don’t know if there is merit to these latest stories or not. On their track record, not inclined to believe ANYTHING the MSM reports. But if he has gone off the rails, our hopey-changey Pres can take full credit for driving him over the edge.
They don’t see it as punishment. They don’t see gun ownership as a right, which would be something you take away as punishment. Instead they see it as a privilege bestowed to the wealthy who vote the right way. Anyone can be disarmed in their book, that that’s just peachy- even people who have never shot anyone for any reason.
I agree. I think you nailed it, in terms of how they think. And that’s the problem.