• As much as I disagree with the verdict

    Now legally he's innocent. It would set an awful, awful precedent not to give him his gun back. Do I think he deserves it? No. But precedent is bigger and more important than whether or not a single person deserves something or not. Florida should review its laws and address the problems with it. They should spell out that stand your ground literally means stand your ground and does not include charging after a person.

  • Regretfully, there is no lawful reason to prevent it.

    It is down right creepy and disrespectful that the gun used to kill Trayvon Martin be put back in the hands of his killer. But what law could the government pull out to say "it is really screwed up that you get this gun back so we're just going to keep it"?
    It is more important to preserve the law and give back confiscated property to a man who wasn't convicted, than to break the law and set a precedent of withholding personal property despite a non-guilty verdict.

  • Law Abiding Citizens Should not be denied.

    Like it or not, he was proven innocent. I don't know why that is so hard for some to understand. All the rioting just shows how out of control these animals can get. Now he is a target more than ever. I would carry 2. I don't see how there is any legal precedence to stop him.

  • Legally speaking, yes.

    The justice system has found Zimmerman guilty of no crime. He was legally carrying his firearm. There is no rationally legal reason for him not to get it back that I know of. While I completely disagree with the outcome of the trial, I am objective enough to acknowledge the lack of legal reasoning in keeping his weapon from him.

  • Well of course he should

    I mean hello, THIS IS FLORIDA. Florida is easily one of the most f-cked up states in the nation, and after Zimmerman did what he did, you can bet that people are going to literally be gunning for him in the coming weeks/months, maybe even years. He NEEDS his gun back otherwise he'll be dead in a week imo

  • Its private property

    You cant take away something a man has legaly paid for and put in his name. Who cares if the gun killed someone? He broke no laws when using it. It was all self defense. He was declared not guilty so we need to leave it at that stop fighting about it.

  • Zimmerman broke no laws having it.

    George Zimmerman broke no laws having the gun, and broke no laws when using it. Keeping him from his gun would bullsh!T the very concept of justice. He was declared Not Guilty, holding his gun from him would be hypocrisy on the Justice System's behalf.

    He had a valid license to carry and use that gun, and was declared not guilty in turns of murdering someone with it. There shouldn't even BE a discussion about this.

  • Yes, unless he broke some other Florida law that would preclude him from gun ownership.

    Private property is private property. You get speeding ticket, your are found not guilty, do they keep your car? Under what rights do state or federal governments have the right to seize private property? See the Fifth Amendment... Eminent domain, Drug trafficking...

    Why if Mr. Zimmerman was found innocent should his gun NOT be returned to him?

  • Mob law should not trump due process of law

    Zimmerman has been found not guilty. As such, the state of Florida officially recognizes that he has done nothing wrong and committed no crime. Whether or not this is actually true, the state has no right to confiscate Zimmerman's property if it considers him innocent. The government is not a dictatorship. It cannot legally punish people who are not convicted of crimes.

  • He has been acquitted.

    If Zimmerman has a legal permit to own a firearm and was acquitted of the crime of which he was accused, the state cannot legally keep his firearm. Nor can it deny him a future permit or renewal of licensure, because the court found that the gun was used legally in self defense.

  • Murder lucky crime

    A seventeen year old has been killed by a 30 year old with a gun. He could have shot him in the legs or other part of the body with the intention to injure if he was acting aggressively. The killing by firing at the heart is an unanswered question.

  • No, and his gun license should be stripped from him

    We need to prevent this monster from killing another innocent child. He is completely lucky that his case was handled by right wing fascist that are completely biased toward a cause. He should as be banned from ever owning a gun in any state to even further prevent any more violence (Ya know hes had a long history of domestic violence?)

  • Putting It Short

    Let me be moral here. He shot an innocent kid with a promising future. Do you honestly think, from the bottom the bottom of you heart, that this guy should be let out into a world on innocent people with a gun? I think not.

    Better safe than sorry, right?

  • Honestly, this is disgusting

    Zimmerman should not get his gun back. That gun holds a lot of weight and Zimmerman would be fool to want it. It symbolizes the death of a teenager and it would show Zimmerman's callousness if he even thought of wanting his gun back. Whether or not he was innocent, he should not get his gun back.

  • Hell to the no

    This mans gun should be tossed into fire, the state does not understand that this was a racist crime. He killed a teenage with that gun that was out one night, trayvon wanted to live and grow up but no he was shot. That gun should be burned and never seen again

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.