• 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.

Trayvon Martin acted in self-defense

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes, Martin did attack Zimmerman. He did what any reasonable person would do when being followed by someone who is armed.




Betcha never thought of it along those lines.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Yes, Martin did attack Zimmerman. He did what any reasonable person would do when being followed by someone who is armed.




Betcha never thought of it along those lines.

How did he know Zimmerman was armed? Did he have the gun drawn? No.
 

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,308
Reaction score
21,687
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
You can't blame Martin for his actions. Being followed at night by a dude in a car is ****ing creepy.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
50,164
Reaction score
26,442
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes, Martin did attack Zimmerman. He did what any reasonable person would do when being followed by someone who is armed.

Betcha never thought of it along those lines.

Actually we've been talking about that for days now.

When was Zimmerman allowed to defend himself against Martin's attack?
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
He didn't, but he didn't attack Martin either.

If he didn't know Martin was a thief, why was he following him?

He didn't attack Martin, but Zimmerman's own actions caused what happened.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,771
Reaction score
53,411
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Yes, Martin did attack Zimmerman. He did what any reasonable person would do when being followed by someone who is armed.




Betcha never thought of it along those lines.

Betcha that you personally don't go around punching armed folks that follow you. You don't bring Skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Betcha that you personally don't go around punching armed folks that follow you. You don't bring Skittles and an attitude to a gunfight twice.


Who made it a gunfight?
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
If he didn't know Martin was a thief, why was he following him?

He didn't attack Martin, but Zimmerman's own actions caused what happened.

1. It is not illegal for Zimmerman to follow someone he thought was acting suspicious.
2. Martin still is the one who initiated the attack, therefore could not be acting in self-defense.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
50,164
Reaction score
26,442
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So up until then his actions weren't justified? See, we agree.

Though I think shooting someone for throwing a punch is a bit extreme.

Yes, I think if a creepy person is following you, you have every right to defend yourself.

Now, when does the creepy person (who doesn't mean you any harm) have the right to defend himself?
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,176
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Yes, Martin did attack Zimmerman. He did what any reasonable person would do when being followed by someone who is armed.

Betcha never thought of it along those lines.

Definitely have, but there are a few issues with it:

1) Do we have any evidence that he knew Zimmerman was armed at the time the confrontation began? (honest question, I don't know what's came out concerning this)

2) Had there been any indication from Zimmerman regarding his potential use of deadly force? Had there not been then it does get into a situation where it comes into question the amount of force one can use legally to "defend" ones self against what would be a passive threat before it turns from you being the defender to the aggressor.

It also comes down to a thought between a belief as to whether or not following someone is starting an altercation, or if actually performing an assault and/or battery is what is the technical start. I believe that largely seems to be coming down to peoples opinions. My general take on it is that while I generally won't begrudge an individuals judgement of what they think they need to do to protect themselves, I believe it's in general far more reasonable to suggest that responding with force is appropriate when force is used against you but is NOT appropriate simply as a result of being followed by an individual unless there is clear and evident factors to lead you to believe that they plan to be physical once catching up to you.

It's a case that the Martin prosecution could've attempted to make, but I'm honestly not sure how strong of a case they could've made for it based on the little bit of evidence I saw discussed during the trial.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
So up until then his actions weren't justified? See, we agree.

Though I think shooting someone for throwing a punch is a bit extreme.

Except it is not illegal to follow somebody. And he didn't shoot him just from throwing a punch. He was on top of him MMA style bashing his head. The shot was justified in that case. Perhaps Martin's parents should have raised their son better.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
1. It is not illegal for Zimmerman to follow someone he thought was acting suspicious.
2. Martin still is the one who initiated the attack, therefore could not be acting in self-defense.

It doesn't have to be illegal for your actions to have a consequence.

If Martin had been armed, Zimmerman would be dead. And it would have been self-defense if we was followed by an armed person.
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
50,164
Reaction score
26,442
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
He wasn't the one with a gun as far as I know.

He was reaching for the gun. I believe Zimmerman didn't want to use his gun which is why he just kept yelling for help instead of getting his gun. When he saw Trayvon going for his gun, he knew he had to use it to save his life.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,176
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
How did Zimmerman know he was a thief?

So your assertion that these two assumptions are on the same level and degree to be compared as directly equal...

Someone believing it's okay to follow an unfamiliar individual going throug the middle of a neighborhood at night becuase they may be a thief and you want to be sure they're not breaking the law.

Someone believing that a person has a gun based singularly on the fact that they're following him, and thus force is allowable to "defend" from the presumed deadly force.
 

davidtaylorjr

Well-known member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
6,775
Reaction score
1,123
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It doesn't have to be illegal for your actions to have a consequence.

If Martin had been armed, Zimmerman would be dead. And it would have been self-defense if we was followed by an armed person.

That simply isn't true though. It would not have been self-defense if you simply shoot someone following you that is armed. If they had their gun drawn and aimed, that would be different but that isn't what the scenario was. Martin should have just gone home. If he was really worried, he had a phone, call the police. He was a racist kid who decided to start a fight rather than just leave it alone.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
He was reaching for the gun. I believe Zimmerman didn't want to use his gun which is why he just kept yelling for help instead of getting his gun. When he saw Trayvon going for his gun, he knew he had to use it to save his life.

It wasn't Martin's gun though. How was he reaching for it if he didn't know it was there?
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
89,771
Reaction score
53,411
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Who made it a gunfight?

The person punching one that was armed. The gun was not used until the fight was well underway. GZ was walking around armed many times, what made the TM "incident" special was that TM decided to teach that "creepy ass cracker" what following and "disrespecting" a good boy, simply walking home, should feel like. I note that you will not tell us just how many armed folks that you, personally, have beaten up.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,176
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
He didn't attack Martin, but Zimmerman's own actions caused what happened.

Technically, EVERYONE'S own actions caused what happened. There's blame regarding bad decisions to go around that night.

Had Martin stuck to the the side of streets and/or sidewalks instead of cutting through yards then Zimmerman would likely never have began to tail him.

Had Zimmerman listed to dispatch and not followed Trayvon he likely wouldn't have been attacked.

Had Martin not physically assaulted Zimmerman, he likely would've never been shot.

Had Zimmerman not shot Trayvon, he likely would've never been thrown into this circus.

Both individuals poor decisions avalanched together to form this unfortunate situation. No one "deserves" to die for poor decisions, but the fact one did and that one may go to jail for quite some time doesn't magically make it a situation where we can't or shouldn't speak honestly about the poor decisions on both.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,814
Reaction score
20,220
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
That simply isn't true though. It would not have been self-defense if you simply shoot someone following you that is armed. If they had their gun drawn and aimed, that would be different but that isn't what the scenario was. Martin should have just gone home. If he was really worried, he had a phone, call the police. He was a racist kid who decided to start a fight rather than just leave it alone.


Just going home is kind of what he was trying to do.
 
Top Bottom