Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You and me are struggling close quarters, I pull a gun from my waistband. How much time do I have to aim before you knock the gun out of the way, or take it from me? There is no aiming in close quarter struggling. I teach people to fire at center of mass IF they have time.
do you also teach them to make sure they don't shoot themselves? Trayvon was trying to get away; porky was holding onto him to make sure of the shot.
So, for you BOTH people are doing things that could suggest they're on the path to initiate a confrontation, yet you wholeheartedly believe only one of them could have actually initiated the confrontation.
Why don't you even doubt GZ account of who started the confrontation?
There isn't any reason to infer that Zimmerman's intent was to initiate a fistfight, but there is reason to infer that that was Trayvon Martin's intent.
How many people call the police and spend minutes talking to the police and invite the police to come to their location before they commit a felony? It just doesn't make any sense. Also, Zimmerman's motive is clear--he was concerned about crime in his neighborhood and wanted to learn more about a potential burglary suspect in his neighborhood. Frustrated that the criminals almost always get away, he wanted to keep an eye on the suspect so that he could direct the police to him.
That's a long, long way from being able to infer that his goal was to kill Martin or initiate a fistfight.
In contrast, what can you infer about Martin's behavior? What possible motive could he have for leaving the safety of the house to go look for Zimmerman? What kind of a racist state of mind could he have had when used the word "cracker"? Do you think his intent was to share Skittles with Zimmerman? If his intent was to help locate the creepy guy who was following him so that he could help the police find him, then why didn't he call the police?
Zimmerman's background is that he was just a nosy neighborhood busybody would-be do-gooder. Trayvon's background is that he had been involved in prior physical altercations, may have been in possession of property stolen in a burglary, may have been involved in drug use, and may have even filmed two homeless black men fighting one another.
The physical injuries were on Zimmerman, not Martin.
Use your head. Who do you think initiated the physical altercation? You have to perform great leaps of logic to conclude that Zimmerman is the one most likely to have initiated the altercation. A racist desire to blame Whitey for all of the black community's ills and to use this case as evidence to support a worldview that Whitey is out to incarcerate all black men and to oppress all black men is the only way you could infer that Zimmerman threw the first punch.
Zimmerman's father must be real proud of him. A witness testified that George is a wimp, and it's forever in the court records.
Even in death, Trayvon Martin (not yet an adult) stands taller than George Zimmerman the court confirmed coward.
I know you're smarter than to believe this, even though you've repeated it several times.
So...............assuming we don't know, that's even more reason for George to be acquitted. We don't put people in prison for 30 years when "we don't know".
I did not realize till now that the MINIMUM sentence in Florida for manslaughter involving a firearm is 25 years. That does shed more light on the verdict.
That's bad law, in my opinion. Now I understand more why the jury was loathe to convict Zimmerman of manslaughter. Hell, it may as well be a sentence of murder. I do not think Zimmerman was guilty of murder. My idea of a fair punishment would have been several years in prison followed by sevdral years of parole. NOT TWENTY FIVE YEARS.
As I said before, I feel the jury was put in a very difficult position due to the letter of the law. The law is often very imperfect and sometimes it takes a case like this to drive that point home.
So, for you BOTH people are doing things that could suggest they're on the path to initiate a confrontation, yet you wholeheartedly believe only one of them could have actually initiated the confrontation.
Why don't you even doubt GZ account of who started the confrontation?
I feel like this is the 5th or 6th time I've asked you this.
this poster will not answer my question, either, about why he believes this particular portion of Rachel's testimony, but no other part.
Zimmerman's father must be real proud of him. A witness testified that George is a wimp, and it's forever in the court records.
Even in death, Trayvon Martin (not yet an adult) stands taller than George Zimmerman the court confirmed coward.
I doubt that's the standard he judges his son by.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
