[deleted]
That's interesting. Thanks; I'll have to look up the wiki article.
Basically, he a good boy, he didn't do nuffin, was going to get a college ph.d and graduate to become a skittle researcher and make loads of bucks but wanted to stroll around in the middle of the night first to see the rainbow and taste the rainbow. Not long after, an evil neighborhood watchman took his life when he tried to share a skittle with him and tried to cosplay as the black skittle with the hoodie on.
shareLmao that actually sounds accurate.
shareHopefully it will be fair to both sides.
First episode is "Stand Your Ground", which is a big Libtard lie. Self defense, that's all.
Can't wait to rate fake documentary 1* tomorrow.
SYG ws never an issue at the trial. Zimmerman's lawyers could have raised it, I suppose, but my understanding is that Zimmerman was no position to retreat, as Martin was on top of him pounding his head into the pavement. He was not standing his ground; he was pinned to it.
shareYou seem to have good horse sense, and I agree with most of what you said, but the idea firing a 'warning shot' (not your term, but basically that's what it comes down to) is rarely a good idea, as the fired bullet has to come down somewhere and its' landing could conceivably have injured someone else. Other than that, I think we're pretty much on the same page.
shareI would happily live with the million to one chance of the bullet landing on someone over the very definite chance of having my head mashed to a pulp in the next few seconds.
Besides , I think they proved on Mythbusters falling bullets are not fatal , just give you a headache.
[deleted]
I don’t want to get into all the other issues here, but a falling bullet can be fatal. Just google it, and there are many articles from all over about people killed by a bullet fired into the air https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebratory_gunfire.
In terms of self defense, what little I have read and been told is that you should not shoot to scare. If you do, you run the risk of the gun being taken and used against you. In the one class I went to, they said you don’t pull a gun unless you think your life is in danger. Once you pull the gun, it is to use it in self defense. If you pull the gun out to scare someone, they might have a gun of their own and they may be willing to shoot.
[deleted]
My objective in shooting is that my son and son in laws like target shooting as a sport. I go with them as something to do together.My apologies: I meant in self-defense.
Now, for self defense, if the need ever arose, I would protect my family. I would never bring out a gun unless I had already decided to use it. In the movies, people shoot the knife out of someone’s hand, or shoot them in the hand to prevent them from using their hand. In real life, there are very few people who are such a good shot. I am certainly not one of them. The objective would be to eliminate the threat. I am not a good enough shot, that in a stressful conflict situation I could say: I will hit him between the 3rd and 4th ribs on the right, so I collapse his lung and incapacitate him without killing him. It is more like, I hope I hit him somewhere and stop him.
[deleted]
[deleted]
People have al sorts of outlandish ideas about guns; one, like you mentioned is shooting the weapon out of the opponent's hand. Another is that shooting someone with a PO-lice special will knock the person four feet in the air. Other common beliefs are just as asinine, but, hey, they saw it in the movies or (better yet) saw it on the internet, so it must be true.
Much of what the public believes about this case is false as well.
It began as a false story, from the description of Zimmerman to the first photo that was circulated of Martin.
share
I would happily live with the million to one chance of the bullet landing on someone over the very definite chance of having my head mashed to a pulp in the next few seconds.
Besides , I think they proved on Mythbusters falling bullets are not fatal , just give you a headache.
Firing a warning shot would only have motivated Martin to disarm Zimmerman and probably kill him.
shareso from all the above discussion from first mentoin of "warning shot" to here , everyone seems to agree that if you are being actually beaten up , you shoot to "stop".
The question for me is how did it get to that stage? Ive done a bit of reading about this incident since yesterday. Zimmerman was actively "neighborhood patrolling" , seen the boy acting suspiciously , phoned police , continued to follow him .....
..... then suddenly they're rolling around on the ground and a shot is fired.
so from all the above discussion from first mentoin of "warning shot" to here , everyone seems to agree that if you are being actually beaten up , you shoot to "stop".
The question for me is how did it get to that stage? Ive done a bit of reading about this incident since yesterday. Zimmerman was actively "neighborhood patrolling" , seen the boy acting suspiciously , phoned police , continued to follow him .....
..... then suddenly they're rolling around on the ground and a shot is fired.
yeah thats kinda what i read too , but i cant help feeling maybe zimmerman is missing out the bit where .. who knows? he made some kinda contact.
Asked him to exit the gates? just asked him how he got in? or maybe attempted to hold him until the cops got there.
yeah thats kinda what i read too , but i cant help feeling maybe zimmerman is missing out the bit where .. who knows? he made some kinda contact.Zimmerman called the police and he said that he was following Martin until the police said not to. He then said that he was returning to his vehicle and was almost there when Martin attacked him from behind. share
Asked him to exit the gates? just asked him how he got in? or maybe attempted to hold him until the cops got there.
Zimmerman was still in his truck when the dispatcher told him not to follow. Zimmermans biggest mistake was pretending he wasn't acting in a threatning manner to martin by following him in the dark of night triggering the altercation. Martin was defending himself. Being a neighborhood watch doesn't mean "Follow and interrigsate every black man you see walking down the street".
This whole stick is what started the whole BLM movement.
The question for me is how did it get to that stage? Ive done a bit of reading about this incident since yesterday. Zimmerman was actively "neighborhood patrolling" , seen the boy acting suspiciously , phoned police , continued to follow him .....
..... then suddenly they're rolling around on the ground and a shot is fired.
I hate this type of crap. Martin was a punk, and even though Zimmerman is a total tool and asshat, the fact is is that Martin was on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the pavement. I wish Zimmerman hadn't followed Martin. If someone else was the "law and order" of his neighborhood watch, this tragedy could have been avoided.
Martin is dead so we can't hear his side of the story but from what Zimerman said he approached him in the dark after following him with his truck. Thats enough to raise alarm in me and even worse is he got out of his truck. You just don't follow people and approach them in the dark like that.What do you base this on? share
"I still think if Zimmerman had pulled the weapon and fired it into the air, Martin would have run like the punk he was"
I really don't think martin started the fight. I have no doubt martin was telling him to back the F*ck up and Zimmerman kept approaching which lead to the physical altercation. If zimmerman had fired into the air of course martin would have fled. Its not like he had a gun.
The fact that Zimmerman was following him. Thats what an aggressive punk does?
shareThe fact that Zimmerman was following him. Thats what an aggressive punk does?
OMG don't ever think you can follow people in the dark like that. I have a concealed carry permit my self and I've been attacked before my self. I don't know what neighborhood your in if you think its ok to follow people in the dark like that, but the area I'm in people are attacked all the time so you don't follow people like that.
shareLet's please establish something. Who, in your view, attacked who?
share Zimmerman approached martin in the dark. Martin got spoked took an aggressive posture then
Witness number 8 says:
"according to an interview Crump recorded after the shooting, the young woman said Trayvon told her a stranger was following him, and he was scared. Trayvon got away from him once, but the man reappeared, she said, and she heard Trayvon ask, "'What are you following me for?'"
The man answered, "'What are you doing here?'" she said, and then she said the man must have pushed Trayvon because the phone went dead."
Look at what you wrote here.
The man answered, "'What are you doing here?'" she said, and then she said the man must have pushed Trayvon because the phone went dead."
I just heard the 911 tapes of the ass beating martin was giving zimmerman which was excessive so I can see how he got shot. But I still don't excuse zimmerman from following him in the dark like that in a confrontational manner. This is an ugly situation both ways.
shareThe problem here is that you are assuming it was a confrontational manner. There is no evidence to support this, any more than there is to support your assumption earlier that Zimmerman attacked Martin.
Granted, Martin can't tell his side of things but no evidence contradicts what Zimmerman has said happened.
Now, on the issue of Zimmerman continuing to follow Martin, the 911 call indicates that he broke off following Martin after the police dispatcher said 'we don't need you to do that'. Zimmerman's response is 'ok', which tells me that he returned to his vehicle at that point, which was when the fight started. At that point, Zimmerman would have had no reason to attack Martin as the police call had been made, and they were on the way.
One point of agreement that we both have is that Zimmerman should not have gotten out of his car and followed Martin. However, doing this was not illegal and it certainly did not justify Martin's attack on Zimmerman. That was Zimmerman's main mistake, and he has paid a very heavy price for it.
And Martin's price was even heavier for his mistake.
I think that we can agree on this much: this case was tragic for everyone involved. Trayvon Martin lost his life; his parents lost their son and Zimmerman will be hounded for a long time to come by a bitter, vengeful media that did not seem to be concerned an awful lot with facts. A media that badly wanted Zimmerman's head on a platter, so that they could proclaim their own virtue.
I have long been suspicious of the press, and this episode confirmed many of my misgivings.
And that is yet another tragedy.
The dialog on the initial 911 call leads me to believe Zimmerman was acting confrontationally. He already said on the call that "assholes gonna get away with it" and that he already said "He's up to no good". Zimmerman was already acting confrontationally and I have no reason to believe zimmerman was acting pleasant when he encountered martin who was merly walking to his fathers house, and every reason to believe zimmerman had already pegged him out to be a criminal and was acting confrontationally.
Martin, the 911 call indicates that he broke off following Martin after the police dispatcher said 'we don't need you to do that'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin#/media/File:Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin_map.png
https://www.google.com/maps/place/1611+Retreat+View+Cir,+Sanford,+FL+32771/@28.7928387,-81.329764,89m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x88e71298fb8cecb1:0xca98a3e7fa43122f!8m2!3d28.7931178!4d-81.3321029
The second aerial photograph shows you a better view of the distance zimmerman had to walk on foot to have been there. The question of where the truck was is suspect as well being that zimmermans wife moved the truck before the police could mark its location. But you can see its a good walk to get there.
From the 911 call earlier It sounds like zimmerman approached in his truck from twin trees lane being that there is a club house(with a swimming pool) to the left at the intersection of retreat view and twintrees. When looking at the map keep in mind those are 4 unit houses and not the typical 2 unit apartments your used to seeing so the scale is bigger then what it appears. Zimmerman really went out of his way to have ended up between those 2 buildings like that.
So, we have progressed to the point where you concede that Martin attacked Zimmerman, as you are trying to justify it now.
So, we agree that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Martin's attack on Zimmerman, you feel, was a legally justified act. Is this a fair statement of your position?
I already conceeded that martin rightfully defended him self and that Zimmerman may or may not have been in grave danger at that point.
Like I said before in texas you can't provoke a fight then claim self defense. IE even if it looks right that zimmerman was defending him self it can be shown that zimmerman was acting in a threatening manner so a manslughter verdict would have been fine by me.
The really bad part about the media is they kept treating this as a stand your ground case which doesn't apply here nor did Zimmermans attorny try to invoke that.
Stand your ground really doesn't exist the actual legal statute in question is that in a lot of situtations the victim is under no obligation to retreat. Had martin killed Zimmerman that could have been invoked as it can be shown that Zimmerman was following martin in a threatning manner and that martin being close to the residence he was staying at was under no obligation to retreat. Think about how this story would have played out if zimmerman was the one that was dead and you'll see that the story is always stacked in the favor of the survivor being that the victim can't testify.
We have two different versions here, and I'm still not clear on what you think happened.
Either
1. Martin attacked Zimmerman; or,
2. Zimmerman attacked Martin.
Which was it?
I believe 1. Martin attacked Zimmerman as he was being followed in a threatning manner. Something I would have done as well. Its reasonable to conclude that some one who follows you in a vehical then follows you on foot as you try to evade them by walking into an area where a truck can not go (Inidicating your not being followed by chance but intentionally being followed) its reasonable to assume your about to be attacked. That is a reasonable assumption that would trigger a fight or flight response in anyone. In martins case it was a fight response.
shareI believe 1. Martin attacked Zimmerman as he was being followed in a threatning manner. Something I would have done as well. Its reasonable to conclude that some one who follows you in a vehical then follows you on foot as you try to evade them by walking into an area where a truck can not go (Inidicating your not being followed by chance but intentionally being followed) its reasonable to assume your about to be attacked. That is a reasonable assumption that would trigger a fight or flight response in anyone. In martins case it was a fight response.
The sense that I get from Rachel Jeantel's testimony at the trial was not that M was afraid of Z; he was angry at him, and that he was going to teach Z a lesson. Although this was excluded at the trial, and rightly so, since Z did not know it at the time, M was in trouble with the law, having been found with burglar's tools. Now, to be fair, I don't believe that M had them on him when he attacked Z, but one of the things that he had been in trouble for was theft.
Zimmerman was only seconds into following martin when the 911 caller told him to break off persuit yet it was 2 minutes after the 911 call that the gunshot is heard on other 911 calls. Why did it take him so long to get back to his truck? Most likely because he continued to follow on foot. When you look at the map of the houses where martins body was you can see it took place between a long walkway between the resident buildings between the streets twin akes and retreat view. There is only a pedestrial walkway meaning zimmerman was well away from his truck.How do you know how long it it took Zimmerman to get back to his truck?
How do you know how long it it took Zimmerman to get back to his truck?
If Z dd not know where M was, how could he still be following him? Besides, you just admitted that Jeantel's testimony indicated that he was going to teach Z a lesson. If Z was going back to his truck and M jumped him near the truck, it stand to reason that M was following Z. After all, the 'cracker' needed a lesson.
No, my friend; everything that I see points to an very angry young kid who was pissed-off that he was being followed, and acted out of anger, not fear. Besides, if I am afraid of someone, what I try to do is keep distance, not attack
If Z dd not know where M was, how could he still be following him.
Okay, let's sum up. You admit that M attacked Z, but you feel that the attack was justified because Z was following M, due to M's fear of Z. After all, you say that you would react in much the same way.
I think it was not justified in the least because of the trial testimony of Jeantel shows me that the motivation was anger not fear. M, she said, wanted to teach this cracker a lesson. That is extremely damaging to M.
Here's where I see the problem: you are not a thug nor a thug wannabe. At least you don't impress me as being that way. You are courteous and rational, so my guess is that is how you approach situations.
M was a thug. His record shows that he was a less than exemplary citizen, and the way he presented himself shows or at the least strongly implies that he was a violent person. How does such a person handle anger? Quite likely by physically attacking the object of their anger.
Anyway, to sum up, I saw no indication of fear on M's part; what I saw was anger. We likely won't change each other's minds here, but I do thank you for a lively and courteous discussion.
I give you the last word, my friend. You take care.
Here's where I see the problem: you are not a thug nor a thug wannabe. At least you don't impress me as being that way. You are courteous and rational, so my guess is that is how you approach situations.
Why would you think he was angry? He beat the crap out of Zimmerman and that is what frightened people do.
shareThank you. This post needs to be chiseled into a large stone, preferably several, and place in various conspicuous places.
Two crappy people, both did idiotic things, both subsequently did some understandable things given the circumstances they created. Tragedy happened. Sad. But it never needed to be extrapolated into "The Grand Narrative of The Blacks and the non-Blacks of America."
[deleted]
*additional generic suspected white supremacist comment*
share[deleted]
Indeed. Any opinion that collides with the official narrative is:
a. "White supremacist"
b. "Racist"
c. "Nazi / KKK / (fill in the blank with other official boogie man organization)"
d. All of the above
Well you said it but you mean the opposite of the "official" narrative.
shareIt wasn't fair in real life. If some one approaches me in the dark like that I'd be getting hostile too. Like you don't do that to people in the dark and not expect a fight.
shareIt wasn't fair in real life. If some one approaches me in the dark like that I'd be getting hostile too. Like you don't do that to people in the dark and not expect a fight.And this anger justifies assaulting someone?
Gary what would you when some one is following you in the dark like that? Don't you think thats intimidating? Woulden't you tell them to back off and attack if they kept closing in on you? I just don't believe Zimmerman's story. He approached some one in the dark which I find very menacing. Its not anger its the fight or flight response.
shareI just don't believe Zimmerman's story.What evidence is there that he lied? That's what I'm trying to get you to answer, and all you seem to have is not believing Zimmerman. What basis do you have for not believing him?
I'm listening to the 911 tape. Zimmerman got out of his truck right after he said martin was running. Martin was running because he felt threatened. A police arrive 2 minutes after the 911 call. I'm pretty sure it doesn't take zimmerman 2 minutes to get back to his truck as he didn't travel that far. He was still following martin. I know how I would have responded if I had been in the dark and I'm sure most other people would have taken a hostil defensive stance like that. Considering Zimmerman's behavior and past behavior and even on the 911 tape you hear him saying "These assholes, they always get away." indicates that martin didn't want the "perp" (as far as he's concerned) to get away so he followed him against the dispatchers order. Martin had called the police on black people before and was agitated that the police always get their too late so he followed martin so that he woulden't get away.
Had no idea this was even a thing. How pathetic that this show exists.
share