QuietDan

In the parking lot, pass a business card with your name, address and telephone number. When both are off-premises, then talk. Of course you can stand to offer more, you don't have the burden of rent and utilities.

Shoes. Shoes are nice. Or handbags. A lot of spouses/girlfriends/lovers like shoes or handbags. Don't pick them yourself though, you'll get it wrong. Get a Kohl's gift card or something. Better yet, if you're man enough, go shopping WITH her and maybe even (gulp) hold her handbag for her. Dinner is nice, also, don't forget to hold the door. Part of the shopping experience is paying attention to her. Remind her that the Eotech is so you can more effectively and accurately defend her person and her life, your only mission on Earth.

Another example of the high intellect and attention to detail manifested by our God-King-Child-Communist President. pTah! (The sound of spitting on the pavement.)

I think, with training, you can also shoot them from a helicopter in Texas. But, it's . . . a little more than $300 a day. I think there are parts of Texas that are absolutely over-run with hogs. It's more about hog eradication than hunting. I know we had them in our subdivision, where they eat all the flowers and shrubs in the yards. And, don't get between momma and her babies, that's really bad news. (Addition) Here's a little video: http://www.texashunt...cation-in-Texas

I put this in general chat as it does not involve firearms, though it does involve self-defense, or the lack thereof, for little innocents. Who says children cannot be vicious? You wonder where this little demon learned this little trick. Note how carefully he watches the un-watchful adults to commit his vicious attacks. This makes me sick. Mississippi boy caught on daycare surveillance video beating toddlers http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/25/mississippi-boy-caught-on-daycare-surveillence-video-beating-toddlers/?test=latestnews

And they played the National Anthem first, and we all stood up.

I'm pretty happy with my 18 volt Ryobi stuff for general work, though I'm not building a house or anything. Last two batteries were the Lithium ones, we'll see how that works out over time. I had a couple of batteries that started acting up, I placed them on the charger, and then ran them down quick on the high-drawing spotlight, and then recharged them. They are acting fine again.

Took a look at the video of the cops arresting the guy. The cops are examining his gun in one scene. . . . Kinda looks like a Glock. . . . Someone else check me on that.

If these charges hold, this guy will never again own guns, which will be the least of his worries. There are a lot of "dog rescue" organizations that find good homes for dogs that have been in abusive households. Maybe we need a "gun rescue" organization that finds good homes for guns that have been in abusive households. Unless "gun stores" and "pawn shops" qualify . . . .

Dolomite and the rest of you all: Thank you very much for your concerns, but you are missing the point entirely. Bureaucracies and bureaucrats don't exist to provide a service, such as food stamps and such; they only exist to provide jobs for themselves. Expanding the number of folks who qualify for foodstamps or the EBT isn't so more people are covered, it's so that more bureaucrats are needed to "administer" the program. They could care less who gets the benefits, or if they get benefits at all. It's all about the gigs for the bureaucrats. I'm beyond being cynical about this, I'm just being real.

It's all well and good that S&W will fix the problem when you bring it to their attention: in my industry we used to call that "Customer Beta Testing." It's a whole lot better if they check the firearms for the problem BEFORE they ship them. Keep the Beta Testing in the factory.

Police press conference says ballistic helmet, ballistic vest, ballistic leggings, throat and groin protector. Can't remember the legality of a private citizen owning these . . . in any event, who was his supplier? Also, after parking his car behind the theater, he reportedly kicked in the emergency door near the screen. The police chief was asked about whether or not someone opened the door for him, that is, an accomplice. The police chief dodged the question.

Tennessee license plate connection proves false. The perpetrator Holmes is a CU-Denver Medical Student on a PhD track who has recently withdrawn from school for as yet unspecified reasons. The police are preparing to disassemble booby-traps in his apartment, which is in a complex reportedly exclusive to med students and medical personnel. Early speculation on my part suggests that his mental state was such that he had to withdraw from school, and out of a sense of entitlement and rage at this action, decided to shoot up a crowd to burden his medical colleagues. Or, something along those lines. Pure speculation on my part.

Here's the video discussed in the article: Basically, the new Acting Director is trying to shut down whistle-blower leaks and he's doing it in violation of Whistle-blower Laws and Inspector-General Laws on the books. Here's the article, with a link: *********************************************************** Lawmakers: 'Ominous' video a warning to ATF whistle-blowers after 'Furious' The head of ATF recently warned employees that they will face "consequences" if they don't "respect the chain of command," in what Republican lawmakers are decrying as an "ominous message" meant to frighten would-be whistle-blowers in the wake of the Operation Fast and Furious scandal. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa., and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., fired off a letter Wednesday to Acting Director B. Todd Jones saying the message "could be interpreted as a threat" and urging him to clarify. "It was scary," Issa told Fox News on Thursday, in reference to Jones' video message to employees. In the , Jones touched on a topic he described as "choices and consequences." By that, Jones said, he was talking about "organizational discipline" and the need for workers to "play by the rules" -- embedded in the warning was the line about properly raising internal concerns. "Choices and consequences means simply that if you make poor choices, that if you don't abide by the rules, that if you don't respect the chain of command, if you don't find the appropriate way to raise your concerns to your leadership, there will be consequences, because we cannot tolerate -- we cannot tolerate -- an undisciplined organization," he said. Issa told Fox News it's obvious what Jones was talking about. "What it appears to be is a not-so-veiled threat telling (ATF employees) not to do what they did to expose Fast and Furious," Issa said, referring to whistle-blowers who went outside the chain of command to alert lawmakers to problems with the anti-gunrunning operation that let thousands of guns "walk" into Mexico. "He's basically saying 'no, keep it in the chain'." In their letter to Jones, Issa and Grassley wrote that ATF employees must know about their legally protected right to talk to Congress "free and clear of agency interference or retaliation." "Your ominous message -- which could be interpreted as a threat -- is likely to have a major chilling effect on ATF employees exercising their rights to contact Congress," they wrote. "Therefore, it needs to be clarified." Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/19/lawmakers-ominous-video-warning-to-atf-whistleblowers-after-furious/#ixzz215FS9Ppn

On the Nikon website, I'm thinking there is a computer program that you can run for your stuff and it makes a little card for the M223 so that the BDC reticle does match up with what you're using. It won't be even numbers like 100 yards, 200 yards, etc.

I'm thinking it's 8 Central Time, for us Middle and West Tennesseans.

Agreed. Fun to think about, not so much fun to say!

I like to look at young women as much as the next guy, but given a novice shooter young woman with a low cut dress and a brass ejecting semi-auto and you could see this coming a mile off. This might be something to warn them about . . . up front . . . to save them a lot of grief later, as well as getting sweeped with a loaded weapon. And besides, given a little discretion and picking your words carefully, how else are you - a relative stranger - otherwise going to be able to talk to a young woman about her breasts. And who wouldn't want to, given a relatively honorable excuse? "Hey Miss! Sure is good to see young women out shooting! Warms my heart that you can protect yourself. I've got a daughter just about your age. Been shooting long? Uh, you know, you might want to button up your shirt a little. That semi-auto of yours spits out hot brass, you don't want to get it into, ah, crevices in your skin, or under your shirt, might leave a mark, you know. Want to borrow my jacket? . . . Hey, we can zip it up reaaaaaaal tight around your neck . . . Yeah that'll work. No, yeah, I think it's a good look for you! Wouldn't want you to get hurt or nothing." (You want me to buy you an ice-cream when you're done shooting? No? Hey, just thought I'd make the offer!)

IMO: "Esquire" suggests lawyer -- newcomer to the forum with zero previous posts suggests CCA's lawyer. Well? Threats and intimidation tactics don't go down well with this crowd. No libel here -- if relating a statement from a purported eye-witness, and that is what the purported eye-witness said, there is no libel. The truth is a defense against libel. Additionally, the "five minutes" is qualified with ". . . took maybe 5 minutes . . . " which is materially different from "five minutes." I imagine the purported eye-witness made a statement to police, which therefore is a public record. Perhaps the police report ought to be retrieved and posted online. Why don't you just tell Analog Kidd to ". . . just shut up, or someone might break your legs." Do you think that might be just as effective? Perhaps someone from CCA will sign on and repudiate your statements. IMO.

They'd be crazy to have a trial before 21 January 2013, after the new administration is sworn in.

Ocala, Marion County, Florida -- Complete with feel-good video! Apparently, a .380 is a real gun. ************************************************************* Charges unlikely against man who shot robbers By Carlos E. Medina Correspondent Published: Monday, July 16, 2012 at 1:32 p.m. The Internet cafe patron who shot and injured two men as they tried to rob the business will likely not face any criminal charges. “Based on what I have seen and what I know at this time, I don’t anticipate filing any charges,†said Bill Gladson of the State Attorney’s Office. Gladson said he has reviewed the security surveillance video from the cafe. While he still awaits final reports from the Marion County Sheriff’s Office, he said the shooting appeared justified. Samuel Williams, 71, who fired the shots, has a concealed weapons permit, according to the Sheriff’s Office. Under Florida law, a person is allowed to use deadly force if he or she fears death or serious injury to themselves or others. As long as the person isn’t committing a crime and is in a place where he or she has a right to be, they are considered to be acting within the law. Williams, who lives in Ocala, could not be reached for comment on Monday. But at least one of his 30 fellow patrons at the cafe wants to thank him. “I think he is wonderful. If he wouldn’t have been there, there could have been some innocent people shot,†said Mary Beach. Beach was sitting in with her back to the door Friday night and didn’t realize what was happening until she heard shots. “I heard pop, pop; then pop, pop, pop, all at once,†she said. “In the confusion I never really got to see his (Williams) face.†Surveillance video of the incident was released on Monday by the Sheriff’s Office. It shows two masked men entering the Palms Internet Cafe, 8444 SW State Road 200, just before 10 p.m. Friday. One of the men had a gun. Williams was seated toward the back of the cafe dressed in a white shirt, shorts and baseball cap. One of the masked men, identified as Duwayne Henderson, 19, comes in pointing a handgun at customers. The second man, Davis Dawkins, 19, is seen swinging a bat at something off screen, which was later identified as a $1,200 computer screen. As Henderson turns his back, Williams pulls out a .380-caliber semi-automatic handgun, stands from his chair, takes two steps, nearly drops to one knee, and fires two shots at Henderson, who bolts for the front door. Williams takes several more steps toward the door and continues firing as Henderson and Dawkins fall over one another trying to exit the building. The two eventually run off screen. Both men were shot by Williams. Their wounds were not life-threatening. Each was arrested hours later and charged with attempted armed robbery with a firearm and felony criminal mischief. Henderson remained in the Marion County Jail late Monday in lieu of a $31,000 bond. Dawkins was released Sunday after posting an $11,000 bond. Internet cafes are regulated by the state. They offer sweepstakes entries, which are used to buy time on computer terminals that simulate casino-style games. The operations, which have sprung up around the county and the state, are known to deal in cash. http://www.ocala.com...?p=all&tc=pgall

Overreach. This is now in 'piling on' territory. I'm thinking the judge let it be released because he's pissed that Zimmerman's lawyer filed to get him off the case. If Zimmerman is in his 30's now, and this crap allegedly went on when the "victim" was 6 to 16 and Zimmerman was 8 to 18, then they were juvies for the most part and this was more than a decade ago. What does this have to do with shooting someone who's beating your head into the pavement? Nothing.

Taking Down the Second Amendment: The Connection between Fast and Furious and the Trayvon Martin Case By Jeff Lipkes Very soon after his inauguration, Barack Obama decided to move ahead with plans to use the horrific number of deaths in the Mexican drug wars as a pretext for new gun control laws. On March 26, 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder a ban on "assault weapons" in order to reduce violence south of the border.The administration made its case by citing a GAO report. "The number of guns that are used by the drug cartels against the police and the military -- 90 percent of them come from America," Hillary Clinton declared later the same day. The number was too good to be true. The report actually states that of about 30,000 firearms seized from criminals in 2008, the Mexican government submitted only 7,200 (25%) to the ATF. The authorities knew or suspected that the rest came from their own military or police, or overseas suppliers. Of the 7,200 weapons, only about 4,000 could be traced, and of these 4,000 about 3,480 (87%) originated in the U.S. The real figure for guns seized from criminals in Mexico that could be traced to the U.S. is thus about 11.6%. There is no other reasonable explanation for Fast and Furious except to improve on this dismal number. In Phoenix, the ATF watched as over 2,000 weapons were purchased by straw buyers and transferred to the cartels. They videotaped some of the transactions. There was no way to track the weapons until they were found at crime scenes or seized in raids. No GPSs were implanted in the guns. The Mexican authorities were not informed. Even the ATF attachés in Mexico were left in the dark. Agents who wanted to carry out warrantless "rips" and confiscate weapons on probable cause were told to stand down. Supervisors explained to the agents and to gun shop owners that the agency was going after the cartels: the little fish would lead the them to the big fish. Worried gun shop owners were reassured by the ATF, but several agents were incredulous and outraged. At least half a dozen protested and eventually came forward as whistle-blowers. "The most transparent administration in history" immediately began stonewalling. The DOJ sent a letter to Congress on February 4, 2011 categorically denying that the ATF had knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to suspicious buyers. It was only in December 2011 that the DOJ withdrew the lying letter. Meanwhile, the department repeatedly refused to turn over documents requested by the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform and Senator Chuck Grassley's office. Memos they did submit were so heavily redacted that frequently only a single line was not blacked out. One such memo, from the heady early months of the operation, was titled "Expected Legislative or Policy Developments." The campaign to hide incriminating evidence climaxed last month. On June 20, President Obama claimed executive privilege over the documents requested by the House. Eight days later, Eric Holder was cited for contempt of Congress. Why was Holder willing to become the first sitting Cabinet officer in history to be held in contempt of Congress? Why was the White House suddenly willing, at the 11th hour, to invoke executive privilege -- recalling the seamy Watergate scandal -- if the documents do not implicate Tricky Barack? Even with a pussycat press, these are significant crosses to bear going into an election campaign. Again, the only logical explanation is that the objective of F&F was the "expected legislative developments" and that this objective was discussed "at the highest levels of the White House," as reporters used to repeat during the halcyon days of Watergate. If supervisors were "giddy" with delight when guns found at crime scenes in Mexico were traced to the operation, it was because that was the mission's goal. Had the collateral damage been confined only to a few hundred dead Mexicans and not a U.S. Border Patrol agent, it's not difficult to imagine the next step in the administration's war on guns. Chicago is like Mexico in some ways. With 440 murders in 2011, the Second City has one of the highest crime rates of major cities in the U.S., more than double New York's. The murder rate is up 35% this year. Nine people were killed one weekend last month. "It's war," said a local pastor. Most of the homicides, robberies, and assaults are linked to drug-trafficking by gangs. Though its twenty-eight-year ban on handguns was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2010, Chicago still has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. Do the Chicago numbers refute the idea that tight gun laws correlate with lower homicide rates? Not at all, the Obama administration would have claimed. After all, private ownership of guns is illegal in Mexico. Had F&F succeeded, the Obamanistas would likely have made the case that the problem in Chicago is that guns were being "smuggled" into the city from jurisdictions with lax gun laws. Mayor Rahm Emmanuel would have issued a report documenting the number of guns taken from gang members that could be traced to out-of-state and internet gun shops. Only nationwide restrictions on the purchase of handguns will reduce murders in Chicago and in other large cities, we would have been told. * * * If you want to cut down on the consumption of a certain good or service, you can go after the producers or providers. You can outlaw or restrict their businesses or raise their costs with taxes, fees, and onerous regulations. But you can also work on the consumers. You can do this legitimately by, say, educating the public as to what an unborn baby looks like after three months, or what the lungs of a pack-a-day smoker look like after thirty years. But you can do this as well by intimidation. On February 26, 2012, a neighborhood watch captain was attacked by a thug. Trayvon Martin had already been expelled three times in the school year. In one case, twelve pieces of women's jewelry were found in his backpack. His Twitter, MySpace, and YouTube accounts reveal him as a gangsta wannabe, into drugs (and possibly dealing) and screwing "bitches." On the night February 26, "No-Limit Niggah" bought some Skittles and an Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail. Mixed with codeine, they're the ingredients for a cocktail called "Lean" that he seems to have been fond of. He also apparently tried to buy some blunts -- cheap cigars to be hollowed out and filled with marijuana. When the clerk turned him down, he had a scuzzy trio buy these for him. He didn't mix the cocktail, but he probably smoked a blunt. The autopsy found THC in his blood and urine. Martin originally left the 7-Eleven at 6:24. It's a fifteen-minute walk from his condo he was staying in, but forty-five minutes later, he was not back home. There is no reason to doubt George Zimmerman's description of him as wandering around in the rain, looking "like he's up to no good" or "on drugs or something." After Martin spotted Zimmerman, the teenager had seven more minutes to walk 300 feet to the condo. Instead, he circled back, told Zimmerman that Zimmerman now had a problem -- an understatement, it turned out -- then decked the watch captain with one punch and began pounding him into the concrete sidewalk. The only eyewitness reported seeing Zimmerman being pummeled, his screams were recorded on several calls, and he had a broken nose and lacerations on the back of his head. In Florida, you have a right to get out of your vehicle in the presence of an African-American teenager. You have a right to ask a stranger what he's doing in your neighborhood. George Zimmerman also felt he had a responsibility to do the former. The watch captain had reported Martin to Sanford police and wanted to be able to tell them where the guy was. There had been eight break-ins during the previous fourteen months at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, not to mention several unsuccessful attempts. When the suspects were spotted or caught, they were young black males. The last time Zimmerman had called 911 to report a stranger casing homes, the guy escaped before the cops arrived. There is no need to reiterate the media's Pavlovian response to the claims of Ben Crump and his flak Ryan Julison. Journalists and commentators who were capable of blaming the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords by a deranged, apolitical twenty-two-year old on Sarah Palin were more than willing to repeat ad nauseam the fairytale of the angelic twelve-year-old honor student going out in the rain to buy snacks for the son of his father's girlfriend only to be chased and gunned down in cold blood by a paranoid racist cop wannabe. It's tempting to see the press's bloodlust to crucify Zimmerman as the consequence of a dangerous and irrational surrogate religion. We would not expect fair and balanced reporting from a wild-eyed flagellant in 14th-century Europe or in 21st-century Iraq. But is the lynching a result merely of a pernicious ideology? Is there a method in the madness? (And it is truly pathological to pretend that the internet doesn't exist, and that the evidence you ignore or suppress won't surface in the blogosphere.) Is there, in other words, an agenda being pushed? It's been speculated that President Obama wanted to shore up support in the African-American community via the Trayvon Martin imbroglio. This seems implausible. African-Americans account for less than 12% of the vote, and the man who could have been Trayvon's father received 95% of this demographic. If he were really concerned about that number, he wouldn't have come out in favor of gay marriage. A more reasonable explanation is that the administration and its enablers want to terrorize gun-owners with carrying permits into refraining from carrying, and to deter those thinking about getting a gun and a permit. If you live in or near a big city, the reality is that if you have to use your gun to defend yourself, the chances are good that you'll be using it against a young African-American male. According to Eric Holder's Justice Department, between 1976 and 2005, African-Americans, 12.6% of the population, committed 52.2% of all homicides. Over the 30-year period, African-Americans committed murder at about 7.33 times the white rate. (Whites here include Hispanics.) The numbers for other violent crimes are comparable. The perpetrators are overwhelmingly males between fifteen and twenty-five. So the unspoken message of the media crusade against Zimmerman is that if you use a gun to defend yourself against a young black male, there's a chance you'll face a second-degree murder charge. You may see your mugshot in every paper and on every TV news show in the country, face death threats, lose your job and your home, and be forced to become a fugitive before your arrest. Why risk this? Targeted also are neighborhood watch programs. No program asks you to carry a gun or to make a citizen's arrest. But to be effective, you need to be able to describe the suspect and his location to police, and the word has to get out that intruders will be watched. After Zimmerman-Martin, potential volunteers may ask themselves, why risk a run-in with a suspicious African-American? If the guy isn't breaking into my own home, just keep driving. Pick up those groceries at Target and hope he's gone by the time you get back. There's a famous statement attributed to Martin Niemöller, the German pastor imprisoned in Dachau. "First they came for the communists," it begins, "and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist." After mentioning his silence about trade unionists and Jews, it concludes, "Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me." For some conservatives, gun-rights issues are not a high priority. But one day they might find themselves reciting another version of Niemöller's mea culpa. First they came after the owners of "assault weapons," and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a semi-automatic rifle. Then they came for the owners of handguns, and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a handgun. And then they came after my Swiss Army knife, but there was no one left to speak out for me. Carrying a knife, or folding knife with a blade over three inches, is illegal in the U.K. There's a more sobering version of Niemöller's litany. It's not something a lot of people would have given much credence to before the presidency of the man who vowed "to fundamentally change America." When they nullified the 10th Amendment, I said nothing because I was not a libertarian. When they nullified the 2nd Amendment, I said nothing because I was not a gun-owner. When they nullified the 1st Amendment, there was no one left to speak for me. Unfortunately, the 1st Amendment, and our other rights, depend ultimately on the existence of the 2nd Amendment. Holder has an interesting take on this amendment. Asked on ABC News in 1999 if he understood it to mean that "citizens have a right to bear arms" and to "buy a firearm," Holder replied, "No court has ever said that the 2nd Amendment actually says that. I think if you look at it, it talks about bearing guns in a well regulated militia. And I don't think anywhere it talks about an individual" (Pavlich, 22). The Founders, in other words, were using "people" as in "People's Republic of China," not as a synonym for "the population." Before Fast and Furious, the AG was notorious for engineering last-minute pardons for Marc Rich, on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List for the largest tax fraud in history, and for sixteen members of FALN, the Puerto Rican terrorist group that killed several people in bombings in Chicago and New York. But a more revealing accomplishment was his role as point man in the kidnapping of Elian Gonzalez. After applying for a court order to seize the boy from his legal guardian, Holder went ahead with the operation without one, then baldly denied that Elian was seized at gunpoint. Holder was not fazed by the fact that millions of people throughout the world had seen Alan Diaz's disturbing photo. Holder's 130-man INS militia brought enough assault weapons to have taken out Lazaro Gonzalez, Elian's uncle, and any other family members who had armed themselves. But he might have hesitated. It would have been tough to portray the Gonzalez family as nutcase Branch Dravidians. At the very least, Holder might have been tempted to have waited for a court order. And if the SWAT team had broken in with guns blazing and left with blood on its hands, the next time the feds faced armed opposition -- say, to the return of a fifteen-year-old runaway to her father so she could marry her cousin in Lahore -- they might have been even more wary. * * * The murder of Brian Terry has temporarily derailed the administration's plans to slowly, incrementally nationalize Chicago-style gun laws. But there are other fronts in this war, and the vilification of George Zimmerman seems to be very much a part of the campaign to take firearms out of the hands of private citizens. It's a clever strategy: no one has to mention the "g" word. Read more: http://www.americant...l#ixzz20haxVbRi

"Clumsy" Thief? He clearly tripped on his saggin' pants! Moron!

IMO, it's about time. Judge Lester in this case has been popping off with his own personal opinion, which is a huge no-no. Zimmerman has a really smart lawyer who is on top of the case and promptly filed a well-supported motion to disqualify the judge based on his own statements. Read it and weep -- Here is the court filing itself: http://www.cfnews13....-judge-0713.pdf Basically, it says that the judge MUST remove himself if the defendant is making a reasonable case. The judge can't dispute the facts in the case, that's up to the NEXT judge. The act of filing this motion essentially guarantees that Zimmerman will have a new judge. ************************ George Zimmerman: Motion to disqualify judge SANFORD -- George Zimmerman's attorneys want to disqualify the judge who is presiding over his second-degree murder trial. The motion filed Friday says Zimmerman "has a reasonable fear that he cannot get a fair trial or a fair stand your ground hearing by this court." The motion specifically mentions the new bail Judge Kenneth Lester set for George Zimmerman earlier this month. The motion says Lester made disparaging remarks about Zimmerman's character, says he should be "prosecuted for additional crimes," and is holding the threat of future contempt proceedings over Zimmerman's head. The judge revoked Zimmerman's first $150,000 bond, and had him rearrested after he allegedly misled the court as to how much money he had available in a fund for his defense. The motion also says the court is not weighing any evidence of Zimmerman's innocence in the case when determining bond, other than to say "the only issue is the viability of the defendant's self-defense/Stand Your Ground claim" but they also accuse the judge of not discussing that issue either. The motion also says: "The court departed from its role as an impartial, objective minister of justice when it stated on two occasions in its order that in the court's personal opinion there is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed a violation of Florida Statute 903.035(3), a third degree felony punishable by five years in prison. This is tantamount to instructing the state that Mr. Zimmerman should be prosecuted for this offense." George Zimmerman is on trial for second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin last February. The state attorney's office issued the following statement Friday regarding this motion: "The State objects to the Defendant trying to disqualify Judge Lester. We will file a formal response to the Defendant’s Motion early next week." http://www.cfnews13....merman_mot.html