Slow clap.

I love guns. In my defense, mapleleaf, however sarcastically, did ask us what type of firearm Zimmerman should carry.

#fuckglock #1911sforlife

One thing is for sure, Zimmerman should ditch that POS Kel Tec.

"Being a fucktard moron and attacking an adult was just stupid"

You have absolutely no evidence that TM committed an unprovoked attack on GZ, you don't know what happened and what was said and who did what first, but to aid your argument you have now accepted this as gospel, but clever people know you don't know so making up shit to aid your argument isn't so smart.
There is no motive, why would TM just jump this man who looks a bit burly and possibly a bit aggressive, the only reason I can think would be in self-defense, the fight or flight situation we all feel when physically intimidated.by someone we fear may attack us, maybe TM was trying to defend himself against the angry guy with a gun. Maybe he was in fear of his life, black teenagers have feelings too you know.
There is no logic or evidence to suggest that TM was out looking for someone to attack, the confrontation was initiated by GZ, otherwise these guys paths would never have crossed.
There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that TM was doing anything wrong or illegal, or was planning to do anything wrong or illegal, he was what we call in technical terms INNOCENT.
GZ had already told the police his feelings on the situation, we knew he was in the 'wrong frame of mind', he had motive.
Even if he had caught TM stealing that is not just cause to kill him.
TM was murdered, he was set up by GZ and killed. Talk all the bullshit you want, and we all knew that jury was going to let him off.
This issue will rumble on, not because any of us gives a damn about TM, nobody knew him personally, but this shows us that in 2013 in Florida you can still kill someone and get away with it, shame on the law that allows this, shame on the people that defend it. It's not right to kill kids because you don't like what he wears or you think he might be trouble, if you think he is going to commit a crime you call the police, they are trained to deal with innocent young men, even ones that happen to be black.

"You have absolutely no evidence that TM committed an unprovoked attack on GZ"

Zimmerman's injuries aren't proof enough? Martin's lack of injuries (excluding the gunshot wound) isn't proof?

*You* have absolutely no evidence that Zimmerman "racially profiled" Martin. The 911 call edited by NBC doesn't count as evidence.

"The 911 call edited by NBC doesn't count as evidence." Did they actually edit a 911 call? I hadn't heard that before and would be interested in reading on that if you have a link.

http://gawker.com/5898876/nbc-apologizes-for-editing-george-zimmermans-911-call-on-today-show

Just google for more info.

How hard would I fight if someone threatened to kill me or I thought they were going to harm me in some way and they have a loaded gun, pretty hard I guess, what option would you have if you thought someone was going to shoot you, buggered if you do, buggered if you don't.
These teenage kids nowadays though ..... natural born killers, ain't that right GZ

jmo, I think that is the basis for the lawsuit GZ just filed against NBC, for the fake 911 tapes. These callsthey later apologized for, and lots of people there got fired, so Iwould assume that yes, someone there did something.

Yes, seriously edited to intentionally make GZ look racist and inflame the minority uprising (despite the fact GZ is a *minority* being *hispanic* and not white.

I love how one side will point out lack of evidence on the other side as proof that their assumptions are correct. Nigee you are as biased about TM being innocent and GZ being guilty as you claim the others are being the other way around.

We don't know exactly what happened, so GZ, innocent or not, walks free. That is how our justice system is supposed to work.

My understanding of events is as follows. GZ lives in a gated community that has a neighborhood watch and has recently had several burglaries. GZ, in his capacity as neighborhood watchman, spots a stranger walking through the gated community and follows him and reports him to the police. It seems reasonable to me that a neighborhood watchman would continue surveillance of a potential threat to the neighborhood.

After that, I don't know what happened. Somehow things got physical. Did TM try and avoid the confrontation or did he instigate it? I don't know. I've heard that GZ had some physical injuries and that a witness saw TM standing over a prone GZ before TM was shot, but I'm not clear on that.

@Aldy - Pretty accurate as to what official testimony has been released.

Witnesses differed as to who was on top of whom. The witness who was closest did say that TM was on top of GZ. It is also correct that GZ had substantial injuries, while TM, apart from the gunshot wound, had only a scratch on his hand.

Honestly, one of the most interesting things to me is that GZ called for help for an extended period of time before pulling his gun. He's heard* calling for help 14 times in 38 seconds on one of the 911 calls, for example, and witness reports indicate it probably went on longer than that.

This does not suggest, to me anyway, somebody who ran into a situation anxious to use his gun to kill somebody.

*There is controversy about who it is that is calling for help. The balance of witness reports indicate it was probably Zimmerman. To my mind, the injury imbalance between TM and GZ is conclusive in showing it was GZ.

semck, also there was the forensic evidence that suggest TM was on top, since the hole in his shirt was about 3 inchesoff from the bullet hole in his chest, indicating that the shirt was probably hanging loose,which means he was probably hanging over GZ, pummeling him in the face.

Forensic Evidence has a hard time lying.

@gunfighter:
Don't be a hater! To call a Glock "plastic" is equivilent to calling a 1911 "iron". Who the hell wants an Iron gun ... it's just going to rust on you, won't even last 10 years!

Of course steel isn't exactly iron, and the polymer that the frame of a Glock is made from isn't exactly plastic. I'm willing to bet that Glocks will survive 100 years quite well.

That aside - I'm a big fan of the 1911 - especially if it's a double stack. I love my Para Ordinance P14. I wouldn't like to carry a full size 1911 single stack that only held 7 rounds, even though that's the traditional style.

But the question was if I had to look over my shoulder constantly because everyone was out to get me. My Glock 30 holds 10 rounds of the the same ammo in a very concealable package, and the 21 would add 3 rounds to that with only a slightly greater print. A spare mag, and a SureFire flashlight to go along with it, and I could be paranoid with the best of them!

There's a reason more cops carry Glocks than any other firearm. Hell, the military doesn't even issue 1911's anymore ... they're using the Baretta 9mm ... not sure I get that though, because I do like the .45

How does the ability to function after 100 years make a firearm good? There are still muskets out there that could probably be used, it doesn't make them a good firearm.

That's a good point, hereward. And for the purpose of this hypothetical, it doesn't matter a bit. I was just commenting on gunfighters claim that they wouldn't be around in 100 years, and I think he's wrong about that. But GZ doesn't need it to last 100 years, just a couple will be enough for the public to forget his name, imo.

@ philcore

I'm not a fan of the Glock's operating system. It has more moving parts and it isn't exactly combat-proven. Glocks work just fine most of the time but it doesn't have quite the reliability of a 1911. Besides, the 1911's single-stack magazine is an asset. It makes the gun easier to conceal. The 1911 is simple, effective, easy-to-use, accurate, and *extremely* reliable. During testing in 1910, they put 6,000 rounds through one gun over the course of two days. When the gun grew hot, they simply immersed it in water, pulled it out, and continued firing. The gun had zero stoppages during those two days.

"There's a reason more cops carry Glocks than any other firearm."

Cops have historically had an aversion to both single-action and military sidearms, and the 1911 is both single-action and a military sidearm. Despite the 1911's thumb and grip safeties, most cops prefer double-action. Also, most cops consider .45 ACP to be a little too high-powered for a duty piece. Due to the design of the feed ramp, most 1911s only chamber full metal jacket, and cops worry about over-penetration. Frankly, cops don't have good taste in firearms.

"Hell, the military doesn't even issue 1911's anymore ... they're using the Baretta 9mm"

They still issue upgraded 1911s to some special forces units, with Marine Force Recon being the most notable example. There has been a backlash against the M9 due to its weak stopping power and unreliability. Some Navy SEALs have had M9s blow up in their face when chambering +P ammunition. The adoption of the M9, as with the M16 50 years ago, was a combination of the Air Force's poor taste in firearms and good lobbying by the involved companies. But just wait, I have a feeling 1911-pattern sidearms will make a comeback. The Army has been testing an M1911A2 that has been a tremendous success so far.

@ Hereward77 and philcore

"How does the ability to function after 100 years make a firearm good?"

The fact that the 1911 has served for as long as it has and continues to serve is indisputable proof of its reliability and combat effectiveness. Soldiers love 1911s, and if a gun is good enough for the battlefield it's good enough for the streets of America.

I expected you to say that and it's a fair rebuttal. Length of service is obviously a good indicator of reliability and usefulness. I was just pointing out that pure length of time served on its own doesn't mean a weapon is good NOW.

@gunfighter: good response, and a good defense of the 1911. Although it needs no defense with me, as I said I'm a already a fan, and an owner. Unless you consider the double stack mags as being a departure from the original design, then maybe you wouldn't consider Paras as being 1911s. But I do.

My point was just about the Glock hating. You'll find many Glock lovers who will be able to cite all of the benefits and test results of a Glock as you did for the 1911. Very smart people and very capable competition shooters, gunsmiths and firearms instructors. You can't say that they're just wrong, can you? The best you can do is disagree with them about which is better, but neither of them are bad.

Like I said, I'm a traditionalist. I am quite skeptical of "new" Glocks. Many Glock models are underpowered (for me, anything less than .45 is underpowered) and .45 caliber Glocks don't handle as well as a 1911.

I don't like that Glocks are DAO; the trigger pull is heavy enough to throw off my accuracy. I like a smooth, light release. I like exposed hammers and grip safeties and 5 inch barrels and accuracy.

Is it really DAO though? You could also argue that it's SAO. It's a constant trigger pull as either DAO or SAO would be, but unlike a double action pull, you aren't pulling a hammer all the way back until it releases. Because there is no hammer on a Glock. The trigger pull, once prepped, is as short as a single-action pull (once also prepped), immediate and crisp. not a long pull that if released, instead of followed through, would cause the hammer to drop back down without firing.

Even though it's not really SOA or DOA, because the firing mechanism is a pre set stiker, rather than a hammer, to me, having both a 1911 SAO and a Colt Pony DAO (I know .380 is a shit round, but you can hide that thing in your wallet, it's so small) I would say that my Glock trigger pull isn't just closer to my 1911, it's damn near identical to it.

As far as the weight of the trigger pull, you can get that modified in either a 1911 or a Glock, and I doubt all 1911s come of the line with the same pull, although I could easily be wrong about that. I only have one. But my guess would be knowing that my glock is about 5#, that my Para is probably 4 to 4.5. Not much difference at all.

Even though it is striker fired (as opposed to hammer fired) it is in a technical sense a DAO trigger. In my experience, 1911 trigger pulls are lighter. Besides, I like the exposed hammer.

The exposed hammer is like a de facto loaded chamber indicator for me. I carry cocked and locked, and I never drop the hammer on a loaded chamber, so if the hammer is back I know I have a round in the chamber.

If I'm carrying, I know Ihave a round in the chamber. Hammer or not, if I've gone through the trouble to have a firearm on me, I've gone through the trouble to chamber a round.

Well, me too, but I'm human and while I'm not likely to make a firearms-related mistake, it could happen.