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 completely irrelevant to the case and irrelevant in general. The 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about "need". Zimmerman was legally carrying a gun and that's all there is to it. This trial will determine whether he was justified in shooting Trayvon, not whether he should have been carrying a gun at all.
Granted, the question was not directed to as if he could carry the gun, by why since he was not permitted to do while on patrol. There is a good chance but it would be hard to prove that zimmerman carried his gun while on patrol before which was something that he should not have been doing in the first place. I believe that the HOA knew this and settled with the Martin family before that could possibly come up.
I doubt it. This judges bias is hamstringing Zimmerman's defense. Does this judge have some reason to disallow evidence crucial to Zimmerman's case? Such as, Martin's known penchant for fighting (he was an expert in MMA)? He had been suspended from school repeatedly for fighting, and one time for being in possesion of the tools of burglary. This fact is important because the area that Zimmerman had been patrolling had been experiencing multiple break-ins. That is the reason that Martin raised Zimmerman's suspicion.
No, I doubt I'll be surprised. I think it's clear that this trial is going to do just what the MSM has been doing all along. Martin will be portrayed as an innocent young man just out for "snacks" with no history of violence or bad behavior.
Zimmerman will be portrayed as a "hot head," and shown to be the agressor, even though Zimmerman had already notified the police that he was observing Martin, and was expecting their arrival at any moment. Does that even make sense?
"Over my head?" Why the smart assed remark? Are you incapable of civil discourse? Such comments reduce your credibility to zero. You invite criticism of yourself.
Should they request a new judge, again. Maybe they can keep trying until they get one they like.
Granted, the question was not directed to as if he could carry the gun, by why since he was not permitted to do while on patrol. There is a good chance but it would be hard to prove that zimmerman carried his gun while on patrol before which was something that he should not have been doing in the first place. I believe that the HOA knew this and settled with the Martin family before that could possibly come up.
Being a member of an unofficial neighborhood watch program doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman had every legal right to be carrying that gun. You don't go to jail for breaking neighborhood watch rules, at the very worst you get kicked out of the neighborhood watch program.
George Zimmerman has never claimed that he was on "patrol" that night and you yourself just admitted that he was going shopping.
Look at the map. No way Zimmerman's story can be true - that he got out of his truck just to get an address and was then attacked while heading back to his truck. Bull hockey.
I know, it also makes you question if Trayvon attacked him that means that his body would have been found closer to the truck, plus it does not make sense for someone who being followed to suddenly turn around and go after someone who is following you. Since many of his distractors have placed him as being a street thug, they clearly are not aware that if you ask anyone from the streets per say would they go after someone who has been following you in the dark 9 out of 10 would say that they would'nt do it. Simply because if that person is bold enough to follow you there is a good chance that he has a weapon.
Being a member of an unofficial neighborhood watch program doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman had every legal right to be carrying that gun. You don't go to jail for breaking neighborhood watch rules, at the very worst you get kicked out of the neighborhood watch program.
George Zimmerman has never claimed that he was on "patrol" that night and you yourself just admitted that he was going shopping.
So do you own a gun? If so how often do you carry it to go shopping? I have never seen people walk in a large store carrying gun. Although they proably can't prove it but I bet zimmerman was not going shopping that night, he was out playing "super cop"
Ok - I see four named streets within that complex. Is that right?
So, Zimmerman, Mr. Neighborhood Watch Dude/Wannabe Vigilant, can't even give the correct name of a street to the police officer on the other end of a phone call?
In a neighborhood that he himself lives in?
When there are only four streets in the entire complex??????
Sheesh.....he could have GUESSED and he would have had a 25% chance of getting it right.
I hope this is a lesson for all neighborhood associations or others wanting to organize a neighborhood watch group - make sure the people you have "watching" your neighborhood and protecting you and your loved ones from teenagers who are wearing hoodies and carrying a bag of Skittles actually know the names of the streets they're supposedly watching.
Especially where there are so many of them (four).
I agree with you, katzpaw. I think Zimmerman is toast.
A 911 operator is NOT an officer and as such has no authority to "give direction". That said, Zimmerman did apparently break off his pursuit and was attacked. Irrespective, Zimmerman is only guilty of not being the sharpest pencil in the box. That will probably be enough to convict him in this case however as the public needs someone to answer for a kid that was allowed to be corrupted by an over permissive society. Zimmerman will be convicted and imprisoned for a crime he is not guilty of, because the government needs him to take a fall.
You don't know if the 911 operator was a sworn officer or not. In any event s/he was an employee of the police department, and his/her instructions should be followed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj
****DANGER****DANGER****
***RACIST WORD***
(sorry, had to insert some levity)
As for that definition here's an excerpt: Fighting words are not an excuse or defense for a retaliatory assault and battery.
And here's the next few sentences:
However, if they are so threatening as to cause apprehension, they can form the basis for a lawsuit for assault, even though the words alone don't constitute an assault.
The utterance of fighting words is not protected by the free speech protections of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The words are often evaluated not only by the words themselves, but the context in which they are spoken.
Someone jumped on someone and that someone got him to jump back OFF...Zim will soon be a free man.........and we don't want to see no riots with butcher knives in the streets either.
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.
