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.
that's odd. so many people here are claiming that zimmerman having his head beaten against a hard surface was not sufficient cause for SYG - yet you're saying that simply 'feeling' that one is being 'stalked' is sufficient cause?
Only if you and others consistently choose to ignore the chain of events. Which admittedly convenient to your argument isn't how this story is going to play out in a court of law.
that's odd. so many people here are claiming that zimmerman having his head beaten against a hard surface was not sufficient cause for SYG - yet you're saying that simply 'feeling' that one is being 'stalked' is sufficient cause?
You are also twisting words. They are not saying that getting your head beaten against the ground is not sufficient for SYG. They are saying that because Zimmerman provoked the situation, he cannot stand his ground because he is technically the offender, whether he attacked first or not, and whether or not the attack was physical.
That is taking a piece of the situation out of context. Of course if you are getting your head beaten then you should be able to defend yourself. That is only one part out of several details on the case. If that was the only that happened, I would be supporting Zimmerman. As of now, I do not trust Zimmerman simply because of the lies that he told in court. That said, I have not condemned him.
Would you say that a woman who feels she is being followed at night does not have the right to defend herself from a potential attacker? If she is walking alone and sees an unknown person following her, and then the person approaches her, does she have the right to feel threatened?
It's possible, just as it's possible that GZ's statement that he was attacked by TM is possible.
While not addressed to me, I would respond by saying that I have no doubt that Zimmerman's account that Martin threw the first punch is true. I am more than happy to stipulate to that point. Because it is irrelevant.
One thing I want to address. I'm not really concerned with the rest of the post. It seems you might be misinformed concerning the city of Sanford.
Sanford is not a country town. I go to school 30 minutes away from Sanford, and I know several kids from the area. It is a suburb of Orlando, and having been there, I can say it definitely doesn't have a country feel.
I don't know what you define as country, but Sanford has a shopping mall, freeways, large neighborhoods, multi lane avenues, and an medium-sized international airport...things that I did not find when in country towns in TX and LA. It also is only 20-30 min away from downtown Orlando, with urban buildup consistent in between.
As far as where the incident happened, I don't know the details but my friends live in a pretty upscale neighborhood with two-story homes and swimming pools in every backyard. Driving through the place, it seemed to be an upscale suburb of Orlando.
So if I was going to argue how it was different than Miami, I would not use "country." I would use "upscale." That's all.
All things are relative but I Know Sanford a little and the area in general a little and we agree. But it ain't Miami! I would really like to google the area Trayvon lived in Miami. Anyone know the address?
Only if you and others consistently choose to ignore the chain of events. Which admittedly convenient to your argument isn't how this story is going to play out in a court of law.
that doesn't make a lick of sense mr. catto.
trayvon having sufficient cause for SYG is contingent upon me and others ignoring the chain of events?
I couldn't have said it better myself. Using deadly force against a unarmed individual lawfully walking home as a result of gross mischaracterization, with open and unwarranted hostility, and provocation of unneeded conflict must have its consequences.
All the BS boiler plate about "protecting one's community and the right of self-defense" is just that, bs boilerplate inserted from obfuscating the most basic and fundamental facts of this case.
Like many that seem to Want GZ to be innocent, you take the opposite approach. It does not matter that TM was unarmed, and it certainly does not matter that his 'suspicions' about TM proved incorrect. The only thing that matters is who started the physical confrontation? Even there, one side says GZ was being Pummeled and Severely Beaten, which surely isn't proven by the physical evidence.
If GZ was attacked first, he certainly had the right to protect himself. It's probably a scary feeling having someone punch you, and then on top of you, with no way to get up. But this is all based on statements from GZ, there are other theories. GZ's statements to police indicate that TM's hand was covering his mouth and nose, another scary situation. He also stated that every time he tried to get up, TM would push him down, hitting his head on the concrete.
If that truly is what happened, GZ was well within his rights in most states to shoot TM. I would surely not use the "Please Stop" method.
Now maybe it didn't happen that way, we don't know. Trayvon's autopsy surely didn't make it look like he was "hitting" anyone more than once. But if it went down like GZ said, he was free and clear to shoot him. Frankly, I'm surprised that he didn't shoot many times, as most people do when freaking in panic mode. GZ doesn't seem like the type of guy that shakes up easily.
You are also twisting words. They are not saying that getting your head beaten against the ground is not sufficient for SYG.
read the whole thread; plenty of them are saying just that.
Quote:
They are saying that because Zimmerman provoked the situation, he cannot stand his ground because he is technically the offender, whether he attacked first or not, and whether or not the attack was physical.
That is taking a piece of the situation out of context. Of course if you are getting your head beaten then you should be able to defend yourself. That is only one part out of several details on the case. If that was the only that happened, I would be supporting Zimmerman. As of now, I do not trust Zimmerman simply because of the lies that he told in court. That said, I have not condemned him.
Would you say that a woman who feels she is being followed at night does not have the right to defend herself from a potential attacker? If she is walking alone and sees an unknown person following her, and then the person approaches her, does she have the right to feel threatened?
i suppose she has the right to feel threatened; she does not have the right to launch a pre-emptive attack simply on the basis of 'feelings.'
what you seem to be saying is that i can attack and beat up anyone who approaches me at night as i long as i claim to 'feel' threatened.
that was unbelievably weak, even by your standards.
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.
