Capital New York

I am a pistol instructor certified by the NRA and the state of Utah. While I am not an attorney, as a Utah instructor, I am required to teach the rights and limitations of the 'stand-your-ground' rule model regarding the use of deadly physical force.

I often wonder if Bloomberg is naturally obtuse, or being intentionally misleading. The problem in this case is not a 'stand-your-ground law', but rather the local PD's mishandling of the case. 'Stand-your-ground' does not entitle anyone to pursue and threaten anyone, regardless of any self-proclaimed 'neighborhood watch' status. If anything, 'stand-your-ground' entitled Martin to defend himself. If what I understand about this case is true, it's a disgrace - not to the laws regarding the use of force, but to the Sanford PD for basically taking Zimmerman's word for the events. There was certainly enough inconsistency, just in the multiple 911 calls, to justify an arrest.

That said, what Bloomberg doesn't understand about civil liberties is staggering.

"... he was arrested for attacking a police officer and was the subject of a court order to prevent domestic violence..."

Being *arrested* should not prevent anyone from obtaining a concealed carry permit, and in fact, in most states not named 'New York', only a *conviction* of a crime is held against an applicant. The fact is, anyone can get arrested for anything. An arrest doesn't make you guilty - a *conviction* does. In America, we don't remove a person's civil liberties just because a police officer once suspected them of a crime.

As for his protective order, the same standard applies. By federal law, a person may not posses *any* firearm while an order of protection is *active*. Once the order is removed, those liberties are restored. For example, orders of protection are commonplace in divorce proceedings. That doesn't mean that anyone who has ever been through that process is permanently barred from carrying a firearm. However, had he been *convicted* of a crime of domestic violence, he would be permanently barred from possessing *any* firearm.

I find it very troubling that Bloomberg feels the need to fall back on misleading statements and half-truths to attempt to persuade people. If his argument had any real merit, he wouldn't need to do so.

VERY well said, Dave Trig!

Bloomberg has gone from outstanding businessman to one of the most sleazy politicians ever to walk this earth. They say that power corrupts, and Bloomberg is proof in the flesh of how true that is.

Great story, Dana. I love when Bloomberg gets all pissed off.

Let's get this straight Mr. Bloomberg - My right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. PERIOD.

To have enough police to respond quickly (and still after the fact) you would have to have police and cameras in public places and on every street corner turning your city into a police state.

Welcome to NYC. It is time "the mayor" took ca of his crappy city and left the reest of us alone.

It's time for New Amsterdam (upstate NY above Westchester) to split from the MIT city state!

Bloomberg certainly isn't letting a "good crisis go to waste" in order to expand his political agenda. Guns are virtually illegal in New York City, yet, I wonder how many people were shot last night in that city. But of course, they were victims of "illegal" guns.

Latest reports indicate Zimmerman was on his back with his head being banged against concrete when he fired.
If true, then even in NY that would be self defense.

Little Mikey said :"It's a disgrace,,,,: But I'll tell you what's really a disgrace. It's his pals who are members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the media that protect them. Here's what's not widely known. Sixteen of his pals have been convicted of violating bail conditions, child pornography, trademark counterfeiting, bribery, felony corruption, extortion, embezzlement, internet sex, stealing from the poor, perjury, assault (wife beating), obstruction of justice, assaulting a police officer, resisting arrest, drug possession, carrying a weapon, carrying a concealed gun on campus, carrying a gun into a church, carrying a gun into a park, DWI and reckless driving. Overall, the proportion of criminal activity by members of MAIG is higher than the general population and far higher than the minuscule percentage of licensees. Seems Mikey ought to clean his own house before he criticizes ours. And the Martin-Zimmerman incident? The facts are just now emerging. Seems they're not what Mikey, Big Al, Jesse and the media want them to be.

Bloomberg's a serial slanderer so what's one or two more lies amongst the many he's uttered against gun owners in the past?

I've always been puzzled by Bloomberg as mayor and as businessman. There has to be another reason why he is so anti-gun. Perhaps that's how a RINO chameleon must operate to stay in office in the Big Apple. Up until 2007, perhaps he was trying to pass himself off as last of the Rockerfeller Republicans.

Bloomberg's also a billionaire and doesn't need friends, especially not mere mortals. So why stick his neck out for people like Rattner, Hevesi, Morris and their ilk for some pension fraud scheme? And why stick his neck out for Mark Mazer in the SAIC/City-Time scam?

I've listened and watched to Bloomberg News on radio, TV and the internet for years and never once did I encounter an anti-2nd Amendment or anti-gun industry story. His network simply reports all the financials and fundamentals of Ruger, Smith and Wesson, etc. without any political baggage at all.

Bloomberg is certainly not like Salzburger or Zucker using their papers as soap boxes. Perhaps if he starts using the network to promote his agenda, his clients will start to question the accuracy of his fancy, insanely over-priced trading terminals? (If they haven't already).

There has to be another dynamic. The most powerful men in the world cannot buy immortality and so they must achieve the closest thing: A legacy. Perhaps in his mind, there will be a day in the far future when all privately owned guns are banned and that the proles across the land will mouth his name in reverence for bringing about utopia.

@despot - Not necessarily. If Zimmerman instigated the encounter, or tried to detain Martin illegally, then Martin has every right to defend himself.

Imagine, I try to mug you, and you successfully defend yourself, gaining the upper hand. I have no right to claim self-defense in that scenario. Only the defender has a legal right to use force.

Martin didn't attack Zimmerman; Zimmerman stalked Martin and instigated the encounter. That seems apparent to me from his 911 call. Zimmerman is therefore committing aggravated assault if he engages Martin and attempts to detain him.

Make no mistake: Zimmerman is not a victim here. He's a vigilante who killed a man that he assaulted.

Dave Trig needs to contact the DA immediately because he's just offered new information that could have come only from an eye witness as yet unidentified.

Dave- Bloomberg is purposely being obtuse, AND intentionally misleading to suit his personal agenda. Even though he switched his party affiliation from Republican to Independent, he is far left of center and everything he spews follows the Democratic line of thought. The government wants our guns one way or the other. Once the second amendment falls, the rest will follow and citizens will become subjects.

Once Obama mad his Last Stand, Jessie, Sharpton, Bloomsberg are just out toget all the political Capital they. All they want is Justice. Then WHY COMMENT anymore. The courts will decide, right

Hope it is thes Last Stand other wise who can defend themselves and others be it your wife, a black teenager, Old Man or a everyone on an Airplane from a Hijacker.

Yet, if you turn your back on someone getting murdered, they just past laws to prosecute YOU.

Dumb is getting DUMBER

Hey, I'm the gun industry (AKA NRA). I sell the guns. Who they kill is not my department.

What the gun lobby does most effectively is to create a climate of fear and suspicion in which to foster a fight-or-flight set of reflexes that makes it easier to sell more guns by persuading the gullible that they are somehow safer if armed. This became the state of the nation in the Reagan years when we more closely resembled present-day North Korea. I recall a time when some were actually suggesting that the answer to hijacking was to arm all airline passengers; just imagine the OK Corral at 37,000 feet.

I'm not a stranger to guns. In my teens I owned a .22-caliber rifle though I used it only for target practice. During WWII I was trained as an aerial gunner on a B-24 crew, and at one time or another fired almost every kind of pistol, rifle, carbine; even Tommy guns. In the 60s I once lived in a household in which I was the only one not packing heat. Want to know how safe it is to have guns in the house? Google this: "Toddler shoots sister."