Black Teen Shot 3

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
It wouldn’t be weird at all for Trayvon to take offense at “disrespect” from a perceived authority figure.
[/quote]
It wouldn’t be weird for ANYONE to take offense. I have no issues with authority but I have issues with people not minding their own business so I would have told him to do just that. Ask a stranger in NYC a personal question and see what response you get. The idea that only a teen with “authority issues” (like what teen doesn’t?) is the only one who get offended is ridiculous. [/quote]
Right. Telling some one to mind his own business and attacking him are two actions with an ocean between.[/quote]
Add in a 17 year old mind. Add in he was being pursued. Not saying it’s right to hit someone but it wouldn’t be surprising to hear about someone getting smacked for it. The idea that only a 17 year old boy would be capable of a violent reaction under those circumstances is silly. People have been shot for cutting someone else off on the highway.

The whole “Theory” that Zimmerman addressed himself a “Neighborhood watch” makes me think.

If I was walking down a block I thought I had every right to walk down and a stranger walked up to me asking questions. Do you live here? What are you doing? I would look at him like he was crazy and walk right pass him.

I’m not sure what I would do if the guy seemed to be following me.

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
You will have to show the opposite to be true. If you don’t understand why you’re just going to have to live in your own bubble.[/quote]
That’s a cop-out. [/quote]
Nope.

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
It wouldn’t be weird at all for Trayvon to take offense at “disrespect” from a perceived authority figure.
[/quote]
It wouldn’t be weird for ANYONE to take offense. I have no issues with authority but I have issues with people not minding their own business so I would have told him to do just that. Ask a stranger in NYC a personal question and see what response you get. The idea that only a teen with “authority issues” (like what teen doesn’t?) is the only one who get offended is ridiculous. [/quote]
Right. Telling some one to mind his own business and attacking him are two actions with an ocean between.[/quote]
Add in a 17 year old mind. Add in he was being pursued. Not saying it’s right to hit someone but it wouldn’t be surprising to hear about someone getting smacked for it. The idea that only a 17 year old boy would be capable of a violent reaction under those circumstances is silly. People have been shot for cutting someone else off on the highway. [/quote]
Jesus. So road rage incidents vindicate Martin in attacking? Listen, read your shit. Apply context.

[quote]four60 wrote:

I’m not sure what I would do if the guy seemed to be following me.[/quote]

This is what I was trying to get at earlier.

Not every type of provocation justifies a physical attack.

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]JLD2k3 wrote:
Slightly off topic, but I just put DarkNinjaa on “ignore” and my experience in this thread is much more enjoyable.[/quote]

I can understand why some would want to do that. She does have an overly aggressive/insulting posting style that makes it hard to take her seriously, but there are some things that she writes that are worth reading so I will keep her off ignore.[/quote]
I generally like DN.

I’ve been on the fence of ignoring her just until this thread is over to avoid the extreme bullshit but then she pops up with an actual point of conversation I find interesting so I’m still on the fence for now.

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

That point has been beat to death here… but it’s as salient as any other worthwhile point, and I’m sure the prosecution will be hammering it as well.[/quote]
It will probably be more of an issue when it becomes a civil case at some point.

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[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]

Fair enough…but the bias you’re referring too is pretty much void in this thread(so far…lol). But like i noted…I mostly agree with your “it’s not weird to think” references. But the list just didn’t stop there…as I added.

The problem is with your presentation of a neighbor watchperson. You’re presenting an authority figure(as Zimmerman did in his own mind). Its one thing to truly present yourself as an eye of the neighborhood…state what your purpose is(from your vehicle) and move on. Whether that be concluding that the person is no threat and non-suspicious…OR conclude he is suspicious and REPORT details to the actual authorities.

It wouldn’t be weird for anyone with or without prior problems with authority to feel Zimmerman was crossing a line. Maybe Zimmerman was the person who felt the disrespect to his “perceived” authority???

[quote]four60 wrote:
The whole “Theory” that Zimmerman addressed himself a “Neighborhood watch” makes me think.

If I was walking down a block I thought I had every right to walk down and a stranger walked up to me asking questions. Do you live here? What are you doing? I would look at him like he was crazy and walk right pass him.

I’m not sure what I would do if the guy seemed to be following me.[/quote]
And the theory he was just running through a neighborhood, gun drawn, to kill a kid in cold blood?

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

Okay. If so what degree of provocation warrants Trayvon to attack? [/quote]

What attack?

Edit:

Let me add to the above. Zimmermans same wounds can be caused if a person is defending themselves.

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

Okay. If so what degree of provocation warrants Trayvon to attack? [/quote]

What attack?[/quote]

Didn’t Trayvon throw the first punch?

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:
The whole “Theory” that Zimmerman addressed himself a “Neighborhood watch” makes me think.

If I was walking down a block I thought I had every right to walk down and a stranger walked up to me asking questions. Do you live here? What are you doing? I would look at him like he was crazy and walk right pass him.

I’m not sure what I would do if the guy seemed to be following me.[/quote]
And the theory he was just running through a neighborhood, gun drawn, to kill a kid in cold blood?[/quote]

HOLY shit??? where did that come from???

Who sad all of that??

Edit:

Not sure what Theory that came from. But Zimmerman had way more options that Martin.

Zimmerman was in his car. He left it to follow martin.

Zimmerman KNEW he could stop martin in his tracks with the squeeze of a finger,
Martin could only guess he could win in a fight.

Zimmerman Knew the cops where on the way.
Martin didn’t know who zimmerman was.

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[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]

Fair enough…but the bias you’re referring too is pretty much void in this thread(so far…lol). But like i noted…I mostly agree with your “it’s not weird to think” references. But the list just didn’t stop there…as I added.

The problem is with your presentation of a neighbor watchperson. You’re presenting an authority figure(as Zimmerman did in his own mind). Its one thing to truly present yourself as an eye of the neighborhood…state what your purpose is(from your vehicle) and move on. Whether that be concluding that the person is no threat and non-suspicious…OR conclude he is suspicious and REPORT details to the actual authorities.

It wouldn’t be weird for anyone with or without prior problems with authority to feel Zimmerman was crossing a line. Maybe Zimmerman was the person who felt the disrespect to his “perceived” authority???[/quote]
As this thread is a continuation of two maxed threads, I’m holding my position.

It’s all possible. I don’t suggest Zimmerman had any legit authority only that Martin may have perceived him as authority.

Zimmerman may have had an authority complex of is own. It wouldn’t be weird to assume.

He may have also been a concerned neighbor (however his title plays out) worried about the reported crimes in his neighborhood where the suspects matched Trayvon’s description, which is pretty rational to assume.

But yes, he could’ve been a madman on a rampage running down a kid who ignored him, gun drawn in his own neighborhood to teach a lesson, shot Trayvon in cold blood, beat himself up to create a story and bribed neighbors to create witness statements.

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 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]

Self Defense is an affirmative defense. The burden of proof is on the defense to prove it by a prponderance of the evidence. If they can’t, all the prosecution has to do is prove Zim shot trayvon beyond a reasonable doubt.
[/quote]

If this is true and he can’t use the Stand your Ground law and falls on Self Defense then he is in for a fight because its not even a question about the Shot.

So then the real question is Stand your Ground or Self Defense?[/quote]

There is not one without the other. You can’t “stand your ground” unless you are acting in self defense. The stand your ground law just says that you can use deadly force in self-defense, but it still has to be self defense which the defense has to prove.

Edit: and stand your ground says you don’t have to try to escape before defending yourself, but again, still has to be self-defense.

[quote]JLD2k3 wrote:
Slightly off topic, but I just put DarkNinjaa on “ignore” and my experience in this thread is much more enjoyable.[/quote]

I did it months, if not years ago. She was spinning some yarn to my wife about giving births to triplets in a wading pool in her kitchen.

Basically everything out of her mouth is a lie, foul prejudice against Jewish people, or just ignorance.

I’ve always assumed she was a transsexual or a fake poster like “Method Man” being so over-the-top so black people look stupid.

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:

[quote]JLD2k3 wrote:
Slightly off topic, but I just put DarkNinjaa on “ignore” and my experience in this thread is much more enjoyable.[/quote]

I can understand why some would want to do that. She does have an overly aggressive/insulting posting style that makes it hard to take her seriously, but there are some things that she writes that are worth reading so I will keep her off ignore.[/quote]
I generally like DN.

I’ve been on the fence of ignoring her just until this thread is over to avoid the extreme bullshit but then she pops up with an actual point of conversation I find interesting so I’m still on the fence for now.[/quote]

This thread will never be over. We have all been sentenced to post in this thread forever as punishment.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

Okay. If so what degree of provocation warrants Trayvon to attack? [/quote]

What attack?[/quote]

Didn’t Trayvon throw the first punch?
[/quote]

According to Zimmerman yes. There has been no corroboration.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

Okay. If so what degree of provocation warrants Trayvon to attack? [/quote]

What attack?[/quote]

Didn’t Trayvon throw the first punch?
[/quote]

??? Damn I must have missed alot in that other thread??..Or is this another of those “statements not fact” things again?

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[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]

Okay. If so what degree of provocation warrants Trayvon to attack? [/quote]

What attack?[/quote]

Didn’t Trayvon throw the first punch?
[/quote]
Didn’t Zimmerman chase him? Trayvon did not have to wait for Zimmerman to throw a punch; all he needed was the belief that he was in danger and that Zimmerman meant to him harm. It would then be up to the courts to decide if Trayvon’s beliefs were reasonable.

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

But yes, he could’ve been a madman on a rampage running down a kid who ignored him, gun drawn in his own neighborhood to teach a lesson, shot Trayvon in cold blood, beat himself up to create a story and bribed neighbors to create witness statements.[/quote]

Well…that’s a little extreme from my suggestion of Zimmerman being the one offended. But I get it…you’re just balancing the bias,right??