As far as I’ve read Zimmerman had fairly recently bought the gun he shot Trayvon with and at the same time his wife bought a gun. Did he own any firearms beyond that? Did it come up in the trial?
I don’t believe any evidence of additional guns came up at trial. Nor can I picture why it might --what, in your view, would be the relevance of such information?
I think OP is looking for clues to help him form an opinion about whether GZ was just a typical asshole, or was a gun-crazed “Killing is God’s Plan for me” wannabe-vigilante type of asshole. I’m curious about this myself, and want to give GZ the benefit of the doubt despite his blood-curdling “God’s Plan” quote. I look to IMHO threads for guidance, but find only absurd caricatures tossed around by both “sides” of the debate.
Oh. You meant “relevant” in the sense of “admissible as evidence.” You’re among civilians here, Bricker. We know you’re a lawyer. Is it too much ask that you use English the way English-speaking people do?
Why is it important and what does it really tell you?
I have never been arrested in my life, do not commit crimes, am not a maniac. I own 7 firearms. Not a big deal.
Too many.
I started this thread because I saw a thread where a poster repeatedly referred to GZ as a “gun nut”. I believe it was on SD but I was unable to find it to link to. It could have been at another website. When I read it I didn’t recall any discussion of GZ having an arsenal. Around here you don’t qualify as a “gun nut” until you get into the 50+guns range.
I guess he could own one gun (or none) and be a “nut”. To be a “gun nut” I would expect someone to have at least a few.
Septimus had it about right, just looking for some more insight.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that GZ had a room full of guns, thousands of rounds of ammo and bookshelves full of gun books and magazines. Would that have been fair game for the prosecutors to bring up? Could they use that to paint a picture of a “gun nut” itching for a chance to shoot somebody? I’m genuinely curious… I’m obviously not a lawyer.
The media always brings this up (“He had an arsenal of almost 3 guns and thousands of rounds!”*). They didn’t this time AFAIK. That suggests probably not many. He’s hardly the biggest nut, gun or otherwise, in the nutty state of Florida.
*E.g. two boxes of .22 bought at Walmart for <$40 (when you could find it)
Yet… 
Enough.
And suppose that room was filled with pictures of the Fuhrer and big red flags and the faded symbols of yesteryear like that of Father Seamus Fitzpatrick, in Are You Right There, Father Ted ? ?
Would that be admissable ? Or even mentioned by Zimmerman’s haters ?
I’ve not heard anything about other guns, either. I’m pretty sure the “gun nut” description is being applied to the fact that some people don’t think he should have been carrying a gun at all in that situation. Some say that’s because neighborhood watch people should not be armed, as it encourages them to get involved when they shouldn’t. But, from what I understand, there was nothing unusual about him carrying a gun in his particular neighborhood watch, so I can’t jump to that conclusion.
I don’t think I’ve ever thought “gun nut” meant you had to have a lot of guns, although I admit that it’s a natural consequence of the paranoia that defines them–the idea that someone somewhere is going to take away their guns. A “gun nut” is just nearly religious about guns and can’t be reasonable about them.
In my view, no. That’s an mpermissible reference for the jury to make, and even if it had some slight probative value, it would be outweighed by the prejudicial value.
A shop is offering to replace his pistol.
If he is acquitted, I’m not sure why he can’t get it back. I guess because other investigations are still going? Maybe it “disappeared” into an officer’s possession?
Looking around, it seems they aren’t the only ones. I doubt any will go through, but he could build a real arsenal.
OP, your line of reasoning is flawed. I have owned and shot many firearms over the years and my last encounter with the law was a speeding ticket in 1988. You’re not going to find any correlation between firearms ownership and violence.
What line of reasoning? For all I know the OP could have a line of reasoning behind it, but all I see is a simple request for information.
I own many guns. My last speeding ticket (or any other encounter with LE) was well before 1988. I’m 56. My last fight was in Jr. High. I would never expect a correlation between gun ownership and violence.