The country has been heading for disaster ever since the dubious election of George Bush in 2000. The divisions are huge and the Right is seriously psycho. The Tea Party are selling shirts saying "911 takes too long, I reload faster", and they are a genuine political force. This case is just another example of the way the country is going, and it's not impossible that a Sarah Palin/Michelle Bachmann type person could well be President, with 51% loving them, and 49% detesting every decision. Every time I think the UK is bad, I just look over there and thank my lucky stars that we do have as many psychos.
Either Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann could do a better job than the current President, the worst ever.
Riiiiight. To be honest, chief - you're not doing the American right many favours saying stuff like that - because it's quite clearly tosh. I wouldn't trust Bachmann or Palin to run a fu(kin Dunkin' Donuts. Luckily, I suspect, nor would the majority of Americans - no matter how stupid the rest of the world may think they are sometimes.
I've lived here in The States for 41 years now, and run a small business, believe me, this is the worst president in office since I've been here, for anyone who doesn't have their hand out that is.
We know, big man - you've told us all ad nauseum.
Waaah, de gubberment won't let me fire my workers when I feel like it. Waaah, de gubberment takes too much money off me in taxes. Waaah, de gubberment doesn't do enough to deter terrorists. Waaah, de gubberment interferes too much in general. Waaah de gubberment
Tell you what - why don't you come back over here? You'd LOVE it in the UK.
haha quality
+1
Had me giggling for ages. I'm going to say that now.
The country has been heading for disaster ever since the dubious election of George Bush in 2000. The divisions are huge and the Right is seriously psycho. The Tea Party are selling shirts saying "911 takes too long, I reload faster", and they are a genuine political force. This case is just another example of the way the country is going, and it's not impossible that a Sarah Palin/Michelle Bachmann type person could well be President, with 51% loving them, and 49% detesting every decision. Every time I think the UK is bad, I just look over there and thank my lucky stars that we do have as many psychos.
Either Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann could do a better job than the current President, the worst ever.
Riiiiight. To be honest, chief - you're not doing the American right many favours saying stuff like that - because it's quite clearly tosh. I wouldn't trust Bachmann or Palin to run a fu(kin Dunkin' Donuts. Luckily, I suspect, nor would the majority of Americans - no matter how stupid the rest of the world may think they are sometimes.
I've lived here in The States for 41 years now, and run a small business, believe me, this is the worst president in office since I've been here, for anyone who doesn't have their hand out that is.
We know, big man - you've told us all ad nauseum.
Waaah, de gubberment won't let me fire my workers when I feel like it. Waaah, de gubberment takes too much money off me in taxes. Waaah, de gubberment doesn't do enough to deter terrorists. Waaah, de gubberment interferes too much in general. Waaah de gubberment
Tell you what - why don't you come back over here? You'd LOVE it in the UK.
I was under the impression that forums were for the exchange of views, not insults. I do come over, almost every year, flying over on the 24th of the month actually, for a couple of weeks. I'd always planned to retire back in England, couldn't afford to now. I've remained a citizen of The U.K. as I'm proud of my heritage, and always have been proud to be "a Londoner". Not being a citizen of The US means I'm not allowed to vote, I'm therefore not affiliated with any political party. I can tell you this emphatically, Obama's key legislation, "healthcare reform", is causing businesses to not hire new people and to either reduce staffs or change them to part-time. Some parts of the reform have been put off for a year as they have been found to be unworkable and/or nobody understands them. I won't even get into Obama's foreign policy, or the recent multitude of scandals.
sorry mate you missed the point Bush is a white republican(daily mail reader) and Obama is a black Democrat (guardian reader) so you argument is lost on this board. Come over to the dark side we know the truth.
I love America, I still believe it's humanity's success story but, for me and what I've heard if this case, is a unacceptable decision.
An estimated 200 million Native Americans might disagree with that statement.
Cheers, but they'd probably point that finger of accusation towards ethnic Brits
Only a small part of the North American continent was settled when we lost the war of independence. The majority of native Americans (within the settled N.A) fought with us, and many emigrated North to Canada after the war. It was a huge mistake by the British Govt not to protect our Allies in the peace treaty, but we did protect many when we stopped American expansion into Canada. The majority of the genocide started with Andrew Jacksons passing of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act
Thanks for the Wikipedia reference, I know my history!
What's your point ? If its America's not a great country, you're wrong. If its that you look down on America because you think Britain has no skeletons in the closet, you're wrong. If its that you think this is a fair decision, then despite the decision I think you're wrong.
I don't think you do know your history, certainly based on your comments here and above. I also struggle to comprehend what you write.
Odd to highlight a single sentence from a post in order to take it out of context.
Obama's key legislation, "healthcare reform", is causing businesses to not hire new people and to either reduce staffs or change them to part-time.
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
Obama basically adopted a solution originally proposed by several right-of-centre groups, although they naturally turned into fierce opponents of it the moment he suggested it as a compromise. Obamacare was for example virtually identical to the system intoduced by Mitt Romney when he was Governor of Massachusetts. Although he too disowned the system for the rest of America when running for president.
As for Obama being the worst president in the time you have lived in America - get back to me when he starts two illegal wars, runs up not just massive but record budget deficits and after inheriting a budget surplus, abandons a large city when it floods and goes AWOL when his country is under attack and pardons an adviser for leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media because her husband had the temerity not to toe the neo-con line about Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapon programme. George Bush did all of the above and more and yet you think Obama is somehow worse?
sorry mate you missed the point Bush is a white republican(daily mail reader) and Obama is a black Democrat (guardian reader) so you argument is lost on this board. Come over to the dark side we know the truth.
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
"Obamacare" ignores the main reason healthcare became so expensive, "defensive medicine". Doctors malpractice insurance became unaffordable due to frivolous lawsuits. Any doctor's visit , for the most minor symptom, or even a routine check-up ends up with a string of specialist visits as the original doc doesn't want to be accused of missing something. The specialist might have a string of other specialists he wants to send you to as well because he doesn't want to be accused of missing something. Many of these lawsuits are "settled", as it's more expensive to defend them. The first thing that should have been addressed in Obamacare was "tort reform", make the loser pay the legal expenses of the winner, as is usual in England. I was one of those denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition, actually one of the main reasons I left England, asthma. The individual States make insurance available to people like myself, it's expensive but it looks like Obamacare will be more expensive.
Obama's key legislation, "healthcare reform", is causing businesses to not hire new people and to either reduce staffs or change them to part-time.
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
Obama basically adopted a solution originally proposed by several right-of-centre groups, although they naturally turned into fierce opponents of it the moment he suggested it as a compromise. Obamacare was for example virtually identical to the system intoduced by Mitt Romney when he was Governor of Massachusetts. Although he too disowned the system for the rest of America when running for president.
As for Obama being the worst president in the time you have lived in America - get back to me when he starts two illegal wars, runs up not just massive but record budget deficits and after inheriting a budget surplus, abandons a large city when it floods and goes AWOL when his country is under attack and pardons an adviser for leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media because her husband had the temerity not to toe the neo-con line about Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapon programme. George Bush did all of the above and more and yet you think Obama is somehow worse?
Wow - you quote an article from a columnist who identifies herself as a conservative as evidence that Obama is a poor president? I think she may be a tad biased...
In any case she bases her argument around opinion poll ratings rather than anything substantive and the age old complaint of the right that other nations are "batting the US around", while ignoring that problem that Obama is still dealing with two failed wars from the Bush era where he tried and failed to bat around other nations.
Obama inherited a total mess - just about everything in a state of FUBAR and to make matters worse the blue half of Congress declared open war on him the moment he stepped into the White House.
But he has made mistakes - for example he cut too many governmental jobs and didn't pressure Congress to reverse the ruinous Bush era tax cuts (or reduce them) which would have increased US Federal revenues.
And yet throughout this debate about presidents we're forgetting the patriot act and the fact the US are spying on our emails, phone activity and conversations and giving the info back to the UK government. All in the name of "protecting us" from terrorism.
Am I the only one who feels that the outcome of this trial really isn't that outrageous. You have a character entering an estate with a history of crime, and Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watchman, questioning him.
I don't understand why it is acceptable for Trayvon to then beat Zimmerman against the pavement.
We haven't forgotten the spying, those intrusions; they are another product of an arrogant foreign policy. The constitutional right to bear arms results - by way of violent crime - in a nation that incarcerates proportionately more of its population than any other on earth. Well over 90 per cent of American citizens believe in the existence of God. When Obama's healthcare plans were being hotly debated in America, even nominally left-leaning politicians there vehemently denounced the British NHS; it was "socialist", even "evil". A cent on taxes for the common good would "rob the working man of his right to choose". It's a seriously warped society. Meanwhile, Scandinavian governments quietly and successfully go about making improvements for their citizens....
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
"Obamacare" ignores the main reason healthcare became so expensive, "defensive medicine". Doctors malpractice insurance became unaffordable due to frivolous lawsuits. Any doctor's visit , for the most minor symptom, or even a routine check-up ends up with a string of specialist visits as the original doc doesn't want to be accused of missing something. The specialist might have a string of other specialists he wants to send you to as well because he doesn't want to be accused of missing something. Many of these lawsuits are "settled", as it's more expensive to defend them. The first thing that should have been addressed in Obamacare was "tort reform", make the loser pay the legal expenses of the winner, as is usual in England. I was one of those denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition, actually one of the main reasons I left England, asthma. The individual States make insurance available to people like myself, it's expensive but it looks like Obamacare will be more expensive.
So why didnt whatever president who was in charge at the time stop the frivolous lawsuits? Could it be that the lawyers involved were also on the gravy train? How is that Obama's fault?
Am I the only one who feels that the outcome of this trial really isn't that outrageous. You have a character entering an estate with a history of crime, and Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watchman, questioning him.
I don't understand why it is acceptable for Trayvon to then beat Zimmerman against the pavement.
I agree with you. The question was how and why did that fight start.
Regardless, there was never enough evidence to convict Zimmerman, hence why the police didn’t charge him - until the protests started. The trial was a farce and a complete waste of a time.
Am I the only one who feels that the outcome of this trial really isn't that outrageous. You have a character entering an estate with a history of crime, and Zimmerman, a neighbourhood watchman, questioning him.
I don't understand why it is acceptable for Trayvon to then beat Zimmerman against the pavement.
You're not the only one , see my post at the start of this thread. Only two people know the truth and one is dead. No chance convicting someone on supposition
A general point .. the USA is still a very prosperous nation where even 'the poor' have a high standard of living compared to billions in 'the third world' But ... the USA is on the downslide, forced into foreign wars to maintain prestige and trading rights, forced to cut federal employment and federal grants, for so long the underpinning of American prosperity. The wholesale carrying of guns by civilians and the subsequent unjustified (perhaps) slayings are a throwback to the past pioneer days where everman had to look out for himself and would defend himself, his family and his property to the death, hopefully the other guys' death and not his own. Those days should be long gone, sadly they are not. ANY president, of any party of any race is under serious pressure to get the USA back to the glory days of yore. It's not going to happen. The future for the USA is reasonable prosperity for most and not the American dream of a land flowing with milk and honey for all.
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
"Obamacare" ignores the main reason healthcare became so expensive, "defensive medicine". Doctors malpractice insurance became unaffordable due to frivolous lawsuits. Any doctor's visit , for the most minor symptom, or even a routine check-up ends up with a string of specialist visits as the original doc doesn't want to be accused of missing something. The specialist might have a string of other specialists he wants to send you to as well because he doesn't want to be accused of missing something. Many of these lawsuits are "settled", as it's more expensive to defend them. The first thing that should have been addressed in Obamacare was "tort reform", make the loser pay the legal expenses of the winner, as is usual in England. I was one of those denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition, actually one of the main reasons I left England, asthma. The individual States make insurance available to people like myself, it's expensive but it looks like Obamacare will be more expensive.
So why didnt whatever president who was in charge at the time stop the frivolous lawsuits? Could it be that the lawyers involved were also on the gravy train? How is that Obama's fault?
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
"Obamacare" ignores the main reason healthcare became so expensive, "defensive medicine". Doctors malpractice insurance became unaffordable due to frivolous lawsuits. Any doctor's visit , for the most minor symptom, or even a routine check-up ends up with a string of specialist visits as the original doc doesn't want to be accused of missing something. The specialist might have a string of other specialists he wants to send you to as well because he doesn't want to be accused of missing something. Many of these lawsuits are "settled", as it's more expensive to defend them. The first thing that should have been addressed in Obamacare was "tort reform", make the loser pay the legal expenses of the winner, as is usual in England. I was one of those denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition, actually one of the main reasons I left England, asthma. The individual States make insurance available to people like myself, it's expensive but it looks like Obamacare will be more expensive.
So why didnt whatever president who was in charge at the time stop the frivolous lawsuits? Could it be that the lawyers involved were also on the gravy train? How is that Obama's fault?
I suspect the jury had no choice but to acquit. I'm surprised anyone thought differently. This is because of the laws that exist in Florida regarding handguns. First, you are allowed to carry a concealed handgun. Second, under Florida law, there is no "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a lawful right to be. Instead, you may stand your ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or bodily harm to yourself or others. I'm not saying I agree with it but that's the law in Florida and it's residents know that and, in the main, act accordingly. It's perfectly legal to carry a handgun in the glove box of your automobile. People know this and know about the above-mentioned law. That's why there is precious little by way of road rage in Florida. People realise they could quite easily be shot and decide to drive accordingly. For the residents of Florida the answer is simple, if they don't want that law on their statute book, then vote for a policitican who says they will remove it.
The country has been heading for disaster ever since the dubious election of George Bush in 2000. The divisions are huge and the Right is seriously psycho. The Tea Party are selling shirts saying "911 takes too long, I reload faster", and they are a genuine political force. This case is just another example of the way the country is going, and it's not impossible that a Sarah Palin/Michelle Bachmann type person could well be President, with 51% loving them, and 49% detesting every decision. Every time I think the UK is bad, I just look over there and thank my lucky stars that we do have as many psychos.
Either Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann could do a better job than the current President, the worst ever.
The only President approaching Statesman accolades and the only President since JFK who looks after, and care about, the people. It's about time the Yanks had someone who lookas after the real people.
Can't believe he is walking. At least it shows we are not the only country with a dubious legal system.
Civil rights groups in the US have expressed dismay after neighbourhood watchman George Zimmerman was found not guilty of murdering black teenager Trayvon Martin in Florida last year.
Rights leader Jesse Jackson said he was "stunned" and that the Department of Justice (DoJ) should intervene.
Meanwhile Mr Zimmerman's family and lawyers have said they now fear he could face revenge attacks.
The case sparked a fierce debate in the US about racial profiling.
Trayvon Martin's relatives say they are "hurt" and "disappointed" over the verdict Prosecutors had argued that Mr Zimmerman opened fired on 26 February 2012 because he assumed that Trayvon Martin, who was African-American and was wearing a hooded sweatshirt as he walked in the rain, was up to no good.
But the defence said he shot Trayvon Martin in self defence after the teenager had punched their client, slammed his head into the pavement and reached for Mr Zimmerman's gun.
Defence 'ecstatic' Mr Zimmerman was facing possible conviction for second-degree murder or manslaughter, but on Saturday he was cleared of all charges by the six-women jury at Seminole County Criminal Justice Center in Sanford, Florida.
Protesters converged on the Seminole County Criminal Justice Centre shortly after the jury retired to consider its verdict - a couple of dozen of them at first. Then, on the second day of deliberations, a larger and louder group whose numbers slowly started to grow. They stood chanting and staring up at the fifth floor window of the courthouse, where the all-women jury was considering its verdict.
Then, when signs of movement suddenly filled that window, the crowd erupted into a frenzy. The excitement was short-lived however: As word spread of George Zimmerman's acquittal reached them a sense of sadness - sometimes mixed with anger - filled the hot and humid summer night.
Police and community leaders in central Florida have appealed for calm, but with further protests planned, they've drawn up contingency plans just in case this verdict is met with a violent response.
One of his lawyer's, Mark O'Mara, said the defence team were "ecstatic".
"George Zimmerman was never guilty of anything except protecting himself in self defence. I'm glad that the jury saw it that way," he said.
Another defence lawyer, Don West, said the prosecution had been "disgraceful".
"As happy as I am for George Zimmerman, I'm thrilled that this jury kept this tragedy from becoming a travesty," he said.
However, following the verdict, protest marches were staged in US cities including San Francisco, Philadelphia, Chicago, Washington and Atlanta.
In Oakland, California, some protesters started small fires and smashed windows.
Civil rights leader Jesse Jackson told CNN on Sunday: "I remain stunned at the decision. The Department of Justice must intervene to take this to another level."
It appears to be very difficult for black Americans to seek justice in the legal system”
In a Facebook posting, he said "the American legal system has once again failed justice". But he also appealed for calm, saying anyone seeking to "compound our pain with street justice" would do "damage to the innocent blood and legacy of Trayvon Martin".
Right activist Al Sharpton also appealed for calm, but said the verdict was "a slap in the face to the American people".He compared the case to the beating of African-American man Rodney King by police in 1991, which sparked widespread rioting.
Campaign group the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) has launched a petition demanding that the DoJ open a civil rights case against Mr Zimmerman.
Its president, Benjamin Todd Jealous, wrote: "The most fundamental of civil rights - the right to life - was violated the night George Zimmerman stalked and then took the life of Trayvon Martin."
Revenge fears Daryl Parks, lawyer for the Martin family, told BBC News he hoped the case would be a wake-up call for the US.
'Stand Your Ground' laws
Provide that people who fear for their lives can use deadly force to defend themselves without having to flee a confrontation Cited by Florida police after they released George Zimmerman without charge on the night of the shooting Allows use of deadly force if citizen believes it is necessary "to prevent death or great bodily harm" or "imminent commission of a forcible felony" Critics say they encourage a "shoot first" attitude At least 33 states allow use of deadly force in self-defence, according to Association of Prosecuting Attorneys US media on Zimmerman verdict "Many will realise that if there is a law that would allow you to kill an unarmed teenager, then that's a law that we probably should look at and change," he said.
Florida police had angered many by not arresting Mr Zimmerman for six weeks after the shooting, citing the state's controversial "stand your ground" law, which allows a citizen to use lethal force if he or she feels in imminent danger.
But Mr Parks said the trial had given the US "a new perspective on black life - when a young black person gets killed, the approach that it takes to investigate, to arrest the person that did it".
Mr Zimmerman's brother, Robert, and his lawyers said they were concerned for his safety.
Meanwhile Mr Zimmerman's family and representatives have said they are afraid he could fall victim to revenge attacks.
His brother, Robert said he had received frequent threats on social media and there was "more reason now than ever to think that people are trying to kill him".
"He's going to be looking over his shoulder the rest of his life," he said.
Dont remember protests and Jesse Jackson getting upset about the American justice system whent OJ SImpson was found not guilty of murdering the white woman Nicole Brown...it seems despite the assumption of guilt by the media they got it spot on that time.
Comments
I do come over, almost every year, flying over on the 24th of the month actually, for a couple of weeks.
I'd always planned to retire back in England, couldn't afford to now. I've remained a citizen of The U.K. as I'm proud of my heritage, and always have been proud to be "a Londoner". Not being a citizen of The US means I'm not allowed to vote, I'm therefore not affiliated with any political party. I can tell you this emphatically, Obama's key legislation, "healthcare reform", is causing businesses to not hire new people and to either reduce staffs or change them to part-time. Some parts of the reform have been put off for a year as they have been found to be unworkable and/or nobody understands them. I won't even get into Obama's foreign policy, or the recent multitude of scandals.
So what would you have done instead - bearing in mind that the system prior to "Obamacare" left around 25m Americans uninsured and a further 50m or so under-insured. The principle reason why most were uninsured was because they either couldn't afford healthcare or were denied it due to "pre-existing conditions".
Obama basically adopted a solution originally proposed by several right-of-centre groups, although they naturally turned into fierce opponents of it the moment he suggested it as a compromise. Obamacare was for example virtually identical to the system intoduced by Mitt Romney when he was Governor of Massachusetts. Although he too disowned the system for the rest of America when running for president.
As for Obama being the worst president in the time you have lived in America - get back to me when he starts two illegal wars, runs up not just massive but record budget deficits and after inheriting a budget surplus, abandons a large city when it floods and goes AWOL when his country is under attack and pardons an adviser for leaking the name of a CIA operative to the media because her husband had the temerity not to toe the neo-con line about Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapon programme. George Bush did all of the above and more and yet you think Obama is somehow worse?
"Obamacare" ignores the main reason healthcare became so expensive, "defensive medicine". Doctors malpractice insurance became unaffordable due to frivolous lawsuits. Any doctor's visit , for the most minor symptom, or even a routine check-up ends up with a string of specialist visits as the original doc doesn't want to be accused of missing something. The specialist might have a string of other specialists he wants to send you to as well because he doesn't want to be accused of missing something. Many of these lawsuits are "settled", as it's more expensive to defend them. The first thing that should have been addressed in Obamacare was "tort reform", make the loser pay the legal expenses of the winner, as is usual in England.
I was one of those denied health insurance due to a pre-existing condition, actually one of the main reasons I left England, asthma. The individual States make insurance available to people like myself, it's expensive but it looks like Obamacare will be more expensive.
In any case she bases her argument around opinion poll ratings rather than anything substantive and the age old complaint of the right that other nations are "batting the US around", while ignoring that problem that Obama is still dealing with two failed wars from the Bush era where he tried and failed to bat around other nations.
Obama inherited a total mess - just about everything in a state of FUBAR and to make matters worse the blue half of Congress declared open war on him the moment he stepped into the White House.
But he has made mistakes - for example he cut too many governmental jobs and didn't pressure Congress to reverse the ruinous Bush era tax cuts (or reduce them) which would have increased US Federal revenues.
I don't understand why it is acceptable for Trayvon to then beat Zimmerman against the pavement.
Regardless, there was never enough evidence to convict Zimmerman, hence why the police didn’t charge him - until the protests started. The trial was a farce and a complete waste of a time.
But ... the USA is on the downslide, forced into foreign wars to maintain prestige and trading rights, forced to cut federal employment and federal grants, for so long the underpinning of American prosperity.
The wholesale carrying of guns by civilians and the subsequent unjustified (perhaps) slayings are a throwback to the past pioneer days where everman had to look out for himself and would defend himself, his family and his property to the death, hopefully the other guys' death and not his own. Those days should be long gone, sadly they are not.
ANY president, of any party of any race is under serious pressure to get the USA back to the glory days of yore. It's not going to happen. The future for the USA is reasonable prosperity for most and not the American dream of a land flowing with milk and honey for all.
I'm surprised anyone thought differently. This is because of the laws that exist in Florida regarding handguns.
First, you are allowed to carry a concealed handgun.
Second, under Florida law, there is no "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a lawful right to be. Instead, you may stand your ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or bodily harm to yourself or others.
I'm not saying I agree with it but that's the law in Florida and it's residents know that and, in the main, act accordingly.
It's perfectly legal to carry a handgun in the glove box of your automobile. People know this and know about the above-mentioned law. That's why there is precious little by way of road rage in Florida. People realise they could quite easily be shot and decide to drive accordingly.
For the residents of Florida the answer is simple, if they don't want that law on their statute book, then vote for a policitican who says they will remove it.
Yes Leroy yes yes yes --i have very version of the truth which one do you want ?