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.
Would you be OK shooting someone in self defense who attacks you or your family ?
I know you didn't address this question to me, but I want to answer it. Yes, absolutely I would defend myself and my family, although I would certainly try not to use deadly force if at all possible. Then if the perpetrator ran away, I'd call the cops and let them do their jobs! Sure, in a fit of rage, I'd definitely want to shoot the sick piece of garbage, but that's called vigilantism, not protecting your family. Once the danger isn't there any more, you don't go after it.
By the way, there's no proof whatsoever that Trayvon Martin was ever a threat to George Zimmerman. However, George was safely in his vehicle when he called 911. There was never any reason to leave his car or chase after the "suspect."
What? Whos talking about killing anybody? I responding to a post about calling cops on suspicious individuals.
You quoted this post of mine:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
I do not have any neighbors who go calling the cops weekly on "suspicious" people, following them, and eventually shooting them. We do watch out for each other.
Not sure that a diagnosis for ADHD would have required an extensive psychological evaluation; however, he was seeing a therapist for pyschological counseling. I wonder if they discussed his obsession with wanting to be a cop and the fact that he attempted to "enforce" the law by chasing people and constantly calling 911?
At any rate, IMO, it's not necessary to be a licensed psychologist in order to determine that someone's behavior seems delusional. I think that's how people get the ball rolling in Florida for a Baker Act commitment.
Depends on what you call extensive. These days, most are seen by a psychologist/psychiatrist before being put on meds, and the school generally has input as well. It may have been different 20 years ago, when GZ was a kid.
The fact is no crime was committed before the physical assault. The preponderance of the evidence (admittedly very little) would suggest Martin started the fight. Z-man was clearly losing the fight. He defended himself. Martin brought fists to a gunfight, he now belongs to the ages.
No evidence exists to convince a jury Z-man is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The fact is no crime was committed before the physical assault. The preponderance of the evidence (admittedly very little) would suggest Martin started the fight. Z-man was clearly losing the fight. He defended himself. Martin brought fists to a gunfight, he now belongs to the ages.
No evidence exists to convince a jury Z-man is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
So when did you most recently look at the State Attorney's complete case file and consult with those lawyers about what evidence they have to present to a jury?
Also, could you please define what you think beyond a reasonable doubt means?
Depends on what you call extensive. These days, most are seen by a psychologist/psychiatrist before being put on meds, and the school generally has input as well. It may have been different 20 years ago, when GZ was a kid.
Oh, I thought he had been diagnosed as an adult. Didn't realize that he had been on ADHD meds since he was a child.
The fact is no crime was committed before the physical assault. The preponderance of the evidence (admittedly very little) would suggest Martin started the fight. Z-man was clearly losing the fight. He defended himself. Martin brought fists to a gunfight, he now belongs to the ages.
No evidence exists to convince a jury Z-man is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Please explain why you are using this expression. What if Martin brought a gun to a gun fight? Then you'd all be saying "Well, no wonder GZ shot him! He was a criminal."
You can't have it both ways. The fact that this young man walked to a convenience store and DID NOT even have a knife on him, proves the "he was up to no good" statement is false. So many people are eating that up because he was a Black kid in a hoodie. So far there is nothing in the evidence that says Martin had anything on his body that could be called a weapon or burglary tool, not even a screwdriver or pocket knife.
What you are saying is that everyone who takes a walk should carry a weapon, right? That is exactly how I read your statement.
Have you ever thought about how much POWER we would be giving to "professional jurors"? Of course you haven't. Do you have any clue how jury selection works? Have you ever been a defendant in a court case and had to actually observe jury selection?
I am often shocked at the ignorance about how our court system really works which some demonstrate.
valarie is 100% correct. And before you spew, yes, I've been on jury duty a half dozen times on everything from civil to murder 1.
People lie all the time, both to get out of and on jury duty. I thought everybody knew that. I was wrong about that, obviously. Someone's been watching way too much Perry Mason type TV.
The fact is no crime was committed before the physical assault. The preponderance of the evidence (admittedly very little) would suggest Martin started the fight. Z-man was clearly losing the fight. He defended himself. Martin brought fists to a gunfight, he now belongs to the ages.
No evidence exists to convince a jury Z-man is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
valarie is 100% correct. And before you spew, yes, I've been on jury duty a half dozen times on everything from civil to murder 1.
People lie all the time, both to get out of and on jury duty. I thought everybody knew that. I was wrong about that, obviously. Someone's been watching way too much Perry Mason type TV.
Yes, ignorance is rampant.
Huh? I've been on a jury too. What does this have to do with jury selection or having professional jurors?
By the way, I'd be very careful if I were you before calling someone else ignorant.
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.
Do you have any clue how jury selection works? Have you ever been a defendant in a court case and had to actually observe jury selection?
