• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Opening statements.[W:458]

Grim17 said:
This issue will now be settled...

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.​

Zimmerman's screams clearly indicate he want's the use of force by Martin to stop and since we know that Martin continued the physical attack, Zimmerman had the right according to Florida law to use lethal force.

Are we clear on the law now?
Click to expand...

One small problem....the screams were not Zimmerman. Kinda blows a hole in your story now doesn't it?
 
disneydude said:
LOL....I see you conveniently left off the second part I posted....figures!
Click to expand...

We were talking about the self defense laws as they apply to George Zimmerman in the case that he is found to be the aggressor... So I left out nothing.
 
Grim17 said:
To keep an eye on Martin in order to inform police upon their arrival... Action that is perfectly legal and within his rights to do.



Yes, and hides instead of returning to the safety of his fathers home.



There is no evidence of that and is pure speculation.



Yes, Zimmerman was being held down and beated in spite of his cries for help.
Click to expand...

a 220 lb man with a gun, being held down and beaten by a 17 year old 140 lb. kid. God hope those jurors don't leave their common sense at home.
 
Grim17 said:
We were talking about the self defense laws as they apply to George Zimmerman in the case that he is found to be the aggressor... So I left out nothing.
Click to expand...

You absolutely did....and anyone who is paying attention can see that easily.
 
disneydude said:
One small problem....the screams were not Zimmerman. Kinda blows a hole in your story now doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but there is no evidence that supports it was Martin, but there is evidence to support it was Zimmerman... Like Martin's father saying to a detective that it was not his son screaming, which was witnessed and over heard by another detective.
 
Grim17 said:
Sorry, but there is no evidence that supports it was Martin, but there is evidence to support it was Zimmerman... Like Martin's father saying to a detective that it was not his son screaming, which was witnessed and over heard by another detective.
Click to expand...

Wrong. There is zero evidence to establish it was either. Voice recognition experts established that it was Martin. Although, the jury won't get to hear that.
 
disneydude said:
Wrong. There is zero evidence to establish it was either. Voice recognition experts established that it was Martin. Although, the jury won't get to hear that.
Click to expand...

Martin's father telling police it was not his son screaming isn't evidence?

LMAO
 
Paperview said:
Don't misstate facts. Neither of those weights are accurate.

204 lbs

vs

158 lbs
Click to expand...

And don't mistake the fact that Zimmerman was getting beat all to hell, and Martin didn't have a scratch on him except the gunshot wound.
 
Grim17 said:
And don't mistake the fact that Zimmerman was getting beat all to hell, and Martin didn't have a scratch on him except the gunshot wound.
Click to expand...

If someone pulls a gun on you, you have a right to use force. Unfortunately for Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman had a gun.
 
Grim17 said:
Martin's father telling police it was not his son screaming isn't evidence?

LMAO
Click to expand...

Are you saying recognition of screaming from far away on a recorded police call is an easy thing?

Are you saying that his dad is used to hearing Trayvon scream for his life?

My son does video reviews. When we play them on you tube, his friends and family all asked "wait, is that you" ????

And in those samples the audio has clearer quality and in a normal voice level than the police tape.
 
I wish I could drop kick BDLR. How does he end an important day like today with that unconvincing witness?Total stupidity.
 
disneydude said:
If someone pulls a gun on you, you have a right to use force. Unfortunately for Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman had a gun.
Click to expand...

Without one shred of evidence, good luck pushing that fantasy... LMMFAO
 
Grim17 said:
Without one shred of evidence, good luck pushing that fantasy... LMMFAO
Click to expand...

Jurors don't have to leave their common sense and common experience at the door. Sorry. If Vigilante Zimmerman carries a gun and is stalking someone who he thinks is suspicious, who is going to believe that he didn't have his gun pulled. It also makes sense that Trayvon Martin seeing the guy with the gun would have two choices: 1. Run and get shot in the back or 2. Try to subdue a guy that is quite a bit larger than him. Common sense tells you that Trayvon chose fight over flight, but unfortunately for Trayvon, he was overpowered by Zimmerman in two ways, size and weapon. The jury also gets to use their common sense when looking at Zimmermans state of mind and the comments that he made. So...yes Grim.....it won't be hard for the state to present their case. The only question will be whether the jury brings their common sense with them or it they check it at the door.
 
Grim17 said:
Name one piece of evidence indicating it was Martin screaming, and prove you are being honest... Or blow it off and prove me right about your dishonesty. And please, don't say his family, because that's a wash and Martin's father said it wasn't him to police anyway.
Click to expand...
Already did: http://www.debatepolitics.com/zimme...ing-statements-w-458-a-62.html#post1061971986

More to that, when men fight the reflexive reaction is focused in the fight, either attacking or frantically warding off the attacks. There won't be time for screaming. Men don't just lay there doing nothing but scream, especially not when armed with a lethal weapon and had 11/2 years of martial art training. The only person who would let out such a bloodcurdling scream is an unarmed child who was facing the bullet of death right in the eyes and couldn't get away from it.

Talk about commonsense.
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
If someone pulls a gun on you, you have a right to use force. Unfortunately for Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman had a gun.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that does not change the self defense laws, and remember, it's Zimmerman on trial, not Trayvon Martin...

Now when you prove Zimmerman pulled his gun on Martin, get back to me and I'll be glad to discuss it with you.
 
dolphinocean said:
Already did: http://www.debatepolitics.com/zimme...ing-statements-w-458-a-62.html#post1061971986

More to that, when men fight the reflexive reaction is focused in the fight, either attacking or frantically warding off the attacks. There won't be time for screaming. Men don't just lay there doing nothing but scream, especially not when armed with a lethal weapon and had 11/2 years of martial art training. The only person who would let out such a bloodcurdling scream is an unarmed child who was facing the bullet of death right in the eyes and couldn't get away from it.

Talk about commonsense.
Click to expand...

Speculation is not evidence... I find it absolutely hilarious that you think it is.

It's really sad that you have to be dishonest to prop up your beliefs... Maybe one day you'll figure out that when you have to use dishonesty to prop up your beliefs, it means you have beliefs that aren't worth propping up.
 
Grim17 said:
Yes, but that does not change the self defense laws, and remember, it's Zimmerman on trial, not Trayvon Martin...

Now when you prove Zimmerman pulled his gun on Martin, get back to me and I'll be glad to discuss it with you.
Click to expand...

That is exactly why jurors are not required to check their common sense at the door when they enter the courtroom. As I laid out in my previous post, it is much more logical that Zimmerman had his gun pulled and Trayvon had a choice between flight (and being shot in the back) or fight. Stand your ground protects Trayvon as well, not just a vigilante with a gun. Unfortunately for Trayvon that night, he was overpowered by a man larger than him.

For your theory to hold water you would have to believe that Zimmerman carried the gun but didn't use it when pursuing someone. That a 220 lb man was overpowered by a 17 year old boy substantially smaller than him. Common sense tells you otherwise. If the jurors use their common sense, this case is dead bang for the prosecution. The question will be whether the defense can do a snowjob on them and get them to check their common sense.
 
Grim17 said:
Speculation is not evidence... I find it absolutely hilarious that you think it is.

It's really sad that you have to be dishonest to prop up your beliefs... Maybe one day you'll figure out that when you have to use dishonesty to prop up your beliefs, it means you have beliefs that aren't worth propping up.
Click to expand...

Common sense is not speculation. Jurors are allowed to use common sense and common life experiences. It would take the absence of both to believe that Martin was overpowered by a 17 year old boy that was substantially smaller than him.
 
disneydude said:
Common sense is not speculation. Jurors are allowed to use common sense and common life experiences. It would take the absence of both to believe that Martin was overpowered by a 17 year old boy that was substantially smaller than him.
Click to expand...

I hope the lawyers for the state have more sense than to adopt your strategy.
 
disneydude said:
Common sense is not speculation. Jurors are allowed to use common sense and common life experiences. It would take the absence of both to believe that Martin was overpowered by a 17 year old boy that was substantially smaller than him.
Click to expand...

don't think so
we heard that the gym owner called zimmerman soft
that he would not allow zimmerman in a ring with anyone else
that zimmerman never progressed beyond hitting a punching bag

even the neighborhood watch coordinator for the police called him meek
he made a wonderfully soft, meek target for martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom