George Zimmerman once again proves he is a piece of ****.

He is now going to auction off the gun he used to murder Treyvon Martin.

Seriously, this guy is such a sick piece of shit. I bet some jackass conservative gun-nut will buy this gun for a ridiculous amount too.

His being allowed to own a firearm is exactly the type of situation I refer to when I say we need to fix our gun rights in this country. He has assaulted an officer, murdered someone, and repeatedly pulled weapons out on people during arguments, yet he gets to legally own guns?

**** that. This is exactly WHY there needs to be some form of control. I guess murdering one person wasn't enough. We will have to wait again for him to fucking shoot someone before MAYBE he finally has his guns taken away.

But yeah, thoughts OT?

He's a terrible human being. The fact that he's trying to make money off taking someone's life is gross.

He didn't murder anyone. I don't particularly like him or his actions after the incident, and I do agree selling the gun in this manner is in bad taste.

He might be a jackass, but the matter of fact is legally he has not been convicted of a crime so he can own and sell guns as he likes. Unless you had access to all of the evidences and facts presented in the case, your opinion on whether Zimmerman is guilty or not is moot. My thought is I'm glad we live in a country where one's guilt in court isn't determined by a mob or media manipulated opinions.

I don't know enough about the case to say he murdered anyone, but this selling his gun which was involved in the situation in the first place is a terrible idea. Very low, that gun should have been destroyed in my opinion. But thats just my 2 cents.

Just because he wasn't proven guilty doesn't mean he wasn't guilty! O.J Simpson got off, but everybody know what the deal was in that case! Like with O.J, Karma is going to catch up with Zimmerman.

You can't flim-flam the zim-zam.

This guy got a piece of the spotlight and he has been doing all he can to stay in it. What a piece of shit.

George Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed minor who was not committing a crime of any kind. That is a fact. Selling the weapon he used in that tragic sequence of events is sad and pathetic. Having said that, I am sure several second amendment loyalists will bid for it.

Huge differences. First, Simpson case was botched by the investigation. As far as we know no key pieces of evidence were thrown out due to legal technicality. Second, public opinion was in support of Simpson prior to the trial while it was against Zimmerman prior to his. Thirdly, there's no question that Nicole Brown and the other guy she was with were murdered (the trial was whether Simpson was the killer) while Zimmerman's case was almost the opposite in that there was no question of who done it, but trial was entirely focused on whether it was murder or self defense.

By your logic, pretty much any legal convictions in the history of US justice should be overturned because of the simpson trial? My point is there's no additional evidence outside of the courtroom to suggest that it was murdered while all of the evidences presented in the case suggest that it was a justifiable defensive shooting.

He didn't. The trial was over and done with and he was acquitted of murder by people who have been presented enough about the case.

As for it being a terrible idea, it's his personal call because it's his personal property. If it's for personal profit then yes I'd say it's in poor taste but if he's going to donate it all to anti-Hillary effort like he claim he's going to then I personally think it's pretty awesome. It drives the point home that Hillary's anti-gun effort would rob some people's means to defend themselves.

He's this decade's OJ. If he was smart he'd lay low since he got away with it but neither did OJ so what the hell. An argument could be made that the bigger scumbag would be the person that ends up buying the gun.

You are correct, there was no additional evidence to prove that Zimmerman wasn't acting in self defense, but just a little bit of common sense would prove otherwise. And that wasn't directed toward you, I was talking about that B.S stand your ground law in florida.

Dude as logical as that comment was, the hate filled people who supported Zimmerman will still believe that he was justified in what he did.

Was Travon Martin an Angel? Hell no, but he didn't deserve to die that way....nobody should.

Common sense isn't a kind of putty you can use to patch holes created by a lack of evidence. When you are using "common sense" instead of evidence to scorn a stranger you are not proving anything, you are just waggling a hate boner around to see if anyone else will whip out their own.

Of course you can say the same for all the people robbed while wearing nice clothes or women raped while walking by themselves.

Which part of FL self defense law do you think is bullshit?

Absolutely disgusting.

It's just determined by money, connections and political influence instead. Ask Hillary.

Morbid tokens is a very old tradition, in some cases they use to just destroy the bodies and paraphernalia to stop relic hunters.

@bmanva:

Well, not the law, but how it applied to the case.

It's very stupid that he was able to get away with murder, but under Florida law it appears that the murder wasn't actually murder. Even if we all agree that what he did should be considered a crime, the fact is it isn't. So since he has not been convicted of any crime he should have all the freedoms all other non-criminal citizens have.

He's obviously a terrible person. Even if you think he's in the right about the shooting, you can still see that he's a terrible sociopathic person.

lol, exactly

Opinion, we all have them bro.

What a scumbag :/

Ole' boy doesn't know how to stay out of the news.

Yeah, really bad to confuse those opinions with facts though. Worse then hate boner waggling.

Who do you think the hate is directed at?

How was the application of the law bullshit though?

As oppose to Russia, where true justice is served? Please...

@bmanva Is your question rhetorical? An unarmed minor was shot and killed by a grown man. Largely because the grown man is nosy and prejudiced (he may be racist but I can't say that with certainty). Also because the grown man was getting his a$$ whooped. If he wasn't getting dealt with by the boy he never would have reached for his gun. We know this because Mr. Zimmerman did not initially go for his gun when confronting the child.

Having said that the man was found not guilty by a jury of his peers. Any law that can turn an old fashioned butt whooping into cold blooded murder is an issue to me. I would have been justified in killing a great many people as a kid by the law's logic.

The part of the law that is BS is the "imminent danger" portion. What if the killer is solely responsible for being in imminent danger? Peep this: So I walk up on [unarmed] Bruce Lee in the middle of the night because I think all Chinese people are criminals. This is AFTER I was advised by a 911 operator not to walk up on him. I confront Mr. Lee. A fight ensues. Mr. Lee commences to stomping a mudhole in my anus. At that point AND ONLY AT THAT POINT is when I perceive myself to be in imminent danger. That is what is BS.

If I had left Mr. Lee- a U.S. citizen who was not in the commission of any wrongdoing- alone none of that would have happened. Any questions?

I'm not going to sit up here and debate this with you because it's been done a thousand times, neither one of us is going to present ANYTHING that hasn't been presented before!! It's obvious where we both stand on this issue, so it would be pointless but go ahead knock yourself out. lol

I would assume Zimmerman? Though mostly these days it seems like a pass time, so maybe no one?

Surely you jest. This has been done ad nauseam. Suffice to say if the boy wasn't beating up the grown man the boy would probably still be living.

I don't have hate for anyone(well, maybe Tom Brady lol) it's the justice system that I have issues with.

We have the illusion of democracy here in the U.S, it's just a matter of time before reality kicks in.

Not what the facts of the case showed..........

You mean why doesn't the news stay out of reporting him. I'm sure he didn't call TMZ and say, i'm selling the gun that i used in my defense.

It would help if you actually read the article. He wasn't just selling the gun, he was selling it as "the gun that killed Trayvon Martin". If he wasn't doing this for attention he would have just listed it as "Kel-Tec PF-9 9-mm for sale"

People do die from being beaten to death. You're saying that we should let the person be beaten to death before we let them use their gun to make it stop? Doesn't seem very logical to me. Yeah, what he did was terrible and was at least 50% his fault, but that situation is separate of the law. There's nothing wrong with the law itself.

Some of the responses in this thread are hilarious. If you don't beat people's asses and smash their skulls into concrete your chances of being shot by someone in self defense is dramatically reduced. Crazy, right?

I think Stand Your Ground laws are exclusively applied for white people who have murdered colored people. Many conservative states are trying to expand it as well. As it stands, I could murder a black guy in cold blood because I say I felt threatened. I will then be much more likely to get off the crime than if I had killed a white person, then I will get my gun back.

http://addictinginfo.org/2016/05/10/sc-man-uses-stand-your-ground-law-as-reason-for-bail-after-he-slow-cooked-murder-victims/

Stand your ground wasn't even used in Zimmerman's defense. You are right though, there was no real evidence that contradicted Zimmerman's claim of self defense which is why he was exonerated despite your "common sense." All of the physical/hard evidence points to self defense and aligns with his story/side of the incident.

While it was done in pretty poor taste, especially how he marketed the gun. He isnt doing anything illegal... or even newsworthy as far as I am concerned.