trayvan martin

[ginjawarrior]

Why does it matter whether he was doing anything wrong or not?

red was trying to paint trayvon as a gangster that was robbing houses my point was there was no evidence that trayvon did anything wrong up untill the altercation with zimmerman

 

[Illegal Smile]

Buck is very fixated on douche. I think he has vagina envy.

 

[Illegal Smile]

red was trying to paint trayvon as a gangster that was robbing houses my point was there was no evidence that trayvon did anything wrong up untill the altercation with zimmerman

Fine, speculate about that. But there is no legal point that turns on that, it doesn't matter.

 

[UncleBuck]

Fine, speculate about that. But there is no legal point that turns on that, it doesn't matter.

what it really hinges on is an armed man chasing an unarmed innocent kid down and shooting him dead.

 

[Illegal Smile]

Now I see why Buck is so uninformed - he never comes out of that closet to see the real world.

 

[UncleBuck]

i'm going to bed. someone keep the bigot in line.

 

[Illegal Smile]

I'm weary of treating Buck like a cat treats a mouse. I see why almost all of you just ignore him completely. Which is ironic since what he craves is attention.

 

[doc111]

you don't ever hear prosecutors talk about presumption of innocence. it is not a prosecutor's job to believe you are innocent.

it is a prosecutor's job to prove you are guilty.

i think you are too high to understand what I said in full context.

sit down and read it and COMPREHEND what not having a criminal record vs. having one is really about.... that's what presumption of innocence is. you may be arrested 100000 times, until you are convicted, no criminal record. you are a free, innocent man. THINK ABOUT IT.

Bullshit! The burden of proof is on the prosecution! You may be arrested 100000 times and guess what? You may not have a CRIMINAL record but you sure as hell will have a LONG ASS arrest record which is almost as bad.

 

[Hemlock]

The only Bigot here is you Buck

 

[NoDrama]

smart money is on zimmerman trying to detain martin, martin getting a few hits on zimm, but ultimately being held at gunpoint by zimm. zimm, in a state of mental overload, mistakes martin's screams and squirms as a reach for his weapon, and fires. or maybe zimm was just an asshole deep inside and lost his mind for a moment.

who knows.

The only injuries to Martin are a gunshot wound, verified. Injuries to Zimm are nose and back of head, consistent with being attacked by someone. Self Defense.

 

[NoDrama]

you couldn't say you were standing your ground.

and you would be held to a higher standard as the aggressor, not the defender. especially if you are an armed adult and your victim is an unarmed, innocent child.

douche.

Innocent people don't provoke physical attacks on other people. Zimm didn't get a busted nose and lacerations to his head from a slip and fall.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Just wanted to address a point brought up earlier about the fight only lasting 30 secs to a minute. When you're getting your head pommelled, MMA style, 30 secs to a minute is an eternity. Ever seen how long it takes for the ref to intervene when one fighter starts to overwhelm the other, just a few seconds. Why? Because brain damage or death can happen VERY quickly in that circumstance.

If Zimmerman WAS being beaten and it certainly appears he was, how long would it take for him to fear for his life? All the legal stuff aside and all the "ultimately avoidable" aside, let's assume he DID put himself in a situation he shouldn't have, are we still against the shooting if he actually thought he was going to be killed?

I keep hearing "what if it were your son?" Fair enough, but let's flip it around. It's not Zimmerman, it's your son. He fucked up and followed some guy he shouldn't have. Physical altercation follows and your son actually believes he's about to be beaten to death, happens all the time if you watch TV, is the verdict the same? Take your beating/brutal killing like a man OR shoot the guy and save your ass, deal with the legal consequences later?

I'm not trying to fuck with the folks who think Zimmerman is at fault, I'm genuinely interested and I think it's actually a tangent we haven't explored to death yet.

 

[Balzac89]

If Zimmerman did anything wrong he would have been charged. He was released by the police and a DA decides because of public out cry to take this man to trial. He was arrested again almost a month after the altercation.

This whole trial is a waste of tax payers dollars when he is gonna be found not guilty.

 

[afrawfraw]

Just wanted to address a point brought up earlier about the fight only lasting 30 secs to a minute. When you're getting your head pommelled, MMA style, 30 secs to a minute is an eternity. Ever seen how long it takes for the ref to intervene when one fighter starts to overwhelm the other, just a few seconds. Why? Because brain damage or death can happen VERY quickly in that circumstance.

If Zimmerman WAS being beaten and it certainly appears he was, how long would it take for him to fear for his life? All the legal stuff aside and all the "ultimately avoidable" aside, let's assume he DID put himself in a situation he shouldn't have, are we still against the shooting if he actually thought he was going to be killed?

I keep hearing "what if it were your son?" Fair enough, but let's flip it around. It's not Zimmerman, it's your son. He fucked up and followed some guy he shouldn't have. Physical altercation follows and your son actually believes he's about to be beaten to death, happens all the time if you watch TV, is the verdict the same? Take your beating/brutal killing like a man OR shoot the guy and save your ass, deal with the legal consequences later?

I'm not trying to fuck with the folks who think Zimmerman is at fault, I'm genuinely interested and I think it's actually a tangent we haven't explored to death yet.

Two points here:

1) If you are trained PROPERLY in the use of fire arms, you would never pull a gun so late in an altercation. I've pulled mine twice. Both times the assailant was 20 yards away! Why would I allow someone who I feared get so close? I wouldn't. Unless I was chasing him and rounded a corner right in to him, but I don't chase people when I'm carrying. Fuck, I don't even run when I'm carrying. Why?

2) If any of my children decide to carry a fire arm, I feel it is MY duty as a father to instruct them on when and how. CCL classes tell you the laws and how to fire/clean a gun. What they don't cover is adrenaline dumps, emotions, Etc. The real question is, if Z was NOT armed, would his actions have been different? We all know the answer to that one.

 

[desert dude]

Just wanted to address a point brought up earlier about the fight only lasting 30 secs to a minute. When you're getting your head pommelled, MMA style, 30 secs to a minute is an eternity. Ever seen how long it takes for the ref to intervene when one fighter starts to overwhelm the other, just a few seconds. Why? Because brain damage or death can happen VERY quickly in that circumstance.

If Zimmerman WAS being beaten and it certainly appears he was, how long would it take for him to fear for his life? All the legal stuff aside and all the "ultimately avoidable" aside, let's assume he DID put himself in a situation he shouldn't have, are we still against the shooting if he actually thought he was going to be killed?

I keep hearing "what if it were your son?" Fair enough, but let's flip it around. It's not Zimmerman, it's your son. He fucked up and followed some guy he shouldn't have. Physical altercation follows and your son actually believes he's about to be beaten to death, happens all the time if you watch TV, is the verdict the same? Take your beating/brutal killing like a man OR shoot the guy and save your ass, deal with the legal consequences later?

I'm not trying to fuck with the folks who think Zimmerman is at fault, I'm genuinely interested and I think it's actually a tangent we haven't explored to death yet.

Exactly. Defend your life. It is that simple.

 

[afrawfraw]

In a close altercation, I would use my knife. So would any one who was properly trained.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Two points here:

1) If you are trained PROPERLY in the use of fire arms, you would never pull a gun so late in an altercation. I've pulled mine twice. Both times the assailant was 20 yards away! Why would I allow someone who I feared get so close? I wouldn't. Unless I was chasing him and rounded a corner right in to him, but I don't chase people when I'm carrying. Fuck, I don't even run when I'm carrying. Why?

2) If any of my children decide to carry a fire arm, I feel it is MY duty as a father to instruct them on when and how. CCL classes tell you the laws and how to fire/clean a gun. What they don't cover is adrenaline dumps, emotions, Etc. The real question is, if Z was NOT armed, would his actions have been different? We all know the answer to that one.

I agree. However, that's not how this story goes and respectfully, I'd like to hear your answer to the question.

 

[Corso312]

If Zimmerman did anything wrong he would have been charged. He was released by the police and a DA decides because of public out cry to take this man to trial. He was arrested again almost a month after the altercation.

This whole trial is a waste of tax payers dollars when he is gonna be found not guilty.

huh? the lead detective wanted to charge...the word came down from above not to.

 

[NoDrama]

In a close altercation, I would use my knife. So would any one who was properly trained.

I never see police officers use a knife, are you saying that police officers are not properly trained? Your ideas are a source of amusement to me. What Firearm training do you have?

 

[NoDrama]

huh? the lead detective wanted to charge...the word came down from above not to.

Were you aware that detectives do not have the authority to press charges and only the DA does? The DA told the Detective that they were not going to charge him because they had zero evidence of a crime. You realize a crime has to happen for charges to stick right?