Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he shot Trayvon Martin

Onceler said:
Any way you really slice it, he stalked the guy; he cornered him; he instigated the confrontation, when 911 was telling him to back off.

If the kid did fight back, he had a right to do so, imo. And you shouldn't be allowed to shoot someone dead for hitting you.
Click to expand...

Where has anything shown that he was "cornered"; because it now seems that the liberals are using "Key words" in an attempt to make their position seem to be the correct one?
 
Superfreak said:
If the above is true, I can understand the initial hesitation to arrest Zimmerman. But again, had he stayed in the car as told, Martin would be alive. While it may not be murder one by the legal definition, it is still an unjustified use of force. The article states that Martin was a 'towering 6'2" football player' which is just more sensationalistic crap:

1) because why mention height if you are not also going to mention weight? The kid was still 140lbs. Meaning he was a twig. That said, as pointed out to the liberal morons who also tried to use weight as if it meant anything, neither are really a be all end all in terms of someones fighting skills.

2) why mention he is a football player other than because some view it as a more violent sport? It is completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that hold true for the repeated comments of "armed with skittles and Iced Tea" or that he was "cornered"?
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
He's a murderer, Damo. He may have been a well-intentioned murderer, if you want to be charitable, but he's a murderer.
Click to expand...

Then so are any Police that ever shot and killed anyone, or a home owner that shot an intruder, or our Military personel that ever took a life.
So it looks like society is now seperated by those who aren't murderers and those who have; because it appears that even defending yourself can make you a murderer.
 
Rune said:
So, if I follow you, and you run away, but I persist and finaly corner you, then I am entitled to shoot you if you fight back?
Click to expand...

I suppose this is meant to be a clever summary of Zimmerman's actions, leading up to him drawing his gun. That said, I will go ahead and state the obvious, just to be safe, that the cornered man is never the assailant.

I was responding to other posters, who were making light of people would use a gun to defend themselves from a beating. If someone comes at me, and I have a gun, I would prefer to draw on them than worry about getting injured. 100% their fault. If you assault someone, you should assume the possibility if getting shot for your efforts. Also, I am understanding their attitudes correctly, I hope the receive a good thrashing in the near future.
 
Onceler said:
Any way you really slice it, he stalked the guy; he cornered him; he instigated the confrontation, when 911 was telling him to back off.

If the kid did fight back, he had a right to do so, imo. And you shouldn't be allowed to shoot someone dead for hitting you.
Click to expand...

This is why there needs to be a trial. This is why the law needs to be reexamined.
 
Rana said:
This is why there needs to be a trial. This is why the law needs to be reexamined.
Click to expand...

The only reason everyone is crying out about a trial, is because they FEEL that they have a right to know everything that occured; when in reality, it's no one's business except for those personally involved.
 
Damocles said:
Interesting. So nobody who goes after somebody they suspect to be a criminal can ever be seen as protecting their own lives if the tables turn and their life is in danger? That's just stupid.
Click to expand...

The police advise you never to persue the suspect, especially if you are a citizen because this type of situation is what happens, innocent people end up dead. This is the very reason you call the police.
 
Damocles said:
Tried and convicted in the media, gotcha. Should he get the death penalty?

How long do you think he should spend in jail? What if it is found he was defending his life? Should he stay in jail because he confronted somebody in a neighborhood that had had robberies of late?

Again, these are questions. I have repeatedly asked how he wasn't in jail, at least that night and until an investigation was fully completed.

However, this guy has been convicted in the eyes of many without any trial.
Click to expand...

He convicted Trayvon without a trial as well, but the difference, Trayvon is dead.
 
Rana said:
This is why there needs to be a trial. This is why the law needs to be reexamined.
Click to expand...
hey dumbass, you need to learn more about the 'law' in general before you go spouting bullshit like you know something. IF zimmerman initiated the confrontation, the law was not applicable, therefore does NOT need to be re-examined.
 
Rana said:
The police advise you never to persue the suspect, especially if you are a citizen because this type of situation is what happens, innocent people end up dead. This is the very reason you call the police.
Click to expand...
this is also a load of bullshit on your part. If the 'suspect' is attacking or pursuing another individual, do you just call the police and stand back to witness the rape or murder? No, you intervene and stop it, with lethal force if necessary.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
this is also a load of bullshit on your part. If the 'suspect' is attacking or pursuing another individual, do you just call the police and stand back to witness the rape or murder? No, you intervene and stop it, with lethal force if necessary.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, regardless of how irrelevent to the case at hand.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
The only reason everyone is crying out about a trial, is because they FEEL that they have a right to know everything that occured; when in reality, it's no one's business except for those personally involved.
Click to expand...

I dis agree, it is why there are laws in the first place and why people go to jail, to protect society.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
hey dumbass, you need to learn more about the 'law' in general before you go spouting bullshit like you know something. IF zimmerman initiated the confrontation, the law was not applicable, therefore does NOT need to be re-examined.
Click to expand...


The bold is not true, unless by "initiated the confrontation" you mean he attacked Martin physically.
 
Rana said:
I dis agree, it is why there are laws in the first place and why people go to jail, to protect society.
Click to expand...

So you want to protect society, from someone who hasn't been convicted (let alone charged) with anything.
He's Mexican
He shot a black kid
He was armed
He shot a black kid
He's made previous reports abouit suspicious blacks
He shot a black kid
He got out of his car
He shot a black kid
He was reportedly being attacked
He shot a black kid
He as older
He shot a black kid
He was bigger
He shot a black kid
We don't have all the evidence
He shot a black kid
He hasn't been charged
He shot a black kid
He wasn't arrested
He shot a black kid

Apperently the only thing that matters, is that he shot a black kid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top