There's a debate about whether Zimmerman should have been carrying

[MrScorpio]

145. Is there another intended usage for carrying a loaded handgun into a confrontation...

Last edited Wed Apr 4, 2012, 03:53 PM - Edit history (3)

For which I'm not aware?

Perhaps you can enlighten me that Zimmerman's intent at that moment of confrontation was perhaps to do something like skeet shooting, or even target practice or even to show his new friend, Trayvon his fancy toy?

Isn't it reasonable to stipulate that he carried it with the express purpose of possibly shooting down a stranger in case he deemed it necessary to do so… And then actually did that?

I want to make one other clarification, just so you understand me: I, in no way, am advocating that Zimmerman didn't have the right to own and carry his handgun for whatever purpose that he saw fit. He, as well as any other law abiding citizen can do so and should be able to do so as long as we have a Second Amendment in this country.

This is not about the right to keep and bare arms.

All I'm saying is that otherwise irresponsible assholes like Zimmerman are the kind of people who decide to use handguns when it's a better idea to not use them.

Given his bad temper, propensity for violence and confrontation, apparent sense of entitlement and added to the fact that he's the owner of a loaded handgun, it's safe to say that George Zimmerman was bad news waiting to happen. Just the kind of person that I want as far away from me as possible.

In spite of all of that I have to say, just because he had the right to have that gun…. Well, that did not make it right for him to use it when he did.