re: #25 ObserverArt

Regarding the Florida trial…what a mess. Another repeat of Martin and Zimmerman. It is almost as if it is a license to kill. Just claim self defense and the law makes it rather unclear how that could ever be denied. The burden seems to be what is on one’s mind rather than evidence, facts, and logic.

I sure would have liked to be around the legislators and creators of the whole concept to understand their reasoning. You would think they got it wrong, but then you almost have to wonder if it was intended. The question then would be, what is that intention? There certainly doesn’t seem to be a hell of a lot of pressure to change it either. Very strange thinking in the whole thing.

The law doesn’t just provide a license to kill and claim anything as self-defence. The intent, and the interpretation, of it is to allow you to do whatever you like if you have a gun. In American culture and under current interpretation of these kinds of laws, you are morally right by virtue of having the gun, because the gun is the most sacred object in culture. And that’s why there’s no pressure to change the law, because it is a law about gun sanctification.