HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Exposed: The Corporations...

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:19 AM

Exposed: The Corporations Behind The Law That May Let Trayvon Martinís Killer Go Free

Itís been widely reported today that the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the shadowy corporate front group that unites state lawmakers with corporations to pass state laws favorable to corporate interests, helped pass the law that might allow Trayvon Martinís killer, George Zimmerman, to escape prosecution. Floridaís ďStand Your Ground,Ē the law that might help Zimmerman to claim self-defense (despite evidence to the contrary) is just one of many state laws that is nearly identical to ALECís model Castle Doctrine Act. The Florida senator who introduced the law, Durell Peadon, was also a member of ALEC. The law passed in 2005.

According to the Center for Media and Democracy, 98 percent of ALECís revenues come from corporations, corporate trade groups, and corporate foundations. Each member pays annual fees of between $7,000 and $25,000. ALEC is also supplemented by direct grants. We donít know all the details about all of ALECís funders and members. Hereís a partial list of what we do know about the corporations and foundations who helped fund the group that drafted the law that keeps Trayvon Martinís killer free ó and put more guns on our streets:

Read more: http://www.republicreport.org/2012/trayvon-martin-alec-corporate-funder/

11 replies, 1516 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply Exposed: The Corporations Behind The Law That May Let Trayvon Martinís Killer Go Free (Original post)
Report1212 Mar 2012 OP
Pacafishmate Mar 2012 #1
Report1212 Mar 2012 #2
Pacafishmate Mar 2012 #3
DrDan Mar 2012 #4
Pacafishmate Mar 2012 #5
Aerows Mar 2012 #7
denverbill Mar 2012 #8
Aerows Mar 2012 #10
spanone Mar 2012 #6
Report1212 Mar 2012 #9
ljm2002 Mar 2012 #11

Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:22 AM

1. The reason he may go free has nothing to do with SYG.

 

Keep posting that because it furthers your anti gun cause, however. He's going free because the police are backing him up and refuse to charge him.

Also did you ever think that people may be behind the law rather than corporations? No, anything you don't like has to be an evil corporate conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:26 AM

2. SYG has nothing to do with being "anti-gun"

It's legalized murder. I don't care if it's with a gun or a knife or a spoon or a panda bear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:30 AM

3. It isn't "legalized murder".

 

Murder requires malice and premeditation. If someone is running at me with a knife and I shoot them, there was neither malice nor premeditation. I shot them to protect myself from harm. It doesn't matter if the situation occurs inside my home or in a department store. SYG expands the use of force in situations that warrant it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #3)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:38 AM

4. murder does not require premeditation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DrDan (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:40 AM

5. Ok, there are different categories.

 

The point is still that there can be justification for using violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #5)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:44 AM

7. Chasing a person down the street

When they are actively trying to get away from you, is not a justification for using fatal harm. If anything, the person being chased that is unarmed and actively fleeing someone that they view as an attacker is the one that is justified in using violence.

I know if I was chased down the street in an area I had every right to be in and someone in a car kept following me, then they exited their vehicle when I ran and still persisted in following me, I would have every right to fear for my life. Not the other way around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:47 AM

8. Exactly. It he had a gun, he would have been perfectly justified to shoot Zimmermann.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to denverbill (Reply #8)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:59 AM

10. Yep

If anything, you'd think people would seize onto the argument that "If Trayvon had a gun, he'd still be alive", but judging by how this was handled by the Sanford police, he'd be in jail for murder.

That's why this entire line of thinking that it is justifiable to chase someone down and shoot them before the police get there is unreasonable.

I fully believe in gun rights and the right to defend yourself. I also fully believe in prosecuting people who escalate situations to the point where they are acting as vigilantes. That's what happened here.

If your life is not in danger, and you get out of your vehicle to pursue someone, YOU are the aggressor. No ifs ands or buts about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:42 AM

6. nra was also a major backer of this bill. that backs my anti-gun cause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #6)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 11:49 AM

9. NRA also funds ALEC fyi nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pacafishmate (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 23, 2012, 12:31 PM

11. The police cited the law when they declined to arrest him...

...so I'd say the SYG law actually has a lot to do with why he's free right now, and has not been charged. Now you may argue that they misinterpreted the law, but then again that seems pretty easy to do.

Whether or not they are interpreting the law correctly, if police departments are using the law to let people like Zimmerman walk free without even pressing charges, then the law does indeed have something to do with incidents like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread