“Trayvon’s Law?” – Father of Trayvon Martin Wants His Son’s Name Attached to Anti-Carry Bill

July 25 2013
by GSL Staff
Share This Post

Guns Save Lives is not supported by ads and is ran as an independent project. If you support this project please consider supporting us on Patreon. Registration takes just a moment and even $1 is a massive help in continuing our work. Thank you so much.


Could we be citing “Trayvon’s Law” for the reason gun carry rights might be limited in the near future?

If Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, has his way, we will. Martin spoke to Congressional Caucus on Black Men and Boys in an effort to reduce right to carry laws according to the Washington Times.

Martin said, “I think 50 years from now, when I’m dead and gone, I would like to see Trayvon Martin’s name attached to some type of statute, amendment, that says you can’t simply profile our children, shoot them in the heart, kill them and say you were defending yourself.”

George Zimmerman was acquitted of Second Degree Murder and Manslaughter in the 2012 killing of Trayvon Martin. The jury found that Zimmerman acted in self defense within Florida’s laws.

The acquittal has started a national debate on race, gun control and self defense laws.

Many have protested the verdict in recent days, with some protests turning violent. The Department of Justice has also launched an investigation into possible civil rights violations by Zimmerman.

So called “stand your ground” laws have been specifically targeted by those upset with the verdict. Stand your ground laws basically say that the victim of a crime has no duty to retreat or seek alternative means of force before resorting to lethal force to defend themselves. Proponents of the law say it insures victims don’t get turned into criminals by over zealous prosecutors while opponents say such laws encourage confrontation.

It should also be noted that George Zimmerman did not use Florida’s Stand Your Ground law as his defense. Zimmerman claimed basic self defense during his murder trial, a defense which the jury obviously agreed with.

Disqus Comments

comments powered by Disqus