Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

In my foreign land, murder is OKFollow

#152 Mar 23 2012 at 6:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji would fit right in with the 50s, where after murdering a black man for whistling at a white woman he'd blame the victim & find it appropriate the white men were acquitted.

Those were the glory days of his ilk.

Edited, Mar 23rd 2012 8:08am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#153 Mar 23 2012 at 6:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
You know, a new study out of Notre Dame demonstrates that to a person who is holding a gun, innocuous objects other people are holding also look like guns.

I've never seen anyone pretzel so hard in order to blame the victim. You can stand down, Gbaji. No one's claiming they were raped, here.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#154 Mar 23 2012 at 6:59 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
... got in one little fight, and my mom got scared ...

Smiley: motz
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#155 Mar 23 2012 at 7:23 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
6,543 posts
Race and legal issues aside, he shot and killed an unarmed teenager. Zimmerman may not get arrested for it, but he is in no way getting out of this scot free. His face is all over the internet, and people are no doubt looking for him with the intention of inflicting grief and bodily harm.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#156 Mar 23 2012 at 7:23 AM Rating: Decent
LockeColeMA wrote:
In a moment of levity, I'm having fun scanning the comments section of The Blaze article where Allen West came out fully in support of the investigation and a trial for Zimmerman.


For a moment, I pondered "wtf does Batman have to do with this?" Then I realized you said Allen.
#157 Mar 23 2012 at 5:07 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And if all he did was approach, this would be a very different conversation.


And yet, despite the fact that this is all he did, we're having the conversation we're having. Strange, isn't it?

Quote:
Slowly tailing someone while they walk home in the dark, with your headlights blaring, is a very, very different monster.


Is it? How much? You have no freaking idea to what degree Zimmerman "trailed him" with his car. The only actual facts we have about that stage of the events that night come from the call Zimmerman made. It's quite clear in that call that he's sitting in his stationary car reporting someone walking down the street. He speaks about him "coming toward me". Then confirms that the subject is a black male (because he walked close enough for him to see clearly, presumably). Then he reports that "he's running", leaves the car and follows.

That's it. What's happening is that you've adopted the assumption that Martin was 100% innocent, and Zimmerman 100% guilty and are filling in gaps of the story with information that makes that assumption seem stronger. All I'm asking is that you stop filling in gaps, stop making assumptions, and just look at the facts we know. I mean "headlights blaring"? Really? You don't realize you're using language designed to alter the perception of the event? How exactly do headlights "blare" in your world?


Quote:
And if you would get off your white male privilege horse for a second, maybe you could tune in to how most people would feel in that situation.


And there's the insertion of race into the issue (again, since I"m apparently now a racist for not ignoring the facts of a case and joining a mob acting almost solely on the race and age of the two men). What does this have to do with anything? The fact is that the concerns Martin had about Zimmerman were all in his head (just like much of the crazy theories floating around about this). He overreacted. Had he just walked home like a normal person, nothing would have happened. It was Martin's bizarre assumption that a guy in a car must be a threat to him, which required him to run that set up this whole situation.

We don't know who initiated the physical confrontation. But in the absence of any evidence, you can't just assume that Zimmerman did.


And you're also still ignoring huge amounts of information about this case that all supports Zimmerman's side of the story. It's only the selected bits being reported by a couple witnesses after the fact (who didn't see any of the conflict), and the claims of Martin's family, coupled with cries of racism, hate crimes, etc that create this perception you're reacting to. Look at the facts objectively. There's a reason why cops take statements from witnesses as soon after an event as possible. People's perceptions and assumptions about an even change over time. This is a classic example. When we have a witness saying that there was a guy wearing a white shirt straddling Martin and beating him, while Martin screamed for help, but we know that it was Martin wearing a white(ish) top, and Zimmerman wearing red, we're seeing this in action. That witness has adopted the assumption that it was Zimmerman beating Martin, and thus named the person on the ground being beat Martin. But his own statement proves that it was the other way around.


This is how assumptions taint the story over time. When we ignore people's labels and look just at what they actually saw or heard, it's clear that Martin was the aggressor (at least during the entire time period that anyone witnessed any of this). This fact was corroborated by at least 3 different eye-witnesses to the fight and was supported by the physical evidence at the scene. That's why the police concluded that this was a legitimate case of self defense.


As I've said repeatedly, if Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation (not just approaching and/or talking, but actually laying his hands on Martin), then his self defense claim is false. But we can't know if he did. In the absence of any evidence, we can't assume he's guilty. Our legal system works the other way around. And what's happening right now is an angry mob demanding "justice". They are no better than a lynch mob IMO. They don't want actual justice. If that was the case, they'd be looking at all the facts and not ignoring the ones that call into question their claim. They want an outcome that they've predetermined and which isn't justice at all.


And frankly, that makes me sick. You guys are allowing your emotions to lead you to something which is ugly and hateful. Look at the facts. They're there if you're willing to accept them.

Edited, Mar 23rd 2012 4:11pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#158 Mar 23 2012 at 5:36 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I could not care less about the age/race of the people involved. I care that the law let's a person kill another person in this fashion. That a person can just say "He was acting suspiciously!", kill the other person, then claim self defense and of course the other party is now dead so who is going to speak out? The girlfriend's (or, 16 year old girl who liked him a lot) phone call and Zimmerman's phone call both seem to contain enough information to call into question the validity of Zimmerman's claims.

Zimmerman, or anyone else, shouldn't be allowed to do this, and hopefully the outrage (well deserved outrage) over this event will cause lawmakers to take a serious look at the laws in question.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#159 Mar 23 2012 at 5:45 PM Rating: Good
***
1,162 posts
Quote:
The fact is that the concerns Martin had about Zimmerman were all in his head (just like much of the crazy theories floating around about this). He overreacted. Had he just walked home like a normal person, nothing would have happened. It was Martin's bizarre assumption that a guy in a car must be a threat to him, which required him to run that set up this whole situation.


Or you could say that the concerns Zimmerman had about Martin were all in his head. It was Zimmerman's assumption that some kid walking down the street is automatically up to no good. We know for a fact that his assumption was wrong but he had already decided that Martin was a criminal. Zimmerman overreacted.
#160 Mar 23 2012 at 5:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
That's it. What's happening is that you've adopted the assumption that Martin was 100% innocent, and Zimmerman 100% guilty and are filling in gaps of the story with information that makes that assumption seem stronger. All I'm asking is that you stop filling in gaps, stop making assumptions, and just look at the facts we know. I mean "headlights blaring"? Really? You don't realize you're using language designed to alter the perception of the event? How exactly do headlights "blare" in your world?

Martin was innocent - he did nothing illegal. Zimmerman, on the other hand, shot someone dead - that used to be illegal.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#161 Mar 23 2012 at 6:17 PM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
And my assertion had nothing to do with Martin's race, it was about yours and your own inability to see beyond it. You don't know what it's like to belong to an oft-brutalized minority group.

Zimmerman didn't just approach the kid in a car, he stalked him for many minutes. Minutes during which Martin varied his speed, tried to lose him, was eventually found again, etc.

Getting stalked by a car at night is the way most random hate crimes begin. Because the twisted ******** who commit those kinds of crimes are doing so to punish their victims for something (that being the affront of being outside the norm)--it's a mild form of terrorism. They want you to panic and feel fear before they actually engage. If you are really lucky (after finding yourself in that situation), they'll satisfy themselves with the knowledge that you are terrified and leave. But more often than not, at some point they are going to get out of the car and try to kick the sh*t out of you.

Whether Zimmerman was bothering to think about how his actions were obviously going to be construed is a different matter. The fact is that Martin (or ANYONE else, regardless of their race) would feel deeply threatened by them. His girlfriend was begging him to run.

If you belong to a social group generally subject to increased rates of random violence, you are naturally more aware of these indicators (with the stalking car not being a subtle one). Anyone would have been scared, but there's a good chance that Martin was aware he should feel scared.

And, quite literally, he should have felt scared. Zimmerman was stalking him. We KNOW this is true. The 911 call and the girlfriend's testimony proves it to be so. His intent was to control and monitor the kid, and that is how he acted.

Like I said, depending on the state, his actions could have earned him a harassment charge.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#162 Mar 23 2012 at 7:42 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
TirithRR wrote:
I could not care less about the age/race of the people involved.


You're in the extreme minority then, given the number of people in this thread who've called me a racist for not agreeing with them.

Quote:
I care that the law let's a person kill another person in this fashion. That a person can just say "He was acting suspiciously!", kill the other person, then claim self defense and of course the other party is now dead so who is going to speak out?


You skipped a whole set of steps in between. He didn't just walk up to Marin and shoot him because he thought he was acting suspiciously. He shot him because when he approached him to ask him what he was doing, he was (according to Zimmerman) attacked from behind by Martin, who then proceeded to attempt to beat Zimmerman senseless.

Quote:
The girlfriend's (or, 16 year old girl who liked him a lot) phone call and Zimmerman's phone call both seem to contain enough information to call into question the validity of Zimmerman's claims.


How? Zimmerman's phone call only shows us that he left his car to follow Martin. We don't have a record of the girlfriend's phone call, but even her account confirms that Zimmerman approached and spoke with Martin prior to the physical altercation breaking out. She can't possibly know who initiated that fight. She speculates that Martin was pushed, but it could just as easily been Martin doing the pushing (or attacking) which caused his earpiece to fall out and disconnect the call.

And her account does also confirm the whole "acting suspiciously" part. She said that Martin was stepping under awnings to get out of the rain. I suppose if it suddenly started raining while I was walking home, and I expected it to stop in a few minutes, I *might* seek shelter under an awning, but if it's just a steady drizzle (which is what the rain appeared to be that night), I'd just walk home in the rain. Her account has him wandering off the sidewalk and into random areas of the complex in a manner that would certainly seem suspicious and absolutely might be seem as matching what someone might do if they were poking around looking for something to steal.

Quote:
Zimmerman, or anyone else, shouldn't be allowed to do this...


Do what? Approach someone while acting as a member of a local community watch group and ask them what they're doing? Because we have absolutely zero evidence that he did anything other than that. As I said earlier, anyone has an expectation that they can approach anyone else and ask them something on a public street without being assaulted. A watchman on private property he's been authorized to patrol absolutely does as well.

Quote:
...and hopefully the outrage (well deserved outrage) over this event will cause lawmakers to take a serious look at the laws in question.


What laws? The law that says that it's illegal to attack someone simply for walking up to you and asking you a question?


You are assuming that Martin did nothing to instigate the physical conflict. You are assuming that Zimmerman did. Why? Because Zimmerman ultimately shot and killed Martin? If we assume that Martin didn't know Zimmerman was armed, then that doesn't figure into the calculation at all, does it? So no one ever attacks someone else? That's news. You know nothing about Trayvon Martin. Nothing. Yet you take his side without question. Despite all the physical evidence and witness statements showing that he was on top of Zimmerman beating him up just prior to the shot being fired, you assume a guy capable of doing that is utterly incapable of deciding to start the fight in the first place. Why?


Think about how irrational that is.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#163 Mar 23 2012 at 8:00 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
And my assertion had nothing to do with Martin's race, it was about yours and your own inability to see beyond it. You don't know what it's like to belong to an oft-brutalized minority group.


Which is an assertion having to do with race. You assume that as a white male, I can't even conceptualize what Trayvon might have been feeling or thinking. And you frankly assume what Trayvon was thinking and feeling based on your own assumptions about racial groups.

I'm looking at the facts and nothing but the facts. You're speculating based on your own racially biased assumptions.

Quote:
Zimmerman didn't just approach the kid in a car, he stalked him for many minutes. Minutes during which Martin varied his speed, tried to lose him, was eventually found again, etc.

Getting stalked by a car at night is the way most random hate crimes begin. Because the twisted @#%^s who commit those kinds of crimes are doing so to punish their victims for something (that being the affront of being outside the norm)--it's a mild form of terrorism. They want you to panic and feel fear before they actually engage. If you are really lucky (after finding yourself in that situation), they'll satisfy themselves with the knowledge that you are terrified and leave. But more often than not, at some point they are going to get out of the car and try to kick the sh*t out of you.

Whether Zimmerman was bothering to think about how his actions were obviously going to be construed is a different matter. The fact is that Martin (or ANYONE else, regardless of their race) would feel deeply threatened by them. His girlfriend was begging him to run.

If you belong to a social group generally subject to increased rates of random violence, you are naturally more aware of these indicators (with the stalking car not being a subtle one). Anyone would have been scared, but there's a good chance that Martin was aware he should feel scared.

And, quite literally, he should have felt scared. Zimmerman was stalking him. We KNOW this is true. The 911 call and the girlfriend's testimony proves it to be so. His intent was to control and monitor the kid, and that is how he acted.


Ok. Let's play "pretend to be the scared black kid" game for a moment. If he's being stalked for several minutes (and perceives it that way), and in his mind he's thinking "OMG. This is just how hate crimes start", and he's genuinely affraid that there's some crazed KKK guy following him in a car playing "scare the black kid", why for all that is holy, does he carry on a conversation with his girlfriend instead of himself calling 911?

He's got a cell phone, right? If he was really that scared, and really thought this was someone out to "get him" (for any reason, even if not related to race), why not call 911? Why instead talk to his girlfriend about how someone is watching him and following him, and deciding to walk quickly or run? Now, maybe I'm just some white guy who doesn't understand the thought process of black kids, but to me that would be the correct course of action. Now, again, perhaps because I'm white guy who doesn't understand anything, I might interpret the conversation he had with his girlfriend in exactly the way someone who actually was doing something suspicious might if he were worried that he was being watched by a patrol guy, who might be calling the cops on me, and I decide I want to avoid him and try to get away.


His actions are *not* consistent with a law abiding citizen just walking home who sees someone suspicious. Zimmerman's call to the police is absolutely consistent, Martin's isn't. It's consistent with someone who is worried that someone else might be watching what he's doing or even might catch him doing something he's not supposed to do.


To be fair, this is also pure speculation on my part. But you don't know, do you? How do you know that Martin *wasn't* ducking into side yards and other parts of the complex checking out if there was anything he could steal? Do you know that for a fact? Heck. Maybe it's less serious than that. Maybe he took the excuse of walking to the store to smoke some pot and was hiding in the shadows of the complex (and getting out of the rain) to do so? I don't know. But neither do you.


The point is that his actions aren't terribly consistent with someone who was afraid that he might be about to become a victim of a crime. His actions *were* consistent with someone who was afraid he might be caught committing one though. This doesn't prove anything, of course, but if we're going to speculate about what happened, why assume one is true and automatically discount the other? Because his parents say he was a good boy? Parents of gang members who just sprayed bullets on a crowd during a drive by also insist that their son was a good boy. They're hardly objective character witnesses.

Yet you base your entire interpretation of this event and condemnation of Zimmerman and the police on an assumption that there could not have been any justification for Zimmerman's actions and complete justification for Martin's. You assume this because his parents (and their lawyer) insist it's so. You assume this because a bunch of other people, who know no more details about this than you do have also accepted that assumption and loudly proclaim it to be true. I'm sorry, but I don't see it. Now maybe because I'm white I think that you should call the police if you think someone might be planning to commit a crime against you, or maybe it's because I think like a normal law abiding citizen. But in any case, I acknowledge the parts of this story that I don't know and attempt to make my judgment based only on the things I do.

Quote:
Like I said, depending on the state, his actions could have earned him a harassment charge.


In no state can his actions be judged as harassment. You're just tossing absurdities out there now. Stop trying to invent rationales for Martin's actions. Look at the facts. Geez!

Edited, Mar 23rd 2012 7:07pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#164 Mar 23 2012 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
gbaji wrote:

Quote:
Zimmerman, or anyone else, shouldn't be allowed to do this...


Do what? ...

Quote:
...and hopefully the outrage (well deserved outrage) over this event will cause lawmakers to take a serious look at the laws in question.


What laws? The law that says that it's illegal to attack someone simply for walking up to you and asking you a question?


The laws that let someone kill another person and get away with it. The laws that let Zimmerman stalk an innocent person and force a situation where Zimmerman felt he had to use deadly force.

You act like Zimmerman did nothing wrong, yet his actions resulted in Martin's death. Oh, wait... Martin started it by decided to go to the store and purchase something. Shame on him. Maybe it's Martin's family's fault for living in the same area as Zimmerman?

Martin could have thrown the first punch, Zimmerman could have as well, but Zimmerman is the victor, so if you go by his word alone obviously he's going to be the 'victim'. That's the problem. The law let Zimmerman kill Martin, and now there is no real way to know the truth. You don't see this as a problem? That a gun toting individual can decide that someone is suspicious, approach them, kill them (who cares what happens between these two steps), and then that individual is now the 100% authority as to what happened happened between those two steps?

How do you protect yourself against people like that (Zimmerman or not). Just not go anywhere alone, don't do anything that someone in their right, or not right, mind may find a bit suspicious? Zimmerman overstepped, and legal or not, a boy is dead. And yes, he overstepped. He could have done the right thing and waited for real authorities, in which case the truth would have came out and Martin would still be alive, Zimmerman maybe a little embarrassed. But he chose to escalate the encounter to something physical (by approaching the boy) due to his emotions and now he gets to decide what the truth is.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#165 Mar 23 2012 at 8:22 PM Rating: Decent
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
Quote:
Zimmerman's phone call only shows us that he left his car to follow Martin.


Did you even listen to it? He was in his car for the whole conversation.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#166 Mar 23 2012 at 8:34 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,162 posts
If Zimmerman would come out and admit that he killed the kid in cold blood, Gbaji would still make up some BS about how the position of the moon in relation to Saturn while taking into account the wind direction that night makes it Martin's fault.
#167 Mar 23 2012 at 10:21 PM Rating: Good
Racism only plays a part in this if it is part of the reason Zimmerman used to conclude that Martin was "suspicious". Some version of why Zimmerman found Martin suspicious will come out if Zimmerman ends up getting charged with anything.

- If he was suspicious of Martin because he was black, Racism played a factor.
- If he was suspicious because he was a teenager ("kid" is the term Zimmerman used), he's an @#%^, but not necessarily racist.
- If he suspicious because Martin was walking in the rain wearing a hoodie, he's a dumbass.
- If he was suspicious because he thought, as he said in the call, Martin was "on drugs" I'm betting Zimmerman didn't even know Martin was on his phone (using an ear piece) and falsely assumed Martin was "on drugs" instead of simply talking on his phone. Which makes Zimmerman look like an even bigger dumbass.

Anyway you slice it, Martin didn't do ANYTHING wrong or illegal up until the point that Zimmerman confronted Martin, while Zimmerman had already made incorrect assumptions about Martin & disregarded the recommendations of the operator. He also got out of his car and followed Martin, which is against the rules of the Neighborhood Watch program. And while carrying the gun was legal in Zimmerman's case, since he had a Florida CC permit, carrying a gun is also against Neighborhood Watch Protocols.

The police have made some blunders too: they didn't drug test Zimmerman, they told the family Zimmerman had a "squeaky clean" record when he did not, they didn't investigate Martin's last phone call, & they may have led witnesses. Taking into account the "temporarily" resigned chief (Lee) got his job after the last Police Chief lost his job due to a scandal revolving around the cover up of an officer's son beating a homeless man...



It's really hard to take the Police at their word here. It gives, at the very least, the illusion of a cover up & that they have a history of being less than truthful when their asses are on the line. Did that happen here? I don't know. But it certainly warrants further investigation.

Taking into account Zimmerman's overzealous nature in his role as neighborhood and his past criminal charges (even though he was never convicted), he certainly shouldn't have had a gun. He tried to be a hero, killed an innocent kid, & has yet to be charged (Best I can hope for is manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter). It's a @#%^ing tragedy & Gbaji bending over backwards for this twat is sickening.

Edited, Mar 24th 2012 12:24am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#168 Mar 23 2012 at 11:36 PM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
If he was charged with what he was actually guilty of, resisting arrest with violence/battery towards a police officer, he wouldn't have been eligible for a concealed weapons permit in Florida. They dropped the charges after he entered a program available to people with no prior arrests (which I assume is community service).

____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#169 Mar 24 2012 at 1:22 AM Rating: Excellent
**
589 posts
As soon as Zimmerman left his car and sought out danger he was no longer protected under the Law so it really does come back to the Police botching it up. Really as soon as he admitted going from a place of safety to one where is life would be in danger should had thrown up all kinds of red flags to any cop with half a brain. Now in every state even those with out laws like Fl's you can use deadly force and not be charged as long as you are defending your self and you did not seek out the confrontation or danger.
#170 Mar 24 2012 at 10:09 AM Rating: Good
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting/?hpt=us_c2 wrote:
A lawyer for the man at the center of the Trayvon Martin death investigation said Florida's "stand your ground" law doesn't apply to the shooting that killed the unarmed teen.
"In my legal opinion, that's not really applicable to this case. The statute on 'stand your ground' is primarily when you're in your house," said Craig Sonner, attorney for George Zimmerman.


Zimmerman's ****** if his own lawyer denies the law's protection in this case. Maybe justice will be done after all.
#171 Mar 24 2012 at 6:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
David Frum asks why Martin isn't being given the benefit of the doubt regarding Zimmerman's wounds under the "stand your ground" law given that he was being pursued by an attacker with a deadly weapon.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#172 Mar 24 2012 at 7:18 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Jophiel wrote:
David Frum asks why Martin isn't being given the benefit of the doubt regarding Zimmerman's wounds under the "stand your ground" law given that he was being pursued by an attacker with a deadly weapon.


Cause he was wearing a hoodie.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#173 Mar 24 2012 at 11:10 PM Rating: Good
That's Giraldo's theory, anyways.



The hoodie is as responsible as Zimmerman!?!!


Edited, Mar 25th 2012 1:11am by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#174 Mar 25 2012 at 1:42 AM Rating: Good
Everything else aside, since when was lethal force ever allowed to settle a fist fight? Especially when police are already on their way?
#175 Mar 25 2012 at 3:13 AM Rating: Good
**
589 posts
If Martin had used deadly force he would had been protected since this was not a fist fight. The stand your ground law was intended to protect people in Martin's position shame he didn't come out the victor. Martin was stalked down by a nut job that should never had been allowed to carry. If any anything should be changed its the first time offender program, no violent crime should fall under that program for this very reason. But every state has protections for those that have to use deadly force to ward off a attack seeing how a well placed punch could be deadly hell even pepper spray could be fatal if some one has a bad enough reaction.
#176 Mar 25 2012 at 9:24 AM Rating: Good
Apparently Zimmerman was a serial 911 abuser, with 45 calls placed since he started working as a neighborhood watch patrolman in September 2011.

He once called 911 because a 7-9 year old black boy was walking down the street, alone. His official reason for calling? The child was "unaccompanied."

Shoot, when I was that age I was permitted to walk about 2 miles unsupervised (down to the local driving range) and bike the full area of another 5-6.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 143 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (143)