[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
But Zimmerman had zero authority so Trayvon’s issues with him could just as easily have been some kid thinking he is being harassed by a weirdo or perv and not someone in the position of being an authority which Zimmerman wasn’t in the first place. Trayvon probably considered Zimmerman for what he is: a random douchebag.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I don’t see how this slipped past two exhausted threads. Nevertheless…I thought Zimmerman referenced his “patrol” during 911 call…??? Before justifying self-defense on his part…shouldn’t Zimmerman have to establish being justified in his actions leading up the shooting?? Namely…carrying a firearm while on his watch patrol(if verified as such)???[/quote]
As discussed, his license granted by a state authority would carry more legal clout than a set of neighborhood rules.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Spike Lee
“I Deeply Apologize To The McClain Family For Retweeting Their Address. It Was A Mistake. Please Leave The McClain’s In Peace. Justice In Court”
[/quote]
Well I hope he has largely compensated that poor couple. He fucked up real bad.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
But Zimmerman had zero authority so Trayvon’s issues with him could just as easily have been some kid thinking he is being harassed by a weirdo or perv and not someone in the position of being an authority which Zimmerman wasn’t in the first place. Trayvon probably considered Zimmerman for what he is: a random douchebag. [/quote]
Zimmerman probably mentioned neighborhood watch and asked what Trayvon was doing, creating the perception of authority.
We don’t know of course but it is a more likely scenario.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Very true…nothing to refute Zimmerman’s claims. But(IMO) there is enough to still hold him responsible in being careless and negligent…if the prosecution goes that route. [/quote]
I think it is easy to criticize in hindsight.
It’s not that weird to think a neighborhood watch captain would roll up to a suspicious outsider to ask who he is visiting.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon veered off as he pulled up.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon avoiding a question appeared even more suspicious.
It’s not weird to think Zimmerman exited his car to identify himself and ask his question.
Or that Trayvon took off running and Zimmerman headed back to his car.
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
All of that is kinda weird.
If I’m scared enough to run why stop unless my options are diminished?
If its night and I think you may be a criminal why leave my car?
Zimmerman called 911 why was anything else needed on his part?
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
Not sure how it works in Texas or Florida, but in Michigan if a business or property owner posts no firearms you can’t bring one in regardless on if you have a CCW. So no the state license would not override local authority. But that is Michigan.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
I’m pretty sure Houston Guy just made that up.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
Not sure how it works in Texas or Florida, but in Michigan if a business or property owner posts no firearms you can’t bring one in regardless on if you have a CCW. So no the state license would not override local authority. But that is Michigan.
[/quote]
State law would’ve granted the authority to the private associations so yes, it would depend on how the law is written. It would also depend on just how much pull a neighborhood association has as a “private” entity.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Very true…nothing to refute Zimmerman’s claims. But(IMO) there is enough to still hold him responsible in being careless and negligent…if the prosecution goes that route. [/quote]
I think it is easy to criticize in hindsight.
It’s not that weird to think a neighborhood watch captain would roll up to a suspicious outsider to ask who he is visiting.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon veered off as he pulled up.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon avoiding a question appeared even more suspicious.
It’s not weird to think Zimmerman exited his car to identify himself and ask his question.
Or that Trayvon took off running and Zimmerman headed back to his car.
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
Some truth…can’t deny that. HOWEVER it’s also not weird to think Trayvon had all the right for his actions listed without reasonable consequence…Why? see next—>
It’s not weird to think Zimmmerman had no authority to act in the capacity of a law enforcement AUTHORITY as a neighborhood watchman. He couldn’t announce his authority…because he had none other than to REPORT.
Can we do this without bias…because that was too easy…and you’re a smart guy.
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
But Zimmerman had zero authority so Trayvon’s issues with him could just as easily have been some kid thinking he is being harassed by a weirdo or perv and not someone in the position of being an authority which Zimmerman wasn’t in the first place. Trayvon probably considered Zimmerman for what he is: a random douchebag. [/quote]
Zimmerman probably mentioned neighborhood watch and asked what Trayvon was doing, creating the perception of authority.
We don’t know of course but it is a more likely scenario.[/quote]
Only if Trayvon believed neighborhood watch actually meant something, which it doesn’t. Mall cops have more authority.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
Not sure how it works in Texas or Florida, but in Michigan if a business or property owner posts no firearms you can’t bring one in regardless on if you have a CCW. So no the state license would not override local authority. But that is Michigan.
[/quote]
I know in some states the Business type must be written into the law. Meaning Just because they post the sign does not mean its lawful.
But it does still makes since to not give money to people that want to hinder your rights.
If asked I would leave.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
I would love to see the outcome of a jurisdiction analysis between a state government and a neighborhood.
It would certainly be an interesting aside of personal and gun right issues if the case examines this angle.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Some truth…can’t deny that. HOWEVER it’s also not weird to think Trayvon had all the right for his actions listed with no without reasonable consequence…Why? see next—>
It’s not weird to think Zimmmerman had no authority to act in the capacity of a law enforcement AUTHORITY as a neighborhood watchman. He couldn’t announce his authority…because he had none other than to REPORT.
Can we do this without bias…because that was too easy…and you’re a smart guy. [/quote]
Neighborhood watchman = any other random citizen. Zimmerman may not have broken any laws but he behaved improperly and used very poor judgement. I already asked this question: does Zimmerman do something different if he doesn’t have a gun? Because if it’s a dumb choice to make without a gun, the presence of a gun doesn’t make it any less dumb, in fact, it probably makes it even dumber. His life post-shooting proves that.
I also read people posting that Zimmerman, or anyone for that matter, has the right to follow someone and/or ask them questions. I have yet to see anyone actually post something that proves we have that right.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
Not sure how it works in Texas or Florida, but in Michigan if a business or property owner posts no firearms you can’t bring one in regardless on if you have a CCW. So no the state license would not override local authority. But that is Michigan.
[/quote]
I know in some states the Business type must be written into the law. Meaning Just because they post the sign does not mean its lawful.
But it does still makes since to not give money to people that want to hinder your rights.
If asked I would leave.[/quote]
It is written in here also, no establishments serving alcohol, sporting venues or government buildings. But you can also establish private property as firearm free.
Strikes me as kind of pointless actually. I can go to Detroit for a hockey game but I must leave my gun in the vehicle to be stolen.
From the 911 tapes it seems we know what Zimmeran thought of Martin (he thought the kid was up to something, maybe on drugs and told the 911 operater “These assholes always get away”)
Its hard to say what Martin thought of Zimmerman other than he wondered why the guy was following him and felt the need to run from Zimmerman.
What they said to each other when they came face to face is anyone’s guess and can go 2000 dif ways if you have a good imagination.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Very true…nothing to refute Zimmerman’s claims. But(IMO) there is enough to still hold him responsible in being careless and negligent…if the prosecution goes that route. [/quote]
I think it is easy to criticize in hindsight.
It’s not that weird to think a neighborhood watch captain would roll up to a suspicious outsider to ask who he is visiting.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon veered off as he pulled up.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon avoiding a question appeared even more suspicious.
It’s not weird to think Zimmerman exited his car to identify himself and ask his question.
Or that Trayvon took off running and Zimmerman headed back to his car.
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
Some truth…can’t deny that. HOWEVER it’s also not weird to think Trayvon had all the right for his actions listed without reasonable consequence…Why? see next—>
It’s not weird to think Zimmmerman had no authority to act in the capacity of a law enforcement AUTHORITY as a neighborhood watchman. He couldn’t announce his authority…because he had none other than to REPORT.
Can we do this without bias…because that was too easy…and you’re a smart guy. [/quote]
If you would read the “books” of threads you would see I’m only balancing what I see as bias. I’ve enjoyed debates with you before and so I don’t mind playing a little catch up but at least get a feel for the conversation.
And no, it wouldn’t be weird for Trayvon to ignore and run off, it would be his right to do so.
However, a neighborhood watchman would generally ask who an unaccompanied visitor was visiting. It wouldn’t be weird at all for Trayvon to take offense at “disrespect” from a perceived authority figure.
So far we have pages of a bullheaded, bloodlusting, wannabe superhero charicature and I’m saying the sensible, common presentation of a neighborhood watch is very viable indeed.
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Testy1 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.[/quote]
Well since it was apparently discussed…I would assume what you say has been verified. Because verified Watch Association guidlines say otherwise.[/quote]
Not sure how it works in Texas or Florida, but in Michigan if a business or property owner posts no firearms you can’t bring one in regardless on if you have a CCW. So no the state license would not override local authority. But that is Michigan.
[/quote]
I know in some states the Business type must be written into the law. Meaning Just because they post the sign does not mean its lawful.
But it does still makes since to not give money to people that want to hinder your rights.
If asked I would leave.[/quote]
It is written in here also, no establishments serving alcohol, sporting venues or government buildings. But you can also establish private property as firearm free.
Strikes me as kind of pointless actually. I can go to Detroit for a hockey game but I must leave my gun in the vehicle to be stolen.
[/quote]
I’ve seen some of those signs when I went to PA and since I was going to a theater at the time I wondered Hey I’m not sure if that is legal. But left it in the car just not to be a dick.
[quote]four60 wrote:
From the 911 tapes it seems we know what Zimmeran thought of Martin (he thought the kid was up to something, maybe on drugs and told the 911 operater “These assholes always get away”)
Its hard to say what Martin thought of Zimmerman other than he wondered why the guy was following him and felt the need to run from Zimmerman.
What they said to each other when they came face to face is anyone’s guess and can go 2000 dif ways if you have a good imagination.
[/quote]
What’s clear is that Zimmerman’s choice of action provoked Trayvon’s. This wasn’t some random assault on Zimmerman. He set the wheels in motion when he didn’t have to and when he was advised not to.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.[/quote]
But Zimmerman had zero authority so Trayvon’s issues with him could just as easily have been some kid thinking he is being harassed by a weirdo or perv and not someone in the position of being an authority which Zimmerman wasn’t in the first place. Trayvon probably considered Zimmerman for what he is: a random douchebag. [/quote]
Zimmerman probably mentioned neighborhood watch and asked what Trayvon was doing, creating the perception of authority.
We don’t know of course but it is a more likely scenario.[/quote]
Only if Trayvon believed neighborhood watch actually meant something, which it doesn’t. Mall cops have more authority. [/quote]
Google “perception”.