The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6, 2013, 11:42 PM   #1
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,327
State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman

The prosecution has rested their case, and we can expect a verdict soon.

While the case was ongoing, we prohibited discussion of the issue. At that point, evidence hadn't been presented and all we could do was speculate. Things have changed, and we're going to reopen discussion.

This will be the only thread for the Zimmerman case in this subforum. Do not open new or duplicate threads.

Furthermore, we will only be discussing the legal issues and civil-rights implications here. Posts discussing the gun used, disdain for involved parties, self-defense methods, or racial issues will be deleted.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 12:10 AM   #2
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,737
I’ve watched bits and pieces of the trial and although I’m not an attorney the case against Zimmerman seems pretty weak. At the end of the day most of the evidence presented were facts that he has already admitted to or the opinions of friends/family of the victim. I’ve seen nothing that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the shooting was not in self defense.

I think the jury can convict him on lesser offenses than murder, but I’m a little unclear of the specifics. However, it does seem if he is found guilty it will most likely be of the lesser charges, but as we all know juries can be unpredictable.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 12:46 AM   #3
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,071
Thus far, I can say i pretty much removed my feelings that Zimmerman was in a much worse way legally...

Initially I was under the impression he instigated a face to face encounter with a minor at night making him likely, in the legal sense, the aggressor and Martin the defender...

To reverse these roles in florida requires many big things to transpire....

But if the defense story holds with the jury that Martin hid and jumped him and immediately began violence, than I don't see Zimmerman ever being in the legal agressor role if no contact had begun yet...

I am no lawyer but as a florida resident, I try to understand the laws that may affect me, my family and our lives...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 01:59 AM   #4
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Saint Augustine, Florida
Posts: 1,159
I will be watching. I have had friends say Zimmerman instigated the incident by exiting the truck or following. I do not believe these things to be legally and while of questionable tactical merit (Who's to say if I wouldn't have done the same thing), I don't think they prove the case that he was the aggressor. Certainly, there is no limit on how old an aggressor can be for self defense (as a 17 year old I would expect to be shot if I jumped a gun owner), and there is nothing illegal about following a suspicious person even if the dispatch tells you it's not necessary.

I was not able to watch the trial and most of the evidence presented has been glamourized by the media. Where can I find a largely complete, unbiased presentation of the arguments and evidence presented?
dakota.potts is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 03:16 AM   #5
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,088
I have watched all of the testimony and seen all of the evidence that has been publicly released. I believe the state's case is in shambles. So much so that I have, at times questioned whether they were just presenting the facts intending to let the chips fall where they may.

There has not been a single substantial shift in Zimmerman's version of the facts in each telling. There was a written statement to the police four hours after the incident, a videotaped interview, audio interview, a 'challenge interview' (interrogation), a real time video reenactment with the police and a television interview with Sean Hannity. All of these were admitted into evidence and seemed to bolster only Zimmerman's entirely consistent version of the events.

Zimmerman at all times appeared credible, believable, even meek and without a hint of the depraved mind that the prosecution must prove for a second degree murder conviction.

All the facts, and all the testimony from twenty-some witnesses that was presented, taken as a whole, only point to Mr Zimmerman's explanation of the events that night.

To believe the state's arguments, one would have to believe that it was Martin who was the one (on the 911 recording) shrieking and begging for help, all the while straddling Zimmerman and pummeling him relentlessly for more than a full minute, right up to the point of the single gun shot.

The medical examiner testified that Martin's only injuries, besides the fatal shot, were abrasions on his knuckle as if from striking blows. A neighbor's eyewitness account of Martin's "ground and pound" MMA attack on the helpless Zimmerman should have prevented this case from having ever been brought.

Detective Sevino, the lead investigator found Martin to be utterly truthful, testified as such, only to have his testimony stricken with instructions to the jury to disregard. Sevino, by the way, was reported to have refused to charge Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder, and has been subsequently demoted to a patrol officer. Sevino also testified in this case, and to the FBI that there was "external" pressure to charge Zimmerman, regardless of the unimpeached self-defense fact matrix.

I could go on and on, but suffice to say that the parade of state's witnesses, one by one and almost without fail, morphed into defense witnesses before our very eyes. This slow-motion train wreck formed such a complete implosion of the state's case, that I would not have been surprised in the least if the defense had called no witnesses and went straight to closing arguments.

At primary issue is whether Zimmerman could have reasonably feared death or grave injury at the time he discharged his weapon.

Martin's attack was unrelenting. A neighbor and eyewitness John Good commanded Martin to stop, but the attack continued until Zimmerman was able to stop it with a single shot.

I can't imagine, nor does ANY of the evidence so far support a reasonable person in Zimmerman's position NOT fearing his own death.

Last edited by maestro pistolero; July 7, 2013 at 03:25 AM.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 04:20 AM   #6
Crazy88Fingers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 936
I found it interesting that the prosecution brought up Zimmerman's school records. Showing that because he earned good grades in his criminal justice courses he's a wannabe cop and vigilante. Meanwhile, last time I checked, the defense was not allowed to bring forth Martin's school records; which were, shall we say, less sterling.

Pretty much the only concrete, irrefutable, physical evidence in this case would be Zimmerman's injuries. If Martin didn't sneak up on him and/or pummel his head into the sidewalk, then how did the back of Zimmerman's head get injured?
__________________
"And I'm tellin' you son, well it ain't no fun, staring straight down a .44"
-Lynyrd Skynyrd
Crazy88Fingers is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 05:25 AM   #7
Old Stony
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 31, 2013
Location: East Texas
Posts: 636
Let's hope that all of us that carry firearms on a regular basis can take a good lesson from this. No matter what the circumstances, if you shoot another person you will be a victim as well. Justice is expensive in this country and it can cost you everything you own and possibly most of what you could ever earn to get into a shooting situation. So keep your ducks in a row and do everything humanly possible to avoid a situation that could end up like this.
And you say you carry your reloads in your pistol to save 30 bucks?
Old Stony is online now  
Old July 7, 2013, 06:35 AM   #8
wally626
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2009
Posts: 635
For those interested in a detailed review of the trial see

http://legalinsurrection.com/author/...-self-defense/

This is a good summary of the day's events by a Lawyer, Andrew Branca who has written a book on self defense law. (notes: lots of plugs for the book but those can be ignored)

The motion to dismiss after the prosecution rested was very instructive. The defense had a clear picture of what happen, and cited lots of cases backing up their positions on what constitutes self defense and second degree murder in FL and why nothing presented at the trial came even close to meeting the standards required.

The prosecution presented a case full of incredible hyperbole and frankly lies about the case. The judge of course ruled for the prosecution as she has done on almost all disputes so far in the case.

In the defense case the testimony of Zimmerman's uncle was very strong. He said, he was on the computer with the TV playing in the background and heard a scream and said that was his nephew, very compelling.
wally626 is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 07:37 AM   #9
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by maestro pistolero
I could go on and on, but suffice to say that the parade of state's witnesses, one by one and almost without fail, morphed into defense witnesses before our very eyes.

That was exactly my thought. At one point, I was listening to the testimony of the defenses firearms expert but I didn't know at the time who was questioning her. From the answers she was giving, I assumed it was the defense. I finally went and looked at the TV and my first thought was "My God! That's the prosecutor!"

It's been unbelievable.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.

Last edited by Brian Pfleuger; July 7, 2013 at 08:50 AM. Reason: missing letter
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:09 AM   #10
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,482
Quote:
I found it interesting that the prosecution brought up Zimmerman's school records. Showing that because he earned good grades in his criminal justice courses he's a wannabe cop and vigilante. Meanwhile, last time I checked, the defense was not allowed to bring forth Martin's school records; which were, shall we say, less sterling.
I thought exactly the same thing.

I've kept up with this case daily and from a legal standpoint, I don't believe that any thing Zimmerman did was illegal. While we will never know who actually was the aggressor, clearly the witness testimony supports that Zimmerman was being beaten by Martin. That said, Zimmerman had every right to protect himself.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:31 AM   #11
overhead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 28, 2013
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy88Fingers
I found it interesting that the prosecution brought up Zimmerman's school records. Showing that because he earned good grades in his criminal justice courses he's a wannabe cop and vigilante. Meanwhile, last time I checked, the defense was not allowed to bring forth Martin's school records; which were, shall we say, less sterling.

Pretty much the only concrete, irrefutable, physical evidence in this case would be Zimmerman's injuries. If Martin didn't sneak up on him and/or pummel his head into the sidewalk, then how did the back of Zimmerman's head get injured?
I don't think calling his professor as a witness had anything to do with an accusation that he was a "wannabe cop". He claimed no knowledge of the "stand your ground" law. The law was reviewed in that class, I believe the prosecution was trying to show that he was dishonest about his knowledge of the law and that he lied from time to time and therefore could not be trusted to tell the truth about other matters.

I did not see any evidence that showed how the actually confrontation started, Zimmerman's injures could have come from mutual combat, and also could have been caused after either he or Martin were the aggressor. I am not comfortable with what Zimmerman did, but I don't see enough evidence to convict him of any crime.
overhead is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:44 AM   #12
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,389
Brian said:
Quote:
...my first thought was "My God! That's the prosecutor!"
So what's the possibility that the prosecutor INTENTIONALLY did a less than capable job to sway the case for political or other reason?
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 08:52 AM   #13
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,389
Overhead expresses the feelings from many observers :
Quote:
I am not comfortable with what Zimmerman did, but I don't see enough evidence to convict him of any crime.
Anticipated Verdict from talking heads = Not Guilty, massive Civil suit to follow.
As many have noted there is a lawyer (or more) attached to every bullet, and likely several to those in question here.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 09:10 AM   #14
Punisher_1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 136
Is this a case of prosecuting someone for the sake of staving off the civil unrest that may have occurred had they decided it was a justified shoot from the beginning? Scary to think you could end up in prison just to please people and take the heat for a politicians fear of decision making.
Punisher_1 is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 09:22 AM   #15
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,327
Quote:
I found it interesting that the prosecution brought up Zimmerman's school records. Showing that because he earned good grades in his criminal justice courses he's a wannabe cop and vigilante. Meanwhile, last time I checked, the defense was not allowed to bring forth Martin's school records; which were, shall we say, less sterling.
If anything, this case should hammer home one salient point for anyone carrying a gun for self-defense: if you pull the trigger, expect your life to change for the worse. We hear all the conversations that go, "well, the law says I can shoot someone if ____, and there won't be any consequences." There's statute, and then there's the jury who has to interpret it.

I don't think Martin's school records or past indiscretions were relevant. They had little bearing on what he did at the moment the confrontation took place. In Zimmerman's case, we had a prosecution acting under immense pressure to discredit him. While his school records shouldn't have been relevant either, what happens, happens.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 09:45 AM   #16
Microgunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,929
I don't understand the argument that Zimmerman following Martin was the cause of the incident.

I believe you're allowed to approach and verbally challange any uninvited stranger on your own property. Since Zimmerman was a resident and community watch officer of the property and Martin was not a resident, Zimmerman's challenge of Martin was absolutly legal.

It seems to me the entire question should be who struck the first blow, ie: the initiating felony.

With the testimony I've seen I don't see how the jury could find that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation.
__________________
Proud NRA Patron Member
Microgunner is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 09:49 AM   #17
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,400
The prosecution has rested, but the defense has not. I don't think we know how long the defense will need to present its case, since a motion to dismiss was denied. So I'm not holding my breath for a verdict.

I am bothered by the fact that Martin apparently had marijuana in his system when he died, but the jury has NOT been allowed to hear expert testimony that (a) it was there, and (b) it could have affected his thought processes at the time of the incident. I agree with the observations that the prosecution case has pretty much been a continuous train wreck, but I feel the judge has been favoring the prosecution almost (??) to the point of displaying an obvious anti-Zimmerman bias.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 10:16 AM   #18
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
I agree with the observations that the prosecution case has pretty much been a continuous train wreck, but I feel the judge has been favoring the prosecution almost (??) to the point of displaying an obvious anti-Zimmerman bias.
I'd go further than that. The judge is blatantly biased against the defendant.

The errors are so out of whack with a supposedly impartial trial judge, that they are glaring. Should Zimmerman not be acquitted, a court of appeals will have a field day with this judge (remembering the 7th circuit panels Ezell opinion of that trial judge).
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 10:21 AM   #19
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
For those talking about a massive civil suit in the event of a Not Guilty verdict, I take it you mean by Zimmerman vs Florida?

IIRC, under Florida law, a determination of lawful self defense immunizes against law suits related to that use of force.
MLeake is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:00 AM   #20
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,389
MLeake
Not a lawyer, didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express, but watched the legal talking heads have brought up the possibility of a (assumed) federal civil rights suit from Trayvons family against Zimmerman in the case of acquittal.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:01 AM   #21
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,088
Ordinary marijuana use may be no big deal, and may be unlikely to contribute to violent behavior but, in this case, Martin's 'blunt' habit has far more significant implications.

One of the things the prosecution has proffered and is attempting to prove is that Zimmerman profiled Martin because of his race.

Zimmerman claimed on the nonemergency call that Martin appeared to be high on drugs. That was a primary factor in Zimmerman considering Martin suspicious. But the jury been denied access to the toxicology report because the judge deemed it irrelevant early on.

Then comes the medical examiner a couple of days ago saying that he reverses his previous opinion as to whether the THC in Martin's system was sufficient to have a physical and mental effect. The medical examiner now believes it was. Nevertheless, the judge again refused to make the toxicology report admissible, and double down on stupidity when she denied a new motion to let it in.

This, in the opinion of some legal experts, is a reversible error on appeal.

But we will see that the degree of Martin's drug use was much worse before it's all over. There is a popular street mixture of over the counter cough medicine, Arizona watermelon drink, and you guessed it, Skittles that Martin repeatedly posted about using on facebook. The autopsy shows evidence in his liver consistent with long term use. And there is strong circumstancial video evidence of Martin's drug use that very night. See: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/...able-violence/
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:25 AM   #22
Microgunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,929
In a possible civil suit against Zimmerman and/or his home owners association the defense would be allowed a far wider scope of evidence that could be presented.
Martin's drug abuse, firearms posturing, school records etc. could all be used as evidence.
A civil suit, I believe, could gain no ground.
__________________
Proud NRA Patron Member
Microgunner is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:34 AM   #23
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
The Influence of Gun Issues on Juries

I will share my evolving reviews on how the gun type influences juries and perhaps this one. It is not an argument about stopping power but how presentation of gun issues can influence juries as seen in jury simulations.

We have seen in past posts folks saying if it is a good shoot then this doesn't matter as compared to trials where ammo types, training, timing of shots, etc. have been brought up to convince the jury that the defendant was guilty. Frank Ettin has posted a series of trials about these issues. I have a pretty good handle on the simulation literature and that's what I'm basing some of my opinions on. Thus, the quote blocks indicate my evolving views.

It is not a stopping power debate or whether the gun is a good gun - it is jury perception and strategies about discussing the gun.

Quote:
Before the gun testimony:
I don't know about him testifying. It's a double edged sword.

Not being Perry Mason, I might as a DA ask:

1. Why did you carry a gun when the neighborhood watch instructions weren't to do so?

2. Why did you get out of the car when instructed not to?

3. Have you any formal training in how to use a firearm? Do you know that most practical courses teach avoidance? Why didn't you take such a course if you wanted to carry a gun.

4. Please explain your comments about those kind of people getting away with it, etc.?

5. You carried a gun without a safety, why? Ans: So it would be ready to use. Att. So you had the mindset that you were ready to use the gun when you got out of the car (which you were told by the dispatcher not to).

6. You carried a 9mm semi - why. Ans: That is the type of gun and ammo that the police use (a common defense that an expert like Mas might testify to). DA - so you see yourself as a police type ready to intervene?

7. What did you say to him when you confronted Martin? That would be a tricky answer - if he says he was forceful - looks like a commando. If he sounds disingenuous - bad too.

I also think and we can't tell that George (being a hot head from other interactions) might have flashed the gun at Martin. In that case, Martin, IMHO would be justified in using necessary force against him to neutralize the gun.

Here's another point - while one person can keep him from conviction, another can hang the jury and they have to go through this again (if the state wants).

Thus, I opine, Judge Judy - that he shouldn't testify as he can blow away reasonable doubt by screwing up on the stand.

I wonder if they are going to discuss how the gun was concealed.
Quote:
I watched the gun expert interchange and it was weird.

The prosecution was attempting to hint at the gun was ready to go. The defense tried to make it a nice gun and present that the Kel-tec had myriad safety features (sound like a Glock debate). However, they kept on emphasizing how Martin was shot and the gun was up against him. Is that a good idea given the shooting is being portrayed as illegitimate?

Too much exposure of the gun in my view. They also wandered into the trigger pull, the police carry chambered, SA vs DA/SA. I don't know if that makes Zim a good guy because of the gun's characteristics.
Quote:
This is what I said previously. Watching the presentations - and comparing it to the literature on weapons effects on juries - my evaluation is that:

1. The 9mm was not specifically emphasized as an evil round. Unless the term 9mm in general primes some negative attitudes, this seems a wash.

2. The safety issue and chambered issue. The prosecution seemed to want to mention 'safety' quite a bit. There was a discussion of a thumb safety on other guns. One can take this as implying that a gun with a safety is better and/or protects against impulsive usage. You have to make a deliberate removal of it. Using one without a safety, might mean mindset of read to shoot. The idea of a chambered round is the same concept. The gun is hot and ready to go.

The defense wanted to play up that the trigger pull weight and distance were such that the Kel-tec is a safe gun and that it was well thought out choice to avoid impulsive shooting. Contrasting it to SA/DA or DA guns was the point. There was some implication that those guns were less safe than the Kel-tec and that made it a nice gun. Some suggestion that cop guns were not so nice. The expert dismissed this.

In reality, the Kel-tec appeal is that it is a cheap gun.

The literature suggests that increased presentation of the gun primes negative attitudes towards the user. Thus, having the expert hold the gun, dry fire it repeatedly - may give just give a negative attitude - it just reminds one that it was fired into a minor. That might wash away a techy discussion of DA/SA, trigger pull, etc.

Similarly, the discussion of how the gun was either pressed into the body or just touching the clothes has a macro negative. It goes over and over pressing the gun or firing closely into the body of a minor. If you are sympathetic to Martin - that's the take away. They were trying to make a micro point which may not be worth it.

Decisions are made on two levels - emotional and quick or slow and rational. Jury research sometimes suggests the emotional has more power. Based on my professional knowledge, research, and experience - I think the gun debate is 60/40 negative for Zim.
Quote:
On decision processes - do the minute details count:
If George gets convicted, I think the micro level issue of self-defense will be swamped by the macro issue of George starting the incident. That's what the jury may key on. Yeah, you were getting beat but it might have been an educational beat down. I read that term in a book Kathy recommended. It's when you do something stupid and the BG decides to educate you.
I wonder if the gun type will surface in summation. Frank Ettin says that sometimes the 'inside baseball' details, that sound so good to the choir, don't have the same impact on the jury.

We will see.

Certainly, the good shoot fans should take away something. If the shoot is ambiguous, all these issues can come up.

Glenn
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:40 AM   #24
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
I'd go further than that. The judge is blatantly biased against the defendant.

The errors are so out of whack with a supposedly impartial trial judge, that they are glaring. Should Zimmerman not be acquitted, a court of appeals will have a field day with this judge (remembering the 7th circuit panels Ezell opinion of that trial judge).
I'd agree. Clearly this is a judge with a verdict in mind. For Zimmerman this means that come hell or high water, this case is going to the jury.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 7, 2013, 11:44 AM   #25
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
One thing that seems obvious to me in this case is that the prosecution is not only arguing for a conviction in this case, they're arguing as best they can circumstances to bolster the civil suit the Martin family is very obviously planning to file against not merely Zimmerman but Kel Tec. Clearly they wish to demonstrate the possibility of an accidental discharge or firearm malfunction in order to have some cause of action against Kel Tec.
csmsss is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.15400 seconds with 7 queries