[QUOTE=ez12a;2253745]I seriously doubt Zimmerman would just leave him alone if he was told to screw himself.
[/QUOTE]
Not leaving him alone, is very different than shooting him. Let’s be clear about what you are suggesting here.
A lot of people in this thread are perpetuating this idea that Zimmerman was a wanna-be tough guy, looking for a fight, while hiding behind the protection of his gun. Let’s not forget that the gun wasn’t presented until the moment it was used to fire, and THAT didn’t happen until Zimmerman was flat on his back and being pummeled. As far as the proper way to use a gun in self-defense, Zimmerman acted exactly as he should have. You never draw a gun unless you intend to use it.
When people act like tough guys with guns, the gun comes out immediately and gets waved all over the place in hopes that it scares the other guy away. I’ve seen it happen before. Have a real understanding about the way a cowardly bully acts before you rush to accuse someone of being one.
Why is it beyond the realm of possibility that shady stuff had been happening recently in the neighborhood, and was the whole reason that Zimmerman felt it was necessary to personally patrol the area? I’m really surprised at how many of you object to that kind of thing, as that is how things should be done. The police can’t be every where, and further, the police have no obligation to protect you.
Keep talking out of your ass ghost hunter. Zimmerman was not a law abiding citizen. He was arrested in Orlando in 2005 for resisting a florida law enforcement officer and obstructing justice. The police report from that incident stated he used violence and battery upon the responding officer…great guy. You and Stu both keep dancing around the fact that he undeniably initiated the contact and the entire confrontation…how does anything from that point constitute self defense? Either one of you please answer that.
Initiating contact is irrelevant. If you ask someone to help you change your tire, and they rob you, you initiated contact. Initiating contact is just that, and is not an excuse to assault someone.
I’m not worried about convincing you, because you don’t have the capacity to understand an issue like this. All of my responses to this thread have been in order to provide some objective input to this other wise ridiculous topic for those who aren’t just race baiting collaborators.
Freedom isn’t free. I stated that earlier, and no one has bothered to comment about it. Can anyone take two minutes to think about that statement and venture to tell what they think it means? If not, continue chomping at the bit for slavery of all citizens in the US.
Prior arrest is irrelevant. You sound less intelligent with every post. There is a reason why convicted felons cannot own firearms. I do not want people around me with firearms who have a history of violent crime and in Zimmerman’s case, assaulting a peace officer. It is very relevant.
Initiating contact is irrelevant. If you ask someone to help you change your tire, and they rob you, you initiated contact. Initiating contact is just that, and is not an excuse to assault someone. Straw Man meet Stu.
I’m not worried about convincing you, because you don’t have the capacity to understand an issue like this. All of my responses to this thread have been in order to provide some objective input to this other wise ridiculous topic for those who aren’t just race baiting collaborators. You are too cute. Your responses are anything
but objective and this topic is anything but ridiculous. I have never mentioned racism in this thread although
I would venture to guess if TM were white this would not have happened.
Freedom isn’t free. I stated that earlier, and no one has bothered to comment about it. Can anyone take two minutes to think about that statement and venture to tell what they think it means? If not, continue chomping at the bit for slavery of all citizens in the US. Start a new thread for your chest thumping, I’m defending the Constitution BS.
Arrest does not equal a felony. If you lay on the ground and do nothing while being arrested, they’ll still slap you with a resisting arrest charge. Unless you know the circumstances of the prior arrest, you’re really stretching by saying he is a violent felon.
I would venture, that if Martin did not attack Zimmerman, and continue to assault him once he had him on his back, this would not have happened.
So you don’t want to spare a thought towards what “Freedom isn’t free,” means? Has nothing to do with the Constitution.
With the hoods up, with sunglasses on, in the middle of the night? They certainly look the part. Don’t want someone thinking you are suspicious, and approaching you to ask why you’re dressed like that in the middle of the night in a gated community? Don’t dress like that.
[QUOTE=Stu;2253768]Arrest does not equal a felony. If you lay on the ground and do nothing while being arrested, they’ll still slap you with a resisting arrest charge. Unless you know the circumstances of the prior arrest, you’re really stretching by saying he is a violent felon.
I would venture, that if Martin did not attack Zimmerman, and continue to assault him once he had him on his back, this would not have happened.
So you don’t want to spare a thought towards what “Freedom isn’t free,” means? Has nothing to do with the Constitution.[/QUOTE]
Why do you keep ducking the same question I keep asking Stu? The confrontation that led to TM’s death was directly caused by Zimmerman initiating the contact. There is a lot of hard evidence to support that 1. ) the calls for help were from TM (all sources now reporting this) 2.) Video from Zimmerman’s booking shows no sign of injury to him at all.
[QUOTE=Stu;2253749]Not leaving him alone, is very different than shooting him. Let’s be clear about what you are suggesting here.
A lot of people in this thread are perpetuating this idea that Zimmerman was a wanna-be tough guy, looking for a fight, while hiding behind the protection of his gun. Let’s not forget that the gun wasn’t presented until the moment it was used to fire, and THAT didn’t happen until Zimmerman was flat on his back and being pummeled. As far as the proper way to use a gun in self-defense, Zimmerman acted exactly as he should have. You never draw a gun unless you intend to use it.
[/QUOTE]
Just because he didnt draw until he was attacked doesnt mean he never had any intention to use it. CCW owners dont go out of their way walking down dark places following shady figures. The thought of having a gun gave him the mindset that he could resort to deadly force if required, when in fact that is the wrong mindset to begin with. Again, he has no right to become a free-lance police officer as a CCW owner and is not protected by law, and either knowingly or subconsciously put himself in danger.
actually no one really knows. He could have drawn and Martin seized the opportunity to push him into the grass to disarm. We can speculate all day how the fight went down.
dont twist my words, I believe responsible CCW owners are a benefit to society. But rarely do you hear one going around with the sole intention policing their neighborhood. It’s purely for self defense and to protect the lives of someone being attacked. You are not to go around with the mindset that you’re armed police. In this case? Nothing was happening to warrant pursuing Martin.
All that said, one could argue a different application of the Florida law. Zimmerman, who was safely in his car, ignored the instructions of the 911 dispatcher and got out of his car, weapon in hand, and pursued the victim. By that definition, wouldn’t Martin have been justified in firing a weapon? Even under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, Martin would have had no duty to retreat when he saw someone following him. If he had felt threatened and attacked Zimmerman, wouldn’t he have had ever right to do under the Florida law, even with a gun --if he’d been old enough to have one? It raises a troubling question: Is this law making anyone feel safer?
the “unfortunate” (for lack of a better word) fact here is that only one had a gun. Martin did not, and thus engaged his follower physically. Martin would have had every right to confront and potentially kill the random guy following him. In light of the law, technically Martin invoked Stand Your Ground first. Only until Zimmerman was on his ass being beat did he invoke his (if this even happened). But in the end who was following who, and was this necessary? Certainly not. If Zimmerman had his gun already drawn and approaching I believe that’s more than enough cause for TM to defend himself.
Lots of people have been arrested for “resisting arrest” and “assaulting a police officer” for nothing more than laying on the ground when being cuffed. It’s a trump-up charge thy like to try and scare people into confessions with. If he was licensed to carry a firearm (which he is), he’s a law-abiding citizen per Florida statutes.
As for how he could possibly be defending himself if he initiated contact, the same could be said of every OIS in the history of time, since police officers initiate contact all the time, yet often have to shoot in self defense.
Walking up to ascertain the reason for an unfamiliar individual wearing suspicious clothing typically worn to conceal one’s identity being in his neighborhood (which had seen a recent rise in burglaries and criminal mischief) does not cause a person to give up their right to defend themselves when their safety is threatened.
I haven’t dodged your question. Initiating contact is just that. The fact of initiating contact is not conclusive evidence that Zimmerman was threatening, had threatened, or in any way endangered Martin. Was Zimmerman on the phone with 911 until the gunshot can be heard?
I can’t take you serious about the video not showing any injury. I was jumped once, and the way you could tell I was assualted was because I had a bloody nose and blood from my kicked out teeth. Had I not had any blood on my face, you wouldn’t have been able to tell I.had been “assaulted.” In fact, right up until the point my face got stomped into the concrete, I didn’t have any mark on me at all, but I can assure you that I was definitely being assaulted. To say that because he didn’t look injured to you on a video, is sobstupid, that it doesn’t even deserve a response, that’s why you didn’t get one.
Finally, if you think that being followed is all it takes to clear you to assault someone, then there is no point in continuing because if you can’t even be honest with yourself, there is no chance you can finish a debate on the subject.
[QUOTE=armedferret;2253865]
Walking up to ascertain the reason for an unfamiliar individual wearing suspicious clothing typically worn to conceal one’s identity being in his neighborhood (which had seen a recent rise in burglaries and criminal mischief) does not cause a person to give up their right to defend themselves when their safety is threatened.[/QUOTE]
That’s odd, besides stereotyping the kid in Zimmerman’s mind, Martin could have thought the same thing of Zimmerman, a bald headed big guy. Since Zimmerman was plain clothed and never identified who he was or his intentions. He could be the criminal for all TM knew. A fact in TM’s mind only reinforced when the gun was drawn. Up to his death TM never knew Zimmerman was community watch–a fact clearly indicated in his conversation with his gf 5 minutes via cellphone before he was killed.
And again, CCW does not give you policing rights, as quoted from Flordia’s own CCW guidelines. He is not a police officer, so they’re not analogous. Had Zimmerman been unarmed I doubt he would have pursued on foot and make contact (this is where the free-lance police comes in). Isnt it one of the basic concepts of CCW is to act like you would if you didnt have a weapon unless attacked or witness a crime? Going out of your way to follow someone by car and foot who is committing no crime at night is normal for an unarmed person?
[QUOTE=Stu;2253868]
Finally, if you think that being followed is all it takes to clear you to assault someone, then there is no point in continuing because if you can’t even be honest with yourself, there is no chance you can finish a debate on the subject.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. If you believe someone following your 17 year old self by car and on foot at night that clearly isn’t a cop or an official of any type isnt suspicious in of itself.
Agree to disagree. We’ll see what the state finds.
Why are you hung up on your made up connection between a ccw and being a cop. They are irrelevant to each other. A guy concerned about his community, also has a ccw. You are drawing connections where there are none.
Second, citizens have the right to arrest other people, regardless if they are officers or not. I’m not saying that he was attempting an arrest, and I don’t know that Zimmerman initiated any physical contact. The point is that you don’t have much of an argument saying Zimmerman was acting like police.
Zimmerman was on the phone with 911. Police and bullies don’t call 911.
He was investifating a suspicious person and being a witness for police if there was something illegal going on. Neither of which is illegal, acting as an officer, or even discouraged behavior.
All of this back and forth is just speculation… Non of us know, or will ever know the whole truth of what happened that night. The bottom line is someone died at the hand of someone else. That person needs to take responsibility for his actions, at the very least manslaughter.