• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

Zimmerman not guilty.

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
68,530
Reaction score
38,826
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.

GZ created only the opportunity for closer contact with TM, which was perhaps unwise yet not illegal. Under current Floriduh law that would have made little difference even if GZ was proven to be the initial aggressor. There was ample physical evidence and witness tetimony to show that GZ had clearly stopped aggression while TM continued to show aggression immediately prior to the shooting.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(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.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

I do not agree with this portion of the Floriduh "self defense" law. It should be amended to limit the initial aggressor to using only non-lethal force, even in their "self defense", as does the Texas law.
 

Thoreau72

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
29,639
Reaction score
7,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Neither the first nor the last unjust and out-of-touch verdict by a jury.

If Z had any money, the family could sue for wrongful death. But Z ain't OJ. :mrgreen:
 

code1211

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
38,396
Reaction score
7,655
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.



It's too bad that our world and society created a time and place that two people who were utterly unprepared to be in that situation were in that situation.

A civil conversation should have been the outcome of that meeting.

This is a tragedy that we all need to take part of the blame for having had it occur.
 

Crosscheck

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
11,465
Reaction score
8,882
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.

That pretty much sums it up. Of course many here suggest that Martin should have just stayed in the house that day and in retrospect that is true because there was an idiot loose in the neighborhood.

What he had done was no different than a man who walks by a fence yard and teases a dog inside the yard. One day he walks by and teases the dog before realizing the gate is open. The two meet and of course the dog attacks him. Luckily the man has a gun and shoots and kills the dog and becomes a hero for people afraid of dogs.

George Zimmerman is not the hero people are parading him to be.
 

Carleen

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
7,880
Reaction score
3,238
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.

I said he would not be convicted. The prosecution could no prove their case. There was too much reasonable doubt. But I agree if Zimmerman has heeded the suggestion that he not follow Trayvon none of this would have happened.
 

Papa bull

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
6,927
Reaction score
2,599
Location
Midwest
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
GZ created only the opportunity for closer contact with TM, which was perhaps unwise yet not illegal. Under current Floriduh law that would have made little difference even if GZ was proven to be the initial aggressor. There was ample physical evidence and witness tetimony to show that GZ had clearly stopped aggression while TM continued to show aggression immediately prior to the shooting.



Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

I do not agree with this portion of the Floriduh "self defense" law. It should be amended to limit the initial aggressor to using only non-lethal force, even in their "self defense", as does the Texas law.

Here is the problem with that. You punch someone in the mouth for calling your wife a filthy whore. The guy you punched in the mouth gets up and pulls out a 5 inch fighting knife and "defends himself". You may very well need to use deadly force to keep from being gutted like a fish. It might not have been the "smart thing to do" to punch the guy in the mouth in the first place for calling your wife a filthy whore, but it shouldn't mean you go to prison because you had to shoot the asswipe after he pulled out a longshank and tried to nail kill you.

You have to leave stuff like this to juries because you can't write a law so tight that you can cover all possibilities.
 

Bethlehem Bill

Active member
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
294
Reaction score
159
Location
Bethlehem, PA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's too bad that our world and society created a time and place that two people who were utterly unprepared to be in that situation were in that situation.

A civil conversation should have been the outcome of that meeting.

This is a tragedy that we all need to take part of the blame for having had it occur
.

i'm 26 and live in Pennsylvania

I didn't write or have anything to do with the laws in place in florida nor the climate of racial tension there

so I ask politely, why should I share any of the blame at all for this?
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.

He absolutely did create the situation. When he decided to keep eyes on Trayvon Martin, a series of events unfolded that caused Martin's death. There is no question about that. As others have posted ad nauseum, had George Zimmerman not gotten out of his car? Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

What is so hard about understanding that:

#1 - It's not against the law to get out of your car.
#2 - It's not against the law to follow someone.
#3 - The circumstantial evidence showed that Trayvon Martin struck the first blow -- in fact, the ONLY blows.
#4 - George Martin was in a fight for his life.
#5 - He shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

Other than, "It may have..." "It could have..." "There's a possibility that..." what evidence do you have that it happened any other way.
 

Crosscheck

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
11,465
Reaction score
8,882
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Here is the problem with that. You punch someone in the mouth for calling your wife a filthy whore. The guy you punched in the mouth gets up and pulls out a 5 inch fighting knife and "defends himself". You may very well need to use deadly force to keep from being gutted like a fish. It might not have been the "smart thing to do" to punch the guy in the mouth in the first place for calling your wife a filthy whore, but it shouldn't mean you go to prison because you had to shoot the asswipe after he pulled out a longshank and tried to nail kill you.

You have to leave stuff like this to juries because you can't write a law so tight that you can cover all possibilities.

It all goes back to wh initiated the situation. In this case the idiot who called the guy's wife a filthy whore. He should bear some responsibility .

The guy who yells fire in a crowded theater and causes the stampeded of movie viewers should also bear some respnsibility.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
George Zimmerman is not the hero people are parading him to be.

Who is parading George Zimmerman as a hero? The justice system is the hero here.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
68,530
Reaction score
38,826
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Here is the problem with that. You punch someone in the mouth for calling your wife a filthy whore. The guy you punched in the mouth gets up and pulls out a 5 inch fighting knife and "defends himself". You may very well need to use deadly force to keep from being gutted like a fish. It might not have been the "smart thing to do" to punch the guy in the mouth in the first place for calling your wife a filthy whore, but it shouldn't mean you go to prison because you had to shoot the asswipe after he pulled out a longshank and tried to nail kill you.

You have to leave stuff like this to juries because you can't write a law so tight that you can cover all possibilities.

If you are the type to resort to assault/battery for "insults" then you indeed are getting what you deserve, that "retaliation" is not only not smart but committing a forcible felony. Under your scenario would be quite easy to run around armed asasulting folks, for all manner of reasons, and then executing them if they retaliate using "serious" force. After your initial "sucker punch(es)" you simply say "woops, my bad, I will not hit you again" - any further aggression towards you then warrants your use of deadly force if you have simply have a "reasonable fear" of great bodily harm to yourself.
 

Papa bull

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
6,927
Reaction score
2,599
Location
Midwest
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
If you are the type to resort to assault/battery for "insults" then you indeed are getting what you deserve, that "retaliation" is not only not smart but committing a forcible felony. Under your scenario would be quite easy to run around armed asasulting folks, for all manner of reasons, and then executing them if they retaliate using "serious" force. After your initial "sucker punch(es)" you simply say "woops, my bad, I will not hit you again" - any further aggression towards you then warrants your use of deadly force if you have simply have a "reasonable fear" of great bodily harm to yourself.

You're not following this. I think it is foolish and wrong to punch somebody for saying something ignorant. I'm saying that such a demonstration of poor judgement, however, should not invalidate your right to self defense as needed and reasonable and shooting a guy coming after you with a knife is reasonable even if you initiated the violence by giving him a bloody nose; clearly not a threat of severe physical harm and/or death.

Juries are much better able to sort this stuff out than some black-letter law that can't possibly take all possibilities into consideration.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
George Zimmerman found not guilty

I still think that Zimmerman created the situation and Trayvon died as a result of that situation.

No question he did. Ad nauseum post here: Had George Zimmerman simply stayed in his car, none of this would have happened.

But.

Until we make getting out of one's car against the law? We've got what we've got.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
68,530
Reaction score
38,826
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You're not following this. I think it is foolish and wrong to punch somebody for saying something ignorant. I'm saying that such a demonstration of poor judgement, however, should not invalidate your right to self defense as needed and reasonable and shooting a guy coming after you with a knife is reasonable even if you initiated the violence by giving him a bloody nose; clearly not a threat of severe physical harm and/or death.

Juries are much better able to sort this stuff out than some black-letter law that can't possibly take all possibilities into consideration.

:lol: :doh How quickly we forget the GZ trial situation. :roll: What did TM do to justify the use of deadly force by GZ, beyond giving GZ typical fist fight injuries?
 

mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
22,499
Reaction score
4,266
Location
DC Metro
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
He absolutely did create the situation. When he decided to keep eyes on Trayvon Martin, a series of events unfolded that caused Martin's death. There is no question about that. As others have posted ad nauseum, had George Zimmerman not gotten out of his car? Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

What is so hard about understanding that:

#1 - It's not against the law to get out of your car.
#2 - It's not against the law to follow someone.
#3 - The circumstantial evidence showed that Trayvon Martin struck the first blow -- in fact, the ONLY blows.
#4 - George Martin was in a fight for his life.
#5 - He shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense.

Other than, "It may have..." "It could have..." "There's a possibility that..." what evidence do you have that it happened any other way.

I don't disagree, just lamenting the fact that had he stayed in his car...nothing would have happened.
 

Crosscheck

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
11,465
Reaction score
8,882
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No question he did. Ad nauseum post here: Had George Zimmerman simply stayed in his car, none of this would have happened.

But.

Until we make getting out of one's car against the law? We've got what we've got.

It has nothing to do with getting out of a car.. People do it everyday without threatening action.

When you convict someone of doing a criminal act because of your paranoia and chase them down in a car it is harrassment of an innocent person that is what gets you into trouble.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
It has nothing to do with getting out of a car.. People do it everyday without threatening action.

When you convict someone of doing a criminal act because of your paranoia and chase them down in a car it is harrassment of an innocent person that is what gets you into trouble.

No one chased anyone down in a car.

Why so hyperbolic?

If my neighborhood had been repeatedly robbed and a resident suffered a home invasion and the perpetrators were known to be black? Being suspicious enough of a black person walking in the rain to call the non-emergency number of local police is not being paranoid.
 

HoongLoong

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 24, 2012
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
152
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Just got a phone call from a friend:

The turd-like newspaper New York Times, the quotidian Bible of the Black Racist Enabling DEM Gay/Lib scum had this on their Front Page:

A crowd of the Teen age Thug Trayvon Martin Female Sympathizers cuddling their infants in their arms purportedly showing the extent the emotional anguish these idiots are going thru with bemoaning the just verdict of Z's NOT GUILTY verdict !!!

I puked when I heard that........and, I am still puking.


I wonder how many times, if ever, these same idiots turned out in the streets cuddling their babes in their ams to bemoan the MONTHLY THOUSANDS of the TEEN AGE Black/Black, and Black/Non Black crimes across the Nation ?!?!?
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't disagree, just lamenting the fact that had he stayed in his car...nothing would have happened.

Yeah yeah, and if Z had stayed home he never would have seen TM.... nothing would have happened. If TM had not gone to the store for skittles Z never would have seen him and nothing would have happened. We can even take it as far as if either TM or Z had not been born then nothing would have happened. We can go round and round on this but in the end all those "if's" are just plain D irrelevent. Z getting out of his car to follow TM was NOT illegal no matter how anyone tries to spin it as some sort of act of stupidity or aggression. I personally know several people, including myself that would have followed someone they considered suspicious in order to find out if they are up to no good or not. (and I have on a few occasions done that)

And no matter what anyone says no one will ever convince me that it is not something valid to do. IMO people have an obligation and are honor bound to not only attempt to help protect our communities but to do so actively by following suspicious people. Too many people hide behind closed doors because they are either chicken **** or simply just do not want to get involved. The best way to combat crime is for the whole community to willing to help out in any way possible.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
And no matter what anyone says no one will ever convince me that it is not something valid to do. IMO people have an obligation and are honor bound to not only attempt to help protect our communities but to do so actively by following suspicious people. Too many people hide behind closed doors because they are either chicken **** or simply just do not want to get involved. The best way to combat crime is for the whole community to willing to help out in any way possible.

Then you have learned nothing.

What you should have learned is that the way for people to get involved, is to go outside and yell/scream/call 911 until a two-person fight stops. We heard from numerous witnesses they heard someone screaming for help. Had the community rallied -- had these people actually, you know, HELPED the guy screaming? We'd be talking about a much different scenerio.

Obligation to follow suspicious people. Are you kidding me??
 

Crosscheck

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
11,465
Reaction score
8,882
Location
NW USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No one chased anyone down in a car.

Why so hyperbolic?

If my neighborhood had been repeatedly robbed and a resident suffered a home invasion and the perpetrators were known to be black? Being suspicious enough of a black person walking in the rain to call the non-emergency number of local police is not being paranoid.

Fair enough, he didn't drive his car down the sidewalk. So whatever you want to call it, Martin was quite aware someone was following him. If you are alone walking in the evening and you see somebody following you what would you suspect? If they aren't in a police car you are going to suspect somebody is up to no good. Then that person gets out of the car your alert system is going to up one level.

Not every black person is a criminal. As someone said elsewhere there is a high percentage of black on black crime in the US. That black person walking on the street may be in fear just as much as you
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Then you have learned nothing.

What you should have learned is that the way for people to get involved, is to go outside and yell/scream/call 911 until a two-person fight stops. We heard from numerous witnesses they heard someone screaming for help. Had the community rallied -- had these people actually, you know, HELPED the guy screaming? We'd be talking about a much different scenerio.

Obligation to follow suspicious people. Are you kidding me??

Actually my post was just talking about Z getting out of his car to follow M. I most definitely agree that if you see someone getting the crap beat out of them by someone else you should most definitely intervene right then and there, even before calling the cops imo. And that is not limited to just your immediate local community. But everywhere. Though the difference I think between what you said and what I propose is that I would actually literally phsysically try to stop the fight.

And no, I am not kidding you. However I should add that following someone that is suspicious should only be done when you are in your immediate local community. Not the whole town, city, country, whatever. The reason for this is that if you are a conscientious neighbor you know your immediate neighbors (at the very least thier faces) and who generally comes and goes. You however do not know who belongs and doesn't belong in any other part of the town, city, country, whatever.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Fair enough, he didn't drive his car down the sidewalk. So whatever you want to call it, Martin was quite aware someone was following him. If you are alone walking in the evening and you see somebody following you what would you suspect? If they aren't in a police car you are going to suspect somebody is up to no good. Then that person gets out of the car your alert system is going to up one level.

Not every black person is a criminal. As someone said elsewhere there is a high percentage of black on black crime in the US. That black person walking on the street may be in fear just as much as you

I don't think anyone really truely believes that TM wasn't afraid, or at the least HIGHLY concerned about what Z was doing. What is however most peoples problem is that TM struck Z for no apparent reason other than Z following him. It doesn't matter how scared you are, when walking down a public way you do not have the right to strike someone unless there is obvious criminal intent going on. And in this case there was none. Might have had a suspicion of one but that is it, suspicion. No one has the Right to strike out at someone because of a suspicion. There must be obvious intent to do harm in order for a self defense claim to actually work. Many people have been shot because of a "suspicion" and in every case that I know of the person who shot the other guy because of a "suspicion" is always punished...even cops.
 
Top Bottom